What's your IQ - a survey

[Sal9000]

Since IQ was discussed frequently in recent shows, I became curious. What is the distribution of IQ among the listenership. If you want to, you can participate in an anonymous survey, using a MoPad.

To make it more telling, please use the abbrevations I posted on the front of the document. Thank you

https://etherpad.mozilla.org/Fo0xiMVIzr

[TheRobin]

What scale are you using? I recently did an online IQ test (http://sifter.org/iqtest/index.html) and at the end it showed values fom two different scales. One was the European/Cattell scale (which had  a significantly higher value) the other was the Stanford-Binet/USA scale

[MMX2010]

Haven't gotten mine tested in years, but I remember it was 140 when I was in 7th grade.

[Kevin Beal]

According to the Raven's Progressive Matrices test (spatial IQ), I have perfect intelligence (perfect score, booyah!) But so did, like, 5% of people who took that version of the test, so...

 

According to more standard IQ tests, it was more like 120-140. And so, I'll choose the higher end of the measurement, just like I do with my height and penis size

 

I'm curious why the european scale had you (Robin) at a higher IQ level. If 100 is the average, does that mean that the average intelligence is lower in Europe? That would be strange considering some of the folk we've got here in the states who literally can't tie their shoes, haha.

[TheRobin]

I don't know, I'd guess the only difference might be the interval and range. So instead of having 85% in the 80-120 range, maybe it has it in the 60-140 range. But I don't know really.

[Anuojat]

What scale are you using? I recently did an online IQ test (http://sifter.org/iqtest/index.html) and at the end it showed values fom two different scales. One was the European/Cattell scale (which had  a significantly higher value) the other was the Stanford-Binet/USA scale

 

Byt that link mine was 117 or 111

[AncapFTW]

uh, 42.  Did I get it right?

 

I did an online one once and it said 135, but I'm not sure how accurate that is, so don't consider it my real IQ.

[andkon]

I got a 1450 on the SAT I about a decade ago (10 points higher on verbal than math), before they added the third section. If this conversion chart is to be believed, it's in the 140's.

[J. D. Stembal]

I thought that it was interesting that on the Mopad, Jewish people are not considered to be whites.

[the wandering shaman]

i was assessed by mensa 146

[Pepin]

Hard to say as it wasn't tested officially, but the two unofficial tests were at 140.

[Better Future]

Now I know who the narcissists are.

[utopian]

my FSIQ on the WAIS-IV is 111. My processing speed score really brought it down, everything else is above 110 except for that which is 84. I think this has to do with me being a shaken baby among other things. My Perceptual reasoning is 127.

[Better Future]

Why the downvote? I truly believe that people who do IQ tests and then choose to share that information with others are quite narcissistic. Even more so when the result is over the average as the responses here are. Maybe someone will be willing to come forward with a result of 95, that would be evidence against my theory.

[Sal9000]

I thought that it was interesting that on the Mopad, Jewish people are not considered to be whites.

 

Most 'Jewish' haplogroups indicate a non-European background.

[Kevin Beal]

Why the downvote? I truly believe that people who do IQ tests and then choose to share that information with others are quite narcissistic. Even more so when the result is over the average as the responses here are. Maybe someone will be willing to come forward with a result of 95, that would be evidence against my theory.

I didn't downvote your post, but I have noticed that you sometimes leave terse, cryptic and vaguely passive aggressive responses in threads every once in a while. Which I find annoying and am unsure what they actually add, if anything. All I know is that you take issue with it, which personally, I could care less about.

 

I guess it depends on what you mean by "narcissist". In the actual clinical sense you need a lot more information to make that determination and would be quite the damning accusation. You could try and make the case that it's vain, and maybe I was being vain, being the first to publicly say what my IQ is and in so doing, inviting others to do the same. I'm perfectly okay with exploring that if that's what you wanted to do. I can be vain at times, sure. There are much worse things in this world, my ego can take that hit.

 

*Thinking aloud*

What's that definition of a sadist that I heard before? Something like "they know just enough to hurt, but not enough to actually help in any way".

[J. D. Stembal]

Why the downvote? I truly believe that people who do IQ tests and then choose to share that information with others are quite narcissistic. Even more so when the result is over the average as the responses here are. Maybe someone will be willing to come forward with a result of 95, that would be evidence against my theory.

 

Why get upset about -2 reps? Look at some of MMX's longer rants in the feminism threads. He's got a couple -5 and -6 posts over there and he put a lot of effort into them.

 

I was never curious about my IQ, nor was I tested, before I saw this thread. I'm helping Sal9000 achieve her wish for FDR IQ statistics, and we were encouraged to provide them anonymously or not. What do we care what the numbers reflect about individuals here?

[Better Future]

"You could try and make the case that it's vain, and maybe I was being vain, being the first to publicly say what my IQ is and in so doing, inviting others to do the same. I'm perfectly okay with exploring that if that's what you wanted to do. I can be vain at times, sure. There are much worse things in this world, my ego can take that hit"

 

There is generally an elaborate message behind my terse statements.

 

Yes I suppose you could call them passive aggressive, I would call them prods to provoke further thought, I'm not the typical troll.

 

You have attempted to understand my message and you have succeeded. I am probably also at fault for expecting people to read more into my cryptic statements.

[J-William]

I got a 1450 on the SAT I about a decade ago (10 points higher on verbal than math), before they added the third section. If this conversion chart is to be believed, it's in the 140's.

It may be useful... According to the chart my SAT results and an IQ test I was given in 7th grade agree.

 

According to that chart less than half a percent of the population has iq 140 or higher.

Or another interesting way to look at IQ... About 2-4 million people in the world have IQ 150 or above. Or 30 million 140 or above. About the population Of Malaysia

[Pepin]

Why the downvote? I truly believe that people who do IQ tests and then choose to share that information with others are quite narcissistic. Even more so when the result is over the average as the responses here are. Maybe someone will be willing to come forward with a result of 95, that would be evidence against my theory.

 

Imagine we are on a fitness forum and the thread "how much do you bench comes up". People are posting numbers, and someone responds "now I know who the narcissists are". Upon being downvoted, the person acts all confused and states "well I truly believe that people who post how much they bench are narcissists and I don't know why people would have a negative response".

 

Well, that is pretty obvious baiting for a number of reasons, the most obvious being that they are calling everyone who posted in that thread narcissistic. The idea is to get people to defend themselves against the claim that they are narcissistic. Also, just making a statement and calling it an argument or a theory is also a good strategy because you don't have to do any work and rather you just let people's insecurities do the work.

 

Anyway, I'm not saying that you are baiting on a conscious level, but you certainly are on some level. I wouldn't make this response if I didn't think there was a good chance that you weren't aware of what you were doing.

 

Let's put it this way. If you went to a conference for magicians and said publicly "I believe that people who get into magic are all narcissistic", it would be pretty obvious why everyone at the conference wouldn't react too well to this. Acting like you don't know why most everyone is annoyed would be a little concerning.

 

Or how about if you went to a Justin Bieber concert and you kept telling people about how much Justin Bieber sucks and you even backed it up with a number of well thought arguments. Well... That is trolling at its finest.

[Better Future]

"Imagine we are on a fitness forum and the thread "how much do you bench comes up". 

 

"If you went to a conference for magicians and said publicly "I believe that people who get into magic are all narcissistic".

 

These are flawed analogies. This is not an intelligence testing forum. A fitness forum deals with fitness topics, this forum deals with a very wide range of topics. Most people in a fitness forum would bench press and know how much they can do, is the same true for IQ in this forum? People at a magician conference are there for a very specific purpose.

 

A lot can be known about an individual by observing which threads they choose to post on and the thoughts they express in a forum such as this.

 

I wasn't confused as to why I was downvoted, I either offended a few people or they did not understand my intention. I requested an explanation because I am a very curious person and I thought the responses would be interesting. So far the downvoters have not come forward with reasonable explanations.

 

"The idea is to get people to defend themselves against the claim that they are narcissistic".

 

Indeed. That's what I do, I prod to provoke further thought. Kevin has admitted that maybe, just maybe it was vain of him to post his IQ. I am impressed by his introspection, honesty and sharp logic.

 

"Just making a statement and calling it an argument or a theory is also a good strategy because you don't have to do any work and rather you just let people's insecurities do the work".

 

My statement wasn't the theory, I have a theory and I made a statement. I'm not afraid of work but I am a man of few words and maximum efficiency. I am not a bully but I really do like to encourage introspection.

 

Why are we collecting IQ stats again? What will we do with that information? How does it increase wellbeing in the world?

 

Have you ever seen someone come forward and reveal their IQ to be less than 100?

[J-William]

I am not a bully but

 

It's a rare bully that would claim to be a bully...

[Kevin Beal]

Indeed. That's what I do, I prod to provoke further thought. Kevin has admitted that maybe, just maybe it was vain of him to post his IQ. I am impressed by his introspection, honesty and sharp logic.

I'm flattered by the kind words, but you say this as if it's equally true that it was vain or wasn't vain. I'm not convinced I was being vain, I'm simply trying to demonstrate the difference between "you're one grandiose mother fucker" and "hey, I think you might be being vain here, and this is why I think that".

 

If you thought I was being vain and had good reason to think so, then you can make that case. Simply suggesting that people are doing something bad without presenting any reasoning is a tragically common thing, and if there were one thing that I could shake people by the collar and slap them around about, it would probably be this one.

 

There are 3 possibilities that I see when you post comments like that (assuming you're right about that comment):

1. Someone is able to figure out your meaning and the reasoning necessary to independently come to that conclusion on their own, somehow, despite you not giving them that reasoning.
2. Someone simply accepts your conclusion, but has no reasoning and so just as easily can swing back the other way when the next person tells them they are humble. Without the necessary logic, you simply provoke their insecurity.
3. They don't understand why you are saying it, so they just dismiss it, and do not benefit from the insight you have.

I volunteered the possibility that I was being vain (which is conceivably true, I guess) as a starting point, not the conclusion of your provocation. This and the last reply of mine to you are my way of offering a criticism: that this is how you offer meaningful criticism.

 

I don't think simply suggesting that people are doing something bad helps anyone. I think it makes people less receptive to your message in the long run. Because: why aren't you making the case logically? Do you have the logic but are keeping it from us? Or do you not have sufficient reasoning and you are concealing that fact?

 

I think that you only have so many conclusions you can ask people to accept, and that you earn those by consistently demonstrating your reasoning ability in relationship to people. I can't do that with someone I've just met, and I would hesitate still to do it with someone I know very well.

 

Conclusions are powerful. They are non-trivial.

[Better Future]

You may decide for yourself then.

[MMX2010]

I wasn't confused as to why I was downvoted, I either offended a few people or they did not understand my intention.

 

There's only one person in the world who will never misread your intention: YOU.  And this works because only YOU are privy to 100% of your thoughts, emotions, desires, and beliefs: everyone else just gauges you based on what you say. 

 

And so there's a word for someone who experiences legitimate shock when someone else, (who, by definition, has limited access to your Total-Internality), mis-reads their intentions.  There is, indeed, a word for this, but I cannot remember what it is. 

[Matthew Ed Moran]

You really wrapped your passive aggression in a lot of righteous lingo there..

 

"I'm not your typical troll"

 

"I'm here to provoke thought - that's what I do"

 

"There is often an elaborate message behind my terse statements"

 

"I am a man of few words and maximum efficiency"

 

"You have attempted to understand my cryptic message and have succeeded"

 

I get a weird feeling from witnessing this kind of attitude. You made an assertion without any evidence that you "now know who the narcissists are." Somehow this was actually an elaborate message which you condensed for maximum efficiency which me must unravel, like you're playing games with us. If you have some wisdom to bestow upon us, or have a really good question that might make us introspect, then provide it. Why do you need for us to unravel your "cryptic message".. You think that's maximum efficiency?

[Sal9000]

Why are we collecting IQ stats again?

 

I was curious. And to prevent anybody from being shamed or touting his or her horn I decided to make it anonymously. 

[kalmia]

I doubt anyone with an IQ less than 100 would post on this forum. This isn't an IQ testing forum, but discussing the ideas that are discussed on here takes a certain IQ level. A basketball forum might discuss height even though it isn't an anatomy forum.

 

 

I remember mine testing at 130 years ago.

[J. D. Stembal]

 

Have you ever seen someone come forward and reveal their IQ to be less than 100?

 

 

It is entirely possible that most people with below average intelligences never get tested. Perhaps this is the parents' doing. They didn't want to confront the fact that little Timmy may be closer to the mean than they are.

 

Perhaps the larger community also does not want to see evidence of superior intelligence. A great case in point is your first response in this thread conflating honesty and courage with narcissism. I found it more than a little amusing that you accused members of narcissism and questioned us about the negs you received in the same message.

Stefan has postulated that he thinks most FDR collaborators and listeners are at least clocking in at 120. There are going to be a several 119 and under people around, too, but not that many. The data we are collecting on the Mopad will probably bear this out. Already, we have two extreme outliers on the bell curve (70 and 165).

 

I also don't think Pepin's benchpress analogy holds water.

 

A bodybuilder has every right to take pride in his physical achievements. In general, lifting heavier is an empirical sign of a greater level of physical achievement. Just pride doesn't reflect narcissism at all. However, IQ is largely an empirical measurement that we have no control over. It has to do more with how our parents nurtured us when we were children, income level, and some level of genetic variability that is also out of our hands to influence.

 

Therefore, when someone blurts out how high their IQ is and lords it over people during conversations, it's almost like bragging about how great your ethnicity is, and taking pride in something that has absolutely no merit.

[Pepin]

Stefan says that "you have to have an IQ if you understand FDR", and this could be a means of testing that. It is somewhat like saying "if you've made it this far through college, you likely have an IQ". The factor of intelligence acts as a natural sorting algorithm.

 

Sharing your IQ can be fun, just as sharing personality test results, test score, our various skills and hobbies, and so on. A big question that has come up in some of the podcasts is what a high IQ means, and how people ought to cultivate it. Organizations like Mensa have come about to address this to some degree, as well as colleges, conferences, and technical forums. It could be a "show me yours and I show you mine" type scenario.

 

As far as the validity of a survey around IQ, it is likely not to be as accurate as there will be a natural selection bias with people with low IQ's not sharing their score as often. But again with the first paragraph, it may not be likely that there is anyone with a low IQ's in this population. It could be like asking for peoples' IQ in a graduate physics class.

 

Granted that IQ isn't something you can control, it can't be correlated with virtue, though cultivation of your intelligence can be. A researcher that devouts their mind to curing cancer has some extra virtue.

 

Also, IQ may not be that huge of a factor in respect to a lot, but I am going with the idea due to the recent podcasts on the topic.

[Better Future]

I could have posted a huge block of text outlining in detail why I consider this topic to be a huge waste of time and energy. I could have explained why I think people who do IQ tests and share the result non-anonymously (even when there is an anonymous option) are demonstrating vanity. I probably should have as this is turning out to be very inefficient. Point taken. I also accept the possibility that no one here was demonstrating vanity.

 

I don't think vanity is a "bad" thing. It is a natural thing and is generally unhelpful in improving the wellbeing of the species.

I wasn't making a medical diagnoses of every poster here, I was exaggerating on purpose to provoke further thought and to hopefully make a point. It appears that I have failed dismally. Therefore I will explain myself more fully in the future.

I agree Kevin, insulting people really isn't a very good way to get a point across. If I run at someone with a sword they will likely raise a shield. I suppose it is more a reflection of my own personality that I feel the need to provoke in the way I do.

I think Pepin makes a vital point, IQ does not indicate virtue.

You can discount the black woman with an IQ of 70 on Mopad, that was my idea of a joke. Personally I believe that race is a divisive and destructive concept, it is inherently racist. I also believe IQ to be useless data in most cases.

Your responses have been educational. Thank you.

[Kevin Beal]

I agree Kevin, insulting people really isn't a very good way to get a point across. If I run at someone with a sword they will likely raise a shield. I suppose it is more a reflection of my own personality that I feel the need to provoke in the way I do.

As Shia Labeouf from Transformers would say "no no no no no no!"

 

I don't care in the slightest if you are insulting. What the fuck do I care about being insulted? People insult me often, I can handle it. My beef was that you didn't actually provide any reasoning by which I could independently arrive at your conclusion.

 

Personally, I am more than willing to be insulted if there's an opportunity for me to learn something new and important about myself. Treating people like they are fragile little ceramic dolls is insulting. I just ask that you provide some logic for me to evaluate. This is a philosophy forum, after all.

[nadasaki]

I scored 126 via iqtest.com

I guess it's above average according to Wikipedia and slightly below "gifted".

My excuse is I've done this at work and was slightly distracted by a few phone calls.

[Alice Amell]

I also doubt many will post low scores. The survey isn't really a random sample. But not useless, perhaps. I took the online quiz and entered my score though I doubt it's very accurate. I've never taken a real one in person and it costs money so I doubt I will. I think in person I'd do a lot worse. I would bet that I'd score around 100 though.

 

 

I'm curious why the european scale had you (Robin) at a higher IQ level. If 100 is the average, does that mean that the average intelligence is lower in Europe? That would be strange considering some of the folk we've got here in the states who literally can't tie their shoes, haha.

The European scale had a standard deviation of 24 while the American one has a standard deviation of 16, so the scores can't be directly compared. This means 116 on the American scale is equal to 124 on the European scale (both 1 standard deviation above the mean).

[RicardoMata]

When I was in school I was tested but no one said a number. they only said it was above average.

 

Given that I live in Portugal, I don't know the portuguese average so for all I know it could be 101.