Why are some High IQ people stupid, but some Average IQ people smart?

Oh wait, I misunderstood your post. Well the rest of my reply is valid though.

I believe it is a fairly good indicator sure, but it is one chapter of a story, not the complete story.

Isnt this just Nature vs nurture?

that would be more "how IQ/intelligence is formed" or "how heritable is IQ/intelligence", not the question of discrepancy in IQ number and smart/dumb people.

To answer your question, intelligence is fairly heritable at like 60-80%, but the environment/choices ultimately shape intelligence, genes just set hard parameters of a minimum/maximum, ie. you could have parents of 160 IQ but if you were malnourished, those genes would never be fully expressed (to their potential if nourishment was not an issue)

IQ doesn't measure overarching intelligence, it measures how well the underlying subsystems can perform certain low level tasks. Having good neurological machinery (in the readily testable functional areas) does not mean the state of the overall system is such that they're coordinated, communicate, and ultimately used properly.

You can have a very, very, stupid system made of incredibly good parts. And that system might never encounter or be composed of the means to pattern itself in useful ways.

You know the weighting system used in RPGs where you make your character traits? Life literally has a similar weighting system.

It doesn't. Some people ultimately allocate far more points than others. Some people's class is multiple classes.

and there's no DM to whine at when your rolls suck

Wisdom does not equal intelligence.

IQ is a single measurement of intelligence, a multi-faceted and complex concept. There are IQ tests that break intelligence down into multiple sub IQs, those tests are fairly informative.

Wisdom [math] \neq [/math] intelligence.

This. WIS is not INT, it's like you've never played an RPG.

but that's retarded you stupid fucking cuck

oh wait Asians have the highest IQs. Nvm I'm ok with it now.

You've convinced me

IQ measures a person's ability to learn, not necessarily their application of it, the amount of knowledge they have, the veracity of that knowledge, or their ability to think critically in terms of decision-making and questioning their preconceptions.

That's to say, a thirty-year-old with an IQ of 100 has a lot more knowledge than and will make better choices than a ten-year-old with an IQ of 160. Alternatively, the 160-IQ individual may have dedicated that learning propensity to something useless like dated technology, conspiracy theories, or maybe even nothing at all.

your personality isn't based on your IQ.

IQ doesn't make you virtuous, or confident, or energetic, or clever. It allows you to recognize patterns faster than someone with a lower score. Woohoo! My IQ is ~145. There, I just swung my dick. That's about all it's good for anyway other than measuring for mental retardation.

The most intelligent people are not the people with the highest IQ scores that I know. The most intelligent people I know are very well-read and if I could describe them in one word, it'd be "clarity". They are humble. (sometimes have aspergers). They have "good" personalities. They are mature, don't let things get to them, focus on what matters, don't waste time, are virtuous and SELF-AWARE... Legitimacy is important too. I've seen very few posts on Veeky Forums that made me think it was by a legitimately intelligent person, and that's out of the sardonic attitude this website encourages, and that is definitely not intelligent at all, but shows some kind of insecurity or carelessness, too vitriolic to take seriously or give any credibility to, and it's a shame. Who cares I suppose.

I believe that you may be onto something there OP, but if you're seriously going to question IQ then I would like to see statistics instead of anecdotes

>oh wait Asians have the highest IQs.

NO! ! !

Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQ.

>while the literally /x-tier superstitious guy that believes in easily debunkable conspiracy theories had a very high IQ.
how about that

>Woohoo! My IQ is ~145

that's honestly pretty impressive. i didn't like the last 5-10 word problems on that iq test posted earlier so i didn't do them, but i think it's fair that i skipped them since i would have taken a lot of extra time with them and it was a timed test. a couple of the patterns in the beginning tripped me up too, like the rotation involving letters. so i just picked the closest image based on the average "curvature" of the lines. the answer format for the phone question was confusing, so i didn't know what to put there too. i suppose there's no way to see the correct answers though.

also didn't know we were supposed to use a calculator, so i roughed a lot of the math in my head before "cheating" with pen and paper on a couple questions.

it the final score was also pretty generous. if anons are getting about 135-145, that's probably closer to around 110 or 115, since i don't think there are many genius-tier anons here, even though it's likely an above-average population.

IQ is a mental disease.

My experiences tell otherwise. I happen to have a pretty good judgement of people and where they fall in the IQ scale and usually can determine it even from a short talk with them.

There has been no empirical evidence of something that we could define as "being smart" that would not correlate with our current understanding of intelligence.

As long as you discount knowledge and experience from intelligence, which is self explanatory anyway but I just mentioned it just in case.

Even the most (commonly) acceptable 'other intelligence', the "emotional intelligence", has been found to correlate with IQ high enough to remove any need for a differentiation between IQ and EQ.

also pissed that i got that one number sequence wrong. it was +x, /x

WHERE WAS MY ANALYTICAL MIND???

high processing power, bad software

Intelligent people are cursed. They can more easily live inside their own imaginations rather than in the real world, manipulating themselves into feeling pleasant emotions rather than having to work for it.

It seems you're conflating whatever you consider a pleasant and intelligent personality to actual measurable intelligence.

I think that speaks already something about your own intelligence, not being able to differentiate between the two.

A person can well be intelligent regardless of his behavior or attitude and personally I pride myself with being objective enough in my judgement to be able to judge it regardless of my overall opinion of a person.

>defining terms such that the desired result is achieved

are we going to actually discuss this?

I dunno man, I don't think having that sort of IQ makes you a genius. Not even close. An IQ score ~2SDs above the mean doesn't make someone insightful or creative. It helps your creative efforts/insights in their complexity and logical consistency, perhaps.

I did the same thing, what score did you get

>I pride myself with being objective enough in my judgement to be able to judge it regardless of my overall opinion of a person.
you're just a pretentious douche that likes having fap sessions in the form of posts like this. I'm not conflating anything. did using a less common word make your dick fill up? I can already tell what you're about. fuck off.

no, someone cannot be intelligent regardless of his behavior. your "technically" bullshit does not matter.

lol this, i dont think anything that user posted has any substance other than "look at how smart i am at judging people objectively!".
>A person can well be intelligent regardless of his behavior or attitude
no. a persons behavior and attitude reflect intelligence, always. Stop with this "smart but lazy" meme, smart but lazy isnt fucking smart

>high processing power, bad software

Intelligence = High IQ = Good Hardware.
Wisdom = High Education = Good Software

You can run shitty software in a good Hardware.
But It's very hard to run a heavy top notch software in a shitty Hardware.

Even if you Hardware is the best (high IQ), if you install shitty software (bad education) then you will get shitty results.

But all we know that when we try to install heavy software (Ivy League level education) such as Autodesk AutoCAD, Adobe Studio or a AAA HD PC game in a shitty Hardware (low IQ person) the software will either run very slowly, crash, fail to install or even don't run at all.

Hardware (High IQ) is a requirement. But the software (wisdom) is also important.

this is a pretty good analogy for genes (hardware) vs environment (software).

>software (wisdom) is also important.
It is more important. I don't care what your IQ is if you are an idiot. It may as well be 95.

Some people have Toyota Corollas with little engines and they drive 100mph on the highway every day, and they very quickly pass the guy in the powerful Corvette who hasn't driven it past 60mph in his entire life. Your personality is what matters.

As far as I know, iq merely indicates pattern recognition skill which has little to do with abstract reasoning. A guy with a super high iq might be able to solve a rubix cube in under a minute for example but still fall for logical fallacies in debate.

>Toyota Corollas with little engines

the lotus elise comes with a corolla engine and will beat the pants off most cars around a track. not to stretch the analogy too far, but it's more about the weight holding you back.

By your way of thinking. Yes there are people very rich & successful (perform well In life) with lower IQ.

Such as Donald Trump. He is clearly very rich. But I would not consider him a smart / intelligent person.

Many Business people are like Him, rich, charismatic, powerful, sly & narcissistic but dumber that most PhDs you met.

While most PhD that are far smarter than Trump yet will never as rich & powerful as this US president. Even earning above $300k starting meme pay through life.

Some genius yet crazy people even choose to stay poor as the Hobo Russian-Jew Mathematician Grigori Perelman which refused the Math Millennium prize.

>Some genius yet crazy people even choose to stay poor as the Hobo Russian-Jew Mathematician Grigori Perelman which refused the Math Millennium prize.
.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grigori_Perelman

You people are so ridiculous, trying to add your $0.02 or argue against an analogy I wrote while taking a shit. It perfectly explains what I was trying to say. PERSONALITY IS WHAT MATTERS. YOUR IQ IS AN INSIGNIFICANT, VAGUE MEASURE OF HOW QUICKLY YOU RECOGNIZE PATTERNS.

...

who's that though

fps doug. but i just needed a pic appropriate for someone who types a sentence in all caps.

also, for real? you don't know FPS doug? fucking gen z...

i know FPS doug. i was meaning what are you implying and he told me.

nah, just a pissed-off lookin' face cause you were using caps

Don't know either user, but I get the feeling he's still dancing and still getting headshots, even if his hands are shaking

What about high IQ Chad. Some have more points available to them.

he lucked out in 2 separate parameters, intelligence and physical attractiveness. It's not that more points were given to him, they were just allocated differently (and more optimally).
Not to claim people dont have different amount of "points", but they are separate distinctions.

I won't answer the OP question but I would like to chime in for a bit. There are a million types of skills that go into making a good Mathematician, you may have some Mathematicians who have great technical skill, processing speed with a million bag of tricks, aesthetic sense, question posing skills, and general abstract relationship abilities(hidden insight). Obviously you can see this in the most stark contrast between someone like Von Neuman vs Grothendieck.

It's not as simple as having a high IQ = you are guaranteed to be a good Mathematician.

Online IQ tests (iqtest.dk) have a problem where they measure everything that goes into g, usually it's the case that if someone is good at a certain cognitive skill then they are good at all of them, but there are exceptions (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twice_exceptional).

There are certain IQ tests like en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wechsler_Adult_Intelligence_Scale
that are not effected by limitations such as processing speed and working memory, but of course they have to be administrated in real life.

NOT EVERYONE CAN BE A MATHEMATICIAN! It takes a certain type of person and set of skills to become one and it takes much more to win something like the fields medal.

If high IQ doesn't mean you're intelligent, then why is the average IQ of STEM PhDs something like 130-140, which is two sigma above the norm?

no one is saying that high IQ doesnt mean you're intelligent, we are saying it is just one measurable metric of intelligence. That metric happens to be fairly necessary for the environment of a PhD

That's not what is saying, for example.
There also seems to be the misconception that hard work, dedication and work ethic can make up for a lack of talent or average intelligence, which is certainly not true, however I see it posted often.

>There also seems to be the misconception that hard work, dedication and work ethic can make up for a lack of talent or average intelligence, which is certainly not true, however I see it posted often.

this is because many people here suffer from imposter syndrome, myself included. I consider myself "average intelligence", but that's simply not true based on evidence from tests/how quickly i retain information. I think a lot of those people just undersell their own intelligence and attribute their success to their work ethic, dedication, ect. you cannot enter a PhD program (well you certainly cannot complete one) without dedication or work ethic, and you also cannot enter (finish) one with low intelligence. They are both pieces of a larger puzzle

>impostor syndrome
Well, thankfully, IQ is a good way to quantify your intelligence in order to confirm that you're above average.
>attribute their success to their work ethic, dedication, etc
True, I'm just saying that claiming this is all it takes is a harmful lie that shouldn't be perpetuated, since intelligence always trumps work ethic, and that an intelligent person will do what it takes to succeed anyway ("smart but lazy" doesn't exist).

You are truly an idiot if you think having a high iq gurantees you will make a good mathematician.

>Well, thankfully, IQ is a good way to quantify your intelligence in order to confirm that you're above average.
No it isn't. It's a way to compare your entire self to someone else based on how much faster you noticed a pattern compared to them. You are definitely a twat that faps to his own posts.

>completely misinterpreting what I said
You seem to be the stupid one here. A high IQ doesn't mean you'll be a good mathematician, but being a good mathematician implies you have a high IQ.
>No it isn't
So, statistical evidence showing that people who have earned a PhD are, on average, 2 standard deviations above the norm is just anecdotal?
>faps to his own posts
My IQ is average. I'm just stating a fact.

> since intelligence always trumps work ethic
i personally disagree with this. Smart but lazy is not better than stupid but hardworking.

simple fact is, you need both to succeed in a PhD program. Having a bit of one or the other may offset your lack in the other, but someone with low IQ but work ethic wont last, same as someone with high IQ but shit work ethic.

> Takes inductive evidence as fact.

>Smart but lazy is not better than stupid but hardworking.
The former doesn't really exist, in the academic sense. "Smart but lazy" is often used as an excuse for people to justify their low grades.
I've never met an actually smart person who was an underachiever in any relevant subjects.
What are you implying? It's undeniable that academic success very strongly correlates with IQ.
Inductive evidence doesn't necessarily lead to the truth but makes its conclusion highly probable.

im glad you havnt had any experience with the "smart but lazy" type, but they do exist. just not for a very long time, they fail out quickly or master out

>So, statistical evidence showing that people who have earned a PhD are, on average, 2 standard deviations above the norm is just anecdotal?
Of course it is. Not everyone with a high IQ is PhD graduate.

Lets get one thing straight user. Most people have no work ethic at all and don't try. I will take the person that works hard with a good personality, who happens to have a 125 IQ over the 150 IQ that doesn't work hard, and acts like a douche bag because of how smart he is because of his ability to recognize a pattern, and how grand he is because of it.

Most people are perfectly capable, intellectually, if they work hard. Brain plasticity allows you to become a clever, good person if you are willing. Having a high IQ doesn't give you anything. Having a work ethic, even a basic one, puts you above most people. It is absolutely more important. The software is more important than the hardware and I cannot imagine why it'd be the other way around. The fap sessions about how smart we are, I'm not interested in it, and it's all I've seen these other high IQ people do.

Wow, what a use of your hardware. Clearly it's not. Stupid people are stupid because of their personality, inability to accept change, not asking questions, not thinking about shit all of the time... it has N O T H I N G to do with a stupid score on a stupid test that measure your ability to recognize patterns, absolutely nothing, and we already KNOW that. The only people who debate ridiculous shit like that are the ones who like fapping to their high score. It's a joke.

>Most people have no work ethic at all and don't try
begrudgingly i agree with this.

IQ fappers fall into two groups

1.) The idiots who look towards fatalism as a way out for their academic failure.
(see incels)
2.) The people who scored high on an online iq test but never achieved anything in life.

>they fail out quickly
People used to tell me I was "smart but lazy".
What this truly means is that you're an early bloomer. The more precocious people like this are, the longer they'll be able to get by without putting in effort. For most of these people though, this ends up with them reaching a point where their precocity doesn't matter anymore, and since they haven't developed a work ethic, they fail, hard.
Precocious isn't always intelligent.
>Not everyone with a high IQ is PhD graduate
No, but as I said earlier, the opposite is true.
You're right about your example.
>Most people are perfectly capable, intellectually, if they work hard
I disagree. Some subjects require a high level of intelligence that hard work, coming from an average person, cannot compensate for.
>The software is more important than the hardware
This is true in principle, and you absolutely cannot make it without a good work ethic. However, intelligent people more often than not have a good work ethic.

Look, all I'm saying is, you're right about the fact that being a hard worker is very important. But if you're not gifted, you can work as hard as you can and never make it.
There are some subjects for which not having a natural aptitude or understanding puts you at a disadvantage. If you're a shitter at math because you have no intuitive understanding of it, it's unlikely that you'll ever get really good at it.

Can you prove to me there exists a bijection from the set of people with high iq's and all tenured mathematicians at a good university?

I won't believe you, until you do. I'm not a scientist, I don't rely on induction and statistics.

You mean, can I prove that all tenured mathematicians have a high IQ? Of course not.
>I don't rely on induction and statistics
Statistics are a reliable way to describe a population, though.
If the average IQ for tenured professors is, say, 150, do you not consider that to be an indication that academic success correlates with IQ (but not necessarily the other way around)?

careful, you're moving your goalposts by talking about professors, not PhD candidates. Just saying

>I disagree. Some subjects require a high level of intelligence that hard work, coming from an average person, cannot compensate for.
We aren't talking about subjects. Nobody in life is spending every hour on some subject. That's way too vague. I'm talking about people. Not everyone is going to be a mathematician or a physicist. Even mathematicians and physicists have the majority of their lives outside of math and physics, and I think to focus on just that is lame.

Feynman had a really, really good personality. His IQ was supposedly around 125. His personality is what mattered. He does not come off as someone with a 150 IQ. He was a regular guy that gave a shit, and that's what put him above these high IQ douche bags that absolutely cannot handle the idea that they aren't as hot as they think they are because of their stupid number.

>However, intelligent people more often than not have a good work ethic.
You're just saying things. they cater to each other, but in no way are they related.

>tfw the more i think about this the less sure of how right i am

The solution is that you're retarded bro. You seem to rely entirely on the halo effect. People thought I was dumb because I was a class clown but I still had straight A's. There was another kid who was really smart too who did the same (in fact there were plenty) but his dad was a lawyer and he went to a private primary school so it was more well known that he was smart.

I got a lot of disdain from people my junior year and almost got a perfect on the SAT. Even one of my own friends just decided that they hated me because I didn't try in school but hey I only didn't try because well my school was dumb and I wasn't even in the highest classes because I was poor and my school routinely gave the poor kids the shaft. I came from a pretty diverse little town and it was assumed that all the poor kids were just like their parents. Stupid lazy druggies.

It also didn't help that my parents and even my counselor said I would not be going to good university because I was too poor. I know I'm writing a blog but there are an infinite number of circumstances that can contribute to a person not living up to their potential. I've even been told that I simply look dumb which is probably because I don't always react to the stupid shit people tell me with the facial expressions they were expecting. People are dumb and you're dumb and your whole reality is a facade and you should feel bad

I misread your post when I saw the word "tenured". My point still stands.
I don't really understand what you're getting at. Of course people aren't only defined by their academic pursuits, but that's not really relevant.
We were talking about how hard work leads to success.
Feynman was still one SD above the norm, though I get what you're saying. People aren't defined by their IQ, I never implied that. I simply pointed out how much more likely people in demanding STEM fields were to have a high IQ. That's it.
>in no way are they related
Part of being intelligent is being adaptable, and if you're trying to succeed and are intelligent, you're not going to jack off all day when you should be working.

oh that's not my post, it's another user's, just helping reduce arguments. you and other user are really just arguing to argue, im sure you agree more with each other than you disagree

fuck it, i'm definitely right after rereading what i said.

>Part of being intelligent is being adaptable, and if you're trying to succeed and are intelligent, you're not going to jack off all day when you should be working.

I know that, but that isn't related to your IQ AT ALL.

tl;dr I hate IQ tests for purposes outside of determining whether you are
>mentally challenged
>average
>above average
I think that it's completely useless outside of this.

These douchebags that post shit like "my 140 IQ makes me smarter than you with your 130 IQ" is a fucking wankfest. I hate it.

I'm replying to anyone that replies to me.

>im sure you agree more with each other than you disagree
He seems to disagree when I say that academic success is strongly linked to IQ, which is the only part I'm really debating.
So what you're really saying is that you don't think IQ and intelligence are strongly linked?
As far as consensus goes, IQ has been shown to be a good indicator of a person's general intelligence, as long as verbal-linguistic IQ is included alongside the logical reasoning part.

I dont think people aspire to do things they cannot accomplish unless it is something they misunderstand.

Smart but lazy people lack the resolve to continually pursue or learn from something less stimulating than the available alternatives.

Stupid but not-lazy people are the opposite. AKA Average go-getter. They titrate stimulation, withholding vices and not overindulging until the work is done. With these people there is a very hard line between work and fun.

With smart but lazy people, it is a very fine line, or nonexistent. If they are not having fun, they are not working. This can lead to incredible feats like Minecraft(bad example), or the opposite, whatever the word for that is.

Just my two cents.

I'm saying that a good personality doesn't equal a high IQ and I value a good personality much more than a high IQ, as does everyone. I'm saying that the IQ test is a lame, half-baked measure of intelligence.

bad personality = doesn't matter what your IQ is, you're scum and shouldn't exist

good personality = glad to have you

I think the IQ test is bad, that's all, and I don't have sour grapes, my score was very high. I don't put all of my stock into it, though.

Maybe I have an imposter syndrome, or I don't want to accept that I have the hardware and should be pushing it more, or maybe I'm totally wrong.

>always get told I'm smart
>find most of school easy enough, so I never put in any work
>grades start going down in 11th grade or something since I literally did not touch my notes nor listened in class despite choosing the most demanding courses in my country
>be last in my class in 12th grade
>teachers kept telling me about how I had potential the whole time but I didn't listen
I think I'm pretty dumb, but people tell me I'm intelligent. How do I figure it out?

You answered your own question, dumb ass. Stop being a lazy fuck.

Ok, I understand what you're saying. I think you're wrong about the IQ test being bad though.
>as does everyone
Well yeah, of course. We weren't really talking about social relationships but I guess.

No, I just want to know if other people are right when they say I'm smart despite me being an underachiever, or if I'm right when I assume a smart person can't be shit at school, especially high school.
I know I'm too lazy, I'm working on that.

>Some genius yet crazy people even choose to stay poor as the Hobo Russian-Jew Mathematician Grigori Perelman which refused the Math Millennium prize.
I wish they didn't. They of all people need to be greedy, earn a lot of money and pour it into their autistic hobbies. Kind of like Elon Musk, though I would not consider him to be intelligent.

>/sci seems to put too much emphasis on the significance of IQ

And not only Veeky Forums...

Have you ever wondered how people can say how big their dicks are without using the word dick and sounding rude?

This was the answer to this question, and better yet, you could put some papers around your insecurities to reinforce them.

Everyone wins in the end.

you're smart but lazy, which translates to dumb in the real world. I was extremely similar to you, except i lost my grades sophomore year of college. Up to then, i would sleep in class, not go to class, teach myself, ect. It worked really well until i hit a huge wall, a subject (organic) that you couldnt just bullshit with common sense, you actually had to put in effort. Don't let that happen to you. Go work retail for a year, that will give you the drive to not be average.

user, gene expression is not decided in just one generation, not even 5 and there is nothing that garantees that you will get the "right" genes or that they won't end up fucked up in the recombination phase.

I highly doubt you are strict average, you could be high-average (since you are posting here and don't seem to be retarded). The only way to know for sure is to apply yourself, it will help you in other parts of your life also.

>you're smart but lazy
That's not a meme?
>sophomore
Eh you still got pretty far
How did you manage to give yourself the motivation to work regularly? I actually failed out of my freshman year of college after graduating HS due to being bored to death by my major (econ).
Now I've enrolled for CS but I don't want to make the same mistake and assume that I'll manage just by using common sense, as you said.
>Go work retail for a year
I've been dicking around this whole year after dropping out last year, and realized I needed to get my shit together a few months ago.

What is a good website to take a reliable IQ test? I never bothered taking such a test, but want to do it now

>We weren't really talking about social relationships
I'm not specifically talking about that either. Maybe just "person" is better to say than "personality"

virtuous, well-read, hard-working, self-aware, focused, humble, caring, all of these things... these are extremely important qualities that, if you don't have, you won't come off as intelligent to anyone.