How do highly intelligent people think

bump

...

...

I mostly just think about how superior I am to the rest of humanity. I believe Neetshe was talking about my very own existence when he explicated the concept of the ubermensche (which I had conceptualized myself at the tender age of 2, in Latin). Otherwise, I can run on average 3 parallel cognitive processes at once, and I've never encountered a mathematical or scientific problem that wasn't trivial to me. I usually only need to attend few select lectures on a subject, as my mind deduces the extraneous information and easily solves tests with no need for memorization.

It is an enlightening, but also a very lonely and vexing existence.

Be born with more myelin and a better built parietal lobe.

A 119 iq here (top 1% of the board)
We're not really that different from you dumb people, it's just that we see the truth more easily.

Are there any reliable online IQ tests, or would I have to go to a professional IRL to find out mine? My brothers were both tested at some point due to various issues like outbursts and potential autism. I was always a bit more calm, but I'm likely autistic as well.

you haven't been in the iq threads then m8
iq average around here is 140 according to those great iq threads

>people lie on the internet
Shocking, I know

Every intelligent person thinks differently. This post is based on my personal observations of leading academics and less than special academics and undergrads.

>tl;dr: There are usually some innate -but very different- thinking patterns in highly intelligent people, the ones who understand their own minds enough to utilize it become the most successful.

In general most people you would call "intelligent" have both the IQ and discipline to study a "difficult" field. Even though you find many idiots with degrees in difficult fields, most people that can get their undergrad degree in a STEM field tend to be considered "intelligent" by most members of the public. In general people have more or less the same thinking processes and insecurities. They use various learning techniques and follow a kind heuristic problem solving strategy which in itself evolves and becomes refined as they figure out what kind of approach to start with when solving certain classes of problems. You can jump start this development by teaching various known techniques for solving problems. This is what happens in most undergraduate programmes.

Where intelligent people get distinguished from "very/highly intelligent" or even "genius" usually has to do with the creative problem solving approaches rather than how quickly they can study (everyone gets there eventually; to learn a field is to have solved questions explained to you, receiving this knowledge isn't the same as having found those answers yourself). The different thinking processes in this level doesn't necessarily acquire or process information faster or slower than "normal intelligent" people (plenty of even 150+ IQ people drop out of -or underachieve in- undergrad, not because they "get bored" or whatever bullshit they tell themselves, but because they struggle to apply knowledge to solve new problems despite having learned and understood the work quickly).

[cont.]

For genius level people their process on new and unsolved problems tends to be radically different.

Now, every professional has their own little problem solving tool set to draw from. This toolset becomes more developed throughout their career and as they study different fields, possibly outside of their own. Most people rely on their learned techniques; they chip away at new problems by using the techniques they learned in undergrad and postgrad courses. Mathematicians will attempt to find abstract connections to other known abstractions, solving the problem then becomes a matter of proving the connections and understanding through unification. Physicists will try to draw analogies to known solutions of similar problems using various perturbation based methods, understanding and solving problems is a matter of computation (not necessarily using a computer) and data regression. Engineers and computer scientists try to reduce the problem to subproblems/modules which in turn are to be solved with a computational method as soon as possible, again solving problems is a matter of computation and data regression. Chemists will start doing titrations and NMR.

All of this is a matter of problem classification and each method works in its own way (and it's usually not an easy task). You chip away at a problem until you find something that works. Variations on trivial and known problem instances can be classified by all professionals relatively quickly (professionals who can't do this are usually known as "bad mathematicians/scientists/engineers" to people who can).

We can not say which of the professional thinking processes are best, only that you should experiment with all of them.

[cont]

What distinguishes genius is those who are able to sensibly and efficiently guide their heuristic thinking. In a way this has to do with appropriate laziness. Any aspect that can be solved by known techniques is ignored, focus is placed on separating and chipping away at those aspects of the problem that no one understands yet. Most academics have already failed at this point; they fail to see their problem as already been solved in some way and waste an enormous amount of time either reinventing the wheel or thinking about inherently unsolvable problems.

One thing I've noticed is that highly intelligent people almost [math]never[/math] rely on the usual techniques of their profession when they solve these unsolved problems. They all have their little quirks. Some pay extreme attention to detail and take a long, slow but certain road. Some spam away a barrage of ideas most of which turns out to be rubbish, but they find that on string of it works. It appears that they did not learn these techniques, but it is inherit in their thinking. They don't just apply it in math and science, you can see the same patterns in their social relationships, their political maneuvering, their careers. It works for them and they can't understand or replicate other thinking patterns (not techniques) effectively.

Finally I've noticed what truly makes an academic successful to the point where others will all call them genius; when they can't solve a problem they give up quickly and focus on problems that are difficult for almost everyone except themselves. Genius in the end is a matter of appearance and luck, but achieved in an intelligent way.

With an open mind, consume as much information as possible and think for yourself. Spend time alone too.

Genius/genie/generate/generosity so genius = creativity

Right, but most people that think they're creative are just idiots.

Your creativity has to actually be useful. That's why people started using "innovation" as a replacement for creativity in the way idiots and artists abused the term.

It's like a computer with more RAM and a faster processor basically. We don't have better hard drives though and we can be just as lazy as stupid people.
You can't really make yourself smarter to be honest.

This.

The world needs artists just as much as scientific/technology geniuses. I would much rather live in a world where artistic creativity was the dominating factor, myself. Creativity is whatever you want it to be, the real meaning of creativity. But yeah i understand your point too.

This

How do they think while studying?

>Learn theory
>Think about using theory in different ways than intended
>Think about how that theory relates to other theories or other fields
>Think about theory corner cases
>Think about how to improve the theory

A non intelligent person will just learn the theory and then think they don't have to do anything with it because it doesn't interest them, as they are not intelligent. For example the fundamental theorem of calculus. A pleb will read that then just tick off a check mark as it's something that will come up on a test later. Somebody with intelligence will actually try to understand it, how it came to be, and where else it can be applied.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_giftedness

Right, but here's something you didn't anticipate; you're talking to an "artist", or rather someone who has sold commissioned art (digital, but I also do oil painting for fun).

Now trust me art is not about being creative. 99% of artists work off a reference even on commissioned work, perfecting your art then becomes a matter technique which is learned just like every other skillset.

It's the same thing composing music and so forth, most of it draws heavily from previous work. Wildly creative works are almost always shit. Only rare genius composers can regularly churn out creative/innovative works that are consistently good.

I don't believe artists, even genius ones, are required nearly as much "as much as scientific/technology geniuses". Not only is the market for commissioned art extremely over-saturated, but it simply isn't important anymore. Culture and recreation can come from many sources. Most of modern culture actually springs from technology.

>tl;dr: Most starbucks sipping artsy types are not creative even if they imagine themselves to be.

>Creativity is whatever you want it to be, the real meaning of creativity.
Strongly disagree with your non-sequitur feel good litany.

It has more to do with being familiar with the few concepts that IQ tests test for
Some for example are literally just applying XOR onto visual patterns

Yeah being creative is hard. Everything is a remix though. Yeah well those kinds of artists aren't truly creative then, they are more in the box. Why was it important before? Why is it not important now? Yeah and modern culture fucking sucks. I'm sorry but that is creativity, there are no rules. You sound angry, have a hug

Can't talk for everyone, but what works for me as a very high IQ individual is this. When trying to solve a problem, I always think outside the box and try to figure out how jews are connected to the problem and how do they profit from it.

Related: Jews have average higher intelligence but also higher levels of mental illness