Anyone else worried that they might actually be cursed by genetically low IQ and are only "good" at reading because of...

Anyone else worried that they might actually be cursed by genetically low IQ and are only "good" at reading because of how much you do it?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonderlic_test#Median_score_by_profession
newlearningonline.com/new-learning/chapter-6/chomsky-on-iq-and-inequality
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>only "good" at reading because of how much you do it

Low intelligence would mean that even through effort and habit you would be incapable of improvement.

People are only skilled at anything due to habituation. Unless you're a blatant retard you can learn anything with enough devotion.

Producing new art and ideas is something else, entirely. But with how much information is already out there, you can be very knowledgeable just by reading and practicing.

>Not having your IQ tested because you are amazingly mentally ill

Unfortunately you still need to be at least three standard deviations above the norm to not be a pseud and few people are.

This.

>150ish IQ from Stanford-Binet

Everyone around me is a fucking moron.

>worrying about things you cannot change

Yeah I'm afraid of measuring my IQ, I don't want to see the results. It's the same reason I don't measure my dick and rarely look at my checking account

Why would feeling like you overcame adversity worry you?

Dude IQ is a spook, why do you even care? Why do you let it condition your life?

b-b-but p-peterson said it m-m-matters

lol

It blows my mind that these threads are allowed on a literature.

Whatever the discussion is, somebody always turns the discussion to jerking off about their IQ or worrying about their IQ.

Nobody gives a shit. You don't automatically become a superstar if you find out you have a 160 IQ.

/thread

>not despairing over the eternal actuality that has squandered your life's potential
>not railing at the objective propensities that dictate the course of your life
>not reeling in the understanding that metaphysical necessity has conspired to keep you from living the life you want to live

absolutely plebeian as fuck my laddy

outstanding 10/10

Dangerous way of thinking to be honest and here is why

I was never a really smart person and somehow by being persistent and showing up eventually landed an excellent role in the IT field and became an engineer

Overtime I developed so many skills in my previous role and eventually ended up moving up again to another role were I took lead engineer and would work on some very complex issues. I ended up being very proficient at this and I got bored at it, eventually moved on to another company for a much tougher position and had to realize only real reasons I was really good at what I did was because I put in the time and efffort to do everything at that company.

Currently at a new role and having a hard time moving up, and stepping up to be one of the best engineers, have to change my way of thinking and stop focusing on being the best and just be happy you have a career and a solid pay check but it really hurts when you meet people who are truly gifted and have more time in the field. You want to learn from those people, but you look at yourself and can only think maybe I have low iq or something

3 literal nonsensical sentences

low IQ brainlet detected

not gonna make a shitty low IQ joke but if you can't understand these sentences you're a fuckin moron

I feel like I am the retard in most social interactions. Reading is my way of feeling smart. I find solace in that at least I can read and feel that I am understanding the written word of philosophy.

>Nobody gives a shit. You don't automatically become a superstar if you find out you have a 160 IQ.

It's not so much that if you have an IQ you're automatically not going to be a pseud, and more that if you're below a certain IQ you're a pseud by default and should just give up now and focus on breeding so your gene pool gets another shot at the game. Or just an hero.

IQ testing has informed me I should just give up on becoming anything but mediocre and ordinary and man, that's just a weight off my back.

>eternal actuality
>objective propensities
>metaphysical necessity

well you do seem like a dumbass

So what's the cutoff point?

Jesus Christ this is the most pathetic thing I've ever read.

But if you really are happy with placing all of your self-worth on an imperfect score (I won't be an autist and say that IQ is a "spook", but I don't believe it is as accurate as people think it is) then good for you.

>he thinks pseud means dumb
You're a pseudass, my man.

You better kill yourself

Time to reroll for stats, pathetic faggot.

You can always fall for the 10,000 hours meme

Depends what you're doing. If your dream is to become the worlds greatest linebacker it's not even necessarily that important to be average IQ. If you want to contribute to some intellectual pursuit in a meaningful way than although the bar to be a cog in the machine is significantly lower.

It is pathetic to be ordinary, but less pathetic than trying to be extraordinary when you clearly are not capable of doing so. It is akin to trying to become the NBAs GOAT when you are 5'6 because height is just a number. My intellectual ability is high enough yet low enough to make me know that I could be rather extraordinary at being ordinary and that's a much better use of my time than trying to be extraordinary.

Precisely!

>reading
>because of how much you do it

linebackers have pretty high iqs. the very good ones who get to be professional. just sayin

iq doesnt mean shit

fuck your genetics (not that it doesn't affect you, but fuck it, you are what you are, stop complaining and work on what you can work, play with what you are willing to play etc)

reading is just something you do like watching tv, playing a sport, sleeping, eating, studying math, playing the guitar, having sex, going for a walk, etc

get the fuck out of here because this place is full of shit heads that intentionally or not will make it seem all of the above matters a fuck lot

Average NFL linebacker has a lower IQ than an Average receptionist.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonderlic_test#Median_score_by_profession

Halfbacks would have been a better example.

I never did an IQ test until recently. I completed 3 with an average of 132, by most measures this puts me in the top 2%. However, I have friends who I'd consider more intelligent than myself yet scored lower, around the 120-125 mark. Saying one can't learn high level concepts owing to a arbitrary measure of intelligence is total nonsense. It could perhaps take longer but it's like anything, putting any real value on IQ is detrimental. It either falsely enforces a perceived intelligence, shoots down the confidence of someone who is actually intelligent or makes an intelligent individual complacent.

>132IQ

That still puts you in pseud range.

>a arbitrary measure of intelligence is total nonsense
1000 times this

I think anyone can be a pseud regardless of how high IQ they possess. No one is qualified to talk about everything and isn't the definition of a pseud someone who talks about subjects they don't actually understand? I'd consider an 180 IQ quantum physicist a pseud if they tried to talk down to a 120 English professor about English.

meant for

Salinger had a decidedly mediocre IQ of 104, but he was still better educated, more accomplished, more knowledgeable and a better writer than virtually everybody who posts on this board.

IQ doesn't seal your success or doom. It's a vague indicator of intellectual potential, not an intellectual achievement in and of itself. Having a high IQ doesn't mean you will create beautiful or interesting thoughts, and having a low IQ doesn't mean you're incapable of interpreting the world in novel or meaningful ways.

I hate adding another post to this thread, but I have a burning question.

Did William Faulkner have an IQ under 110? I heard this once before, but I cannot confirm or deny it.

Who fucking cares man!

>ITT
>Leftists get butthurt about IQ because they don't like the idea that some people are arbitrarily lucky/unlucky and will forever be pseuds or live on easy street.

Kind of goes against their entire ethos. IQ still is highly correlated with success in a ton of different metrics notably grades and success in certain complex jobs, and if you dismiss it than you have to throw basically the entirety of social sciences in the trash because virtually all of it is worse established than IQ. IQ is strongly correlated with tons of things.

Not that the left wants to actually throw all of social sciences in the trash because that would mean throwing their marxist bullshit in the trash, but they believe if they say "IQ is just a number it's arbitrary, I knew people who were smarter than people with higher IQs" IQ suddenly is discredited because they are pseuds and brainlets.

There are certain domains where IQ isn't relevant. IQ notably doesn't measure creativity at all. You can make an argument there are better ways to measure intelligence than a single IQ score. It's still a ridiculously well established metric that people think is bullshit entirely because it makes the left uncomfortable. You rank people by IQ, you make predictions about them, and a lot of the predictions you can make will be highly accurate.

High IQ merely determines potential to not be a pseud, you will probably still be a pseud even with high IQ. If you're low IQ and are doing stuff harder than janitorial sciences you are doomed to be a pseud though.

IQ doesn't predict creative ability whatsoever. People hate on IQ because they literally do not understand what it predicts. IQ shouldn't be predictive of your ability to make fiction for teens whatsoever. School grades, similarly, are also not predictive of creativity.

He was a college dropout, which his IQ WOULD have predicted, because IQ predicts grades, so J.D. Salinger helps prove IQs validity.

IQ doesn't predict creativity. Look into the tests actually used on an IQ test. It's stuff like testing memory, pattern recognition, and such.

IQ does predict your grades during English literature class, but it doesn't predict if you will be a good writer, as neither IQ or Grades correlate to creativity. Faulker recieved a D in University English, which his medium IQ predicted.

It must be the bell curve kids from pol again... Just ignore them and they will go away.

W-what's my IQ anons

Two people in a row, TRYING to cherry pick examples that disproved my point, used two examples where said students medium IQ predicted their low grades in school, IQ being highly predictive of grades, but not of creativity. This entire thread is people giving opinions on IQ that have never read into the subject in any meaningful level which I guess makes me the low IQ brainlet because what do I expect from Veeky Forums?

Anti-IQ is pseudo-intellectualism at it's finest, and by that, I mean the rejection of the idea that IQ is predictive at all, not the idea there is potentially something more predictive of intelligence than a single IQ factor. It's based on fundamentally misunderstanding what IQ actually measures combined with not understanding how strongly it predicts certain outcomes reliably and repeatably across populations, combined with not understanding most of the social sciences have far less evidence behind them yet people are far more sceptical about the cornerstone of the social sciences than the more flaky shit.

Want to be a good mathematician, physicist, economist, lawyer, engineer, philosopher, chess player? If you are low IQ you will forever fail to ever be anybody of note.

Want to be a good young adult writer, linebacker, custodial contractor, poet, painter? IQ will probably have literally zero relevance because IQ does not predict creativity or achievement in repetitive jobs presuming you are minimally intelligent enough to do said job.

>implying IQ matters when you can do as many pull ups as me

Just give it up. We know you have not read anything about IQ.

Yes, IQ correlates with success; but basing your life around it is ridiculous.

stop reminding me that people unironically call him a philosopher

Not adjusting your life plans based around a reliable corollary of success is absolutely ridiculous. If you have a 80IQ you should not try to become a philosopher for instance, you will fail hilariously hard, unless there is something seriously strange about you, when there are a ton of other Veeky Forums things you could do and succeed at. IQ tests that break your IQ down into smaller components can be even more informative around this point. It's more predictive than the vast majority of things you see in psychology or the social sciences more broadly, certainly moreso than the "personality testing" like MBTI and the shit they make you do during job interviews.

If somebody scores below a certain IQ you should treat them as disabled as well.

IQ is a highly practical metric. Obviously one should treat it with correct proportionality, but one should still base their life around it to an extent, that is perfectly reasonable.

IQ is a Spook.

>"personality testing" like MBTI
Speaking of that, wouldn't over half of Veeky Forums test as the same two types? Yet we have such diverse fates.

is there anything that *isn't* a spook tho

The only thing that squanders your potential to you.

Right now, you are nothing but a child. Accepting responsibility, regardless of disability, fabricated or otherwise, is the first step towards to becoming a completely realized person.

>IQ is a highly practical metric
It isn't beyond very broad strokes. All your posts reek of an autistic failure trying to justify his laziness.

newlearningonline.com/new-learning/chapter-6/chomsky-on-iq-and-inequality

Read this.

Funny, it seems like everyone who does an IQ test is above average. Really makes me think

IQ is overrated.

>Noam Chomsky is a linguist
>Chomsky on IQ and Inequality
most interesting

Chomsky is the ultimate psued

thats why ACT/SAT score threads are better
because people don't know that they're actually accurate IQ threads

If you read it he's not arguing about the psychometric flaws of measuring the g factor.

He dismantles the assumptions around why IQ is so important.

why are stemfags the biggest shitposters

Lol iq is such a fucking meme, how well I do on iq tests always depends on how awake, mentally alert, and high vibration conscious I am feeling. It also only tests a limited range of the spectrum of what intelligence really is.

>tfw 160 IQ
>literally good at everything
>can solve almost any scientific, engineering, or mathematical problem with little to no training
>became a genius philosopher without having read a single page of philosophy
>wrote one of the greatest novels in history before I could even read
I will lead a good life at your expense

how the fuck is someone "good" at reading?

are you "good" at watching tv too?

shit breh

hey you need like a publicist or an agent or someone to clean your belly button i'd really like to ride those coattails

>everyone who does an IQ test
Online shit is not proper IQ testing. Things like WAIS-IV are actually done offline with trained staff, consist of many diverse subtests and last anywhere from 2 to 4 hours.

I hate that this board is such shit I can't tell if this is serious or not.

That was the kind of test that I took. I got 119 as a result. I felt that it was low, mostly because it doesn't look as good as a 120, but also because I saw a graphic on which Philosophy majors had 130 average, so I almost never mention my IQ score anywhere. Bragging about IQ strikes me as a loser thing, actually.

pls hire me

Nah. I've always been top reader in class.