So recently this guy named Jordan(pic related) started to appear on my youtube reccomendations and I watched a few videos where he talks about IQ, how much it indicates success and achievements, financial stability, crime rates, etc. Nothing new so far, but in a certain moment he talked about high IQ manifestations and I thought about it later during the day.
Not trying to make this a personal blog post or anything, I'm just giving my example because it's something I'm familiar with. So I happen to have a high IQ, the result was 160, done with a psychologist, the most remarkable area being my creativity. I should be top 0.1%, I believe, in the bell curve or something like that. The thing is, I don't know if I'm really able to do what I'm told I can.
Everywhere I read it says an individual with this score can do things like being a math phd before 25, solving extremely complex problems in seconds or learning a really hard engineering subject in one day or two, which I have tried and failed(kek). Don't get me wrong, the test result isn't incorrect, I've done some other unofficial IQ tests who gave me the same results and I happen to be smarter than possibly anyone I personally know, I just don't feel like the superhero the IQ test describes me.
Are there people here with a smiliar line of thinking? Perhaps someone with a really high IQ of 180+?
Also, IQ general, this topic is always interesting
Most here are 130+, being under 190 just means you're above average. Being a genius is up to your personal effort
Landon Foster
There are like 10 people with 180+ IQ alive today
Ethan Russell
>hard engineering no such thing exists. sort yourself out
Jack Jones
High IQ + Effort > Moderate IQ + Effort > High IQ little/no effort > Moderate IQ + little no/effort
S O R T O R T
Julian Gray
bucko
Luis Bennett
The thing a lot of people miss is that a high IQ does not guarantee you will have marketable skills that match the current economy. Nor does a high IQ guarantee you will have good social skills and public image.
Also if most people in the community or field of study/ practice you enter into has a high IQ then any probability of success based on your own high IQ will likely start to regress due averages being renormed. This is why you still have large sects of sub-par or failed individuals in countries like Japan and South Korea or academic fields in math and science. The populations that exist in these places do have high IQ relative to the rest of the world but if you aren't competing with the rest of the world and are exclusively competing with individuals inside these populations instead you aren't doing yourself much good.
Jordan Gonzalez
Correct, however in OP's case 160 iq points is a lot, it's in the same tier as jobs, bill gates, stephen hawking and above many other relevant intelligent people who achieved a lot in life.
You make a valid point with Japan, but we're talking about a 10 points average above the mean. Also, I highly doubt OP is japanese, meaning even in the US, the country with probably the highest percentage of genius in the academia, OP should be expected to perform incredibly, because on paper he is a genius.
Tl;dr OP, if your test is reliable and all you said is true, then you only need to put some effort in your life that you'll be able to do pretty much anything. A clear example of effort beating gift is Ronaldo vs Messi. Messi is without a doubt better, no one questions it. However Ronaldo pushed his limits so far he managed to have as many ballon d'or as Messi.
>Their findings, due to be published in the Journal of Political Economy, showed that people with a higher IQ displayed 'significantly higher' levels of cooperation, which in turn led to them earning more money as part of the game.
>"People might naturally presume that people who are nice, conscientious and generous are automatically more cooperative. But, through our research, we find overwhelming support for the idea that intelligence is the primary condition for a socially cohesive, cooperative society. A good heart and good behaviour have an effect too but it's transitory and small.
>"An additional benefit of higher intelligence in our experiment, and likely in real life, is the ability to process information faster, hence to accumulate more extensive experience, and to learn from it. This scenario can be applied to the workplace, where it's likely that intelligent people who see the bigger picture and work cooperatively, will ultimately be promoted and financially rewarded."
2018-03-doesnt-nice-intelligent.html
Existence of brainlets is a curse. They are actually a cancer on the society.
IQ is important when talking about groups. It is less important when talking about individuals. The big exception being, since this is /sci, the big meme that hard work and perserverance can make anyone into a scientist or mathematician. It's a lie and fucks over much more people than it helps.
Zachary Cook
Consider countersignaling fucks like Hawking and Feynman. Feynman both claimed that anyone could achieve what he achieved with hard work and that he was one of the only people in the world who understood General Relativity. His 124 IQ is a meme: the test obviously wasn't valid. If you have a 124 IQ, it is a really bad idea to try to become a theoretical physicist. You will end up wasting time and money.
Hawking attacked people who bragged about IQ, much to the delight of liberals who quickly applied that to biodiversity. If anyone in history benefited from having a high IQ, it was Hawking. If he didn't have a very high IQ, he would have died much sooner in some government hospital. He had a few scientific accomplishments, so he got to signal that he was even smarter and better than other people with 160ish IQs. Great for him. Great for virtue signaling liberals. Bad for high IQ kids who need special attention.
Chase Carter
You need fewer smart people to run society than you do stupid people to do all the grunt work. I'm so sick of this >mah dysgenics bullshit.
Jackson Lewis
being very conscientious paired with a high IQ is what allows for what peterson describes, not just high IQ.
Jordan Evans
>If you have a 124 IQ, it is a really bad idea to try to become a theoretical physicist. You will end up wasting time and money.
Why? The average IQ of a PhD major is around 130. Yeah 124 is low compared to that but if you're focusing on specialized concepts that are built off of previous work from other scientists it's completely doable.
I will never understand why people get so hungup on Feynman's IQ situation. I mean +120 IQ is still high compared to the average and respectable. Is it the idea that some one ""less intelligent"" in terms of IQ can contribute more to a field than others that bothers people? Do they not understand that a number of scientists and mathematicians have based the entire careers off of niche or highly ignored research, materials and concepts that would later on birth big breakthroughs?
Dominic Anderson
You do realize that physics has many different areas, right? Theoretical physics and especially mathematical physics are the most intellectually difficult. And most physics PhD never find a real academic post. That does not include all the people who dropped out or switched majors in undergraduate school?
That was good advice for almost everyone in that IQ range.
Jonathan Collins
Every idiot thinks that he's smarter than the people he's around, because topics of conversation while he's there will ultimately revolve around what he understands, which his peers may not. Being smarter than the people around you is not a good thing, pick more intelligent and successful friends.
Luis Howard
>the US >highest percentage of genius in academia no
Joshua Ward
Personality structure has as much influence on your life as your IQ does. Not industrious or conscientious, with depressive features and issues with attention? You're not going to be as successful as you are intelligent.
Logan Reed
I dont believe you have iq of 160. By simply seing the titles of the video with jordan peterson in it i see a pattern that these videos appeal to loosers, etc. I don't think successful people have jordan peterson in their recommendations.
Nathaniel Butler
>and failed(kek) Stopped reading, good luck
Parker Gutierrez
I don't see many people who built a house looking for instructions on how to build a house either.
Grayson Rivera
Tons of people read self help books even if they seem to be successful. This is just false. Jordan basically wrote a pop self help book that would appeal to moderately high IQ men which didn't exist before. Of course it was successful. And no, I don't think most of his fans are losers. The dude makes like 70 thousand dollars a month just on Patreon. His audiance certainly isn't all NEETs.
Kevin Butler
Pure Math PhDs & 90% of Applied Math PhDs won't be able to solve any hard EE problem because they don't know enough Physics.
Dominic Lewis
patreon.com/jordanbpeterson It doesn't say the total anymore, but I am sure it is even higher now that his book is a best seller.
Alexander Hall
>I should be top 0.1%, I believe, in the bell curve or something like that the absolute state of sci
Jayden Butler
>Engineering >Easy Then go project a Nuclear Submarine faggot. And do all EE and MechE calculations
Brainlets in physics end up doing coding, experimental, finance, material Engineering, optical engineering, EE or unemployed.
Ian Morgan
Biophysics and Astronomy fags are also Brainlets.
Ian Nelson
Post IQ tests desu
Mason Ortiz
>solving extremely complex problems in seconds or learning a really hard engineering subject in one day or two, This is delusional. Life is not a video-game. You may have a high IQ, but you seem to have poor critical thinking skills and no real life experience.
Liam Wilson
High IQ is nothing if you are lazy.
Look at every great scientist. Even with their extreme IQs, most of them probably put more hours into their craft by age 18 than you will in your entire life.
Feynman isn't the only Nobel prize winner in the sciences with a "low" IQ. Watson had an IQ of 124. Shockley 129 (he took the test 1 year later and got 125). Louis Alvarez had one below 135.
Alverez and Shockley were both rejected from a special high IQ school for scoring below 135. The purpose of the school was to take the brightest kids in America and turn them into great geniuses. The irony is that nobody from that school ever won a Nobel prize or did anytying truly astounding, but two rejects of its rejects did.
Both these men, who autists on here would consider brainlets for having a "low" IQ, achieved more than any of you ever will and more than anyone from mensa. IQ is for wannabes that want to feel elite and special without any work. No wonder it appeals to you brainlets on here, since most of you are just sad losers.
IQ is, as someone else pointed out, has some uses when talking about populations. At the individual level you can raise someone's IQ by 1 standard deviation by simply paying them to take the test.
Lucas Collins
>So I happen to have a high IQ, the result was 160 pls invent warp drive user k thanks
Alexander Morris
>Jobs >Intelligent The guy was a fraud dumb manipulative piece of shit that didn't understood the technology he sold. He was at best around IQ 100 but good at treat people like shit and scream at them and shout out random buzzwords.
Brayden Nelson
Can only give personal anecdote, info from my psychologist coupled with my own thoughts but anyhow.
Had an IQ-done last year during investigation of possible ADD. I wasn't given a numerical value as a result but a graph over the various sub-categories.
While nothing was below average the results were wildly different from far above avg to just around standard.
Having such disparate mental capabilities makes me unable to effectively utilise what I'm good at, causing frustration which further lowers focus and ability.
If you find that you can't really do what you feel should be able to, with effort invested, then maybe you have similar issues? Try to test around what fails and work around your limitations
Carson Watson
TL;DR: >IQ is a compound of sub-areas >you might be badly balanced like me >this fuck with you
Effort still needed tho
Carter Price
I'm sure I'm below average IQ yet I'm in medschool. You don't have to be hight IQ person in order to live a good life that you won't be ashamed of. For sure it's better to leave math and physics development for people with hight IQ cuz that they can "catch" ideas faster and thus come up with new things faster. That's the way it works. Just be the comfiest you could be. That's the true way to attain happiness, and that's what really count doesn't it?
>Feynman isn't the only Nobel prize winner in the sciences with a "low" IQ. are there any instances of high level mathematicians and physicists taking actual IQ tests and getting high scores?
it seems they just assign an IQ of 160 to famous people who never took the test which is retarded. If you want to speak of intelligence then use that word, not a stupid test designed by pseudoscientists to pick out retards.
if you even consider that noticing a pattern in some 3x3 grid in 1 minute is what distinguishes the top .1% of humanity from everyone else then you're a legit brainlet.
hawking is right and if you are proud of your online IQ test score you should kill yourself
There's a good reason why most of the people shilling for IQ are psychologists. IQ is one of the few things produced by psychologists that has the semblance of science (quantifiability, predictive capabilities, etc.). Despite that, IQ still pales in scientific rigour compared concepts in the hard sciences. Psychologists need to claim what they're doing is worthwhile, without IQ testing many of them would have no jobs or research funding.
Julian Williams
G-guys how accurate are IQ tests for kids? Asking for a friend.
Charles Turner
S O R T O R T R T T
Dumbass..
Isaiah Kelly
If you got a low score they are very accurate. If you got a high score they are not accurate at all.
Brayden Adams
I got 125 at 12. Is there still hope
Jonathan Rodriguez
You are just dumb OP.
You don't seem to understand what "indicator for" means. There isn't a direct causation between success and IQ. IQ is just correlated with success. Statistics will never tell you causal links that you seem to think.
IQ is a test of your spacial reasoning. I doesn't directly measure intelligence like idiots here will tell you. It is however correlated and a component in "g" which IS ment as a general measurement of intelligence. But this again is not evidence for a direct causal link between the two. It could be many reasons for why they are correlated.
There is however a well established causal connection between watching JP's stuff and being an idiot, which explains why you are such a failure OP. Go clean your room.
Joseph Johnson
>sci disregards online iq tests, claims only valid ones are the psychology guided >guy comes with a psychology assisted result >faggots say they don't believe
talk about being jealous
Isaac Gomez
I woud have believed if he said something like 141, but 160? Posting on Veeky Forums? This is a bait thread.
Oliver Brooks
>modern society >grunt work Go back 50 years and you would be more correct.
Lincoln Phillips
To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand Jordan Peterson. The psychology is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of theoretical physics most of the thruth bombs will go over a typical viewer’s head. There’s also Jordan's Christian outlook, which is deftly woven into his characterisation- his personal philosophy draws heavily from Narodnaya Volya literature, for instance. The fans understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these insights, to realise that they’re not just true- they say something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike Jordan Peterson truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn’t appreciate, for instance, the value in Jordan’s existential catchphrase “Clean your room, Bucko,” which itself is a cryptic reference to Turgenev’s Russian epic Fathers and Sons. I’m smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Peterson's genius wit unfolds itself on their computer screens. What fools.. how I pity them.
And yes, by the way, i DO have a Jordan Peterson tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It’s for the ladies’ eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that they’re within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid
Adam Flores
Based my fellow pickle pickle petersoner
Jayden Hernandez
>t. 142 iq jealous brainlet
Joseph Parker
>Jordan Peterson claims he has an IQ of 150 >he's a psychologist lmao you can't make this shit up
Ethan Kelly
If you can expect the population at large to (a) sort problems out for themselves without waiting for the government to look after them and (b) play by the rules and co-operate instead of engaging in mindless destruction of public property, you waste far less money on enforcement costs and useless "job-creation" boondoggles administered by cat ladies.
He probably does. I don't know if he could score that on a test, but his work speaks for itself. I doubt IQ tests will be around for much longer as brain scans are getting closer and closer to tests and I bet they will surpass them in a decade or so.
Carson Parker
What academic work has he done that is genuinely novel or interesting?
Justin Lee
An inaccurate IQ test is more likely than Feynman having an IQ below 145. He wasn't just able to do physics. He was able to write brilliantly, perform, analyse management failures, teach complicated things to normies; you have to wonder if he ever turned his attention to anything and turned out not to be good at it. The diversity of his abilities points to a very high general intelligence. In fact it's pretty much the definition of general intelligence. Additionally, 129 and 134 are still within the top 1-2%, they're not exactly stupid. >below average IQ El Em Eff Ayy Oh you've spent far too much time around other smart people. When was the last time you spoke to a member of the general public? Your general intelligence is without a shadow of a doubt within the top 4% or so (probably higher) and you've got demoralised because there are a few fuckers in your class who are not only insanely smart but also have their shit very much together so they get everything right and seem to know everything. Stop selling yourself short. Psychologists (and all other researchers dealing with humans) have to make do with what they can get. It's not like you can put someone's brain in a wind tunnel and start inferring exactly how it works from its drag coefficient.
Charles Davis
His first book. Maybe do some basic research before spouting off.
