Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it,
follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given
their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Posts
Did you have an interview?
Despite my grades (or lack there of) I have wonderful people skills (no, really) and I can vouch for the power of the interview.
Except I'm not talking about the ways that concepts interact with one another.
I'm talking about the relevance of a conceptual intelligence level to the real world.
Your intelligence quotient doesn't do shit for you. Hard work, and maybe a little bit of random luck, is what actually matters. A number on a piece of paper doesn't mean anything except that you now need a new piece of paper if you want to write something else.
Edit: By the way, I like your word usage. Stating that I "claim" to have a certain level of IQ, so as to point out that I am making remarks without backing them up, even though that is, in essence, a large part of whatthis thread was created for, and no one on here could honestly definitively prove that their IQ was what they say it is. If you're upset because I didn't give a number, I chose not to for a reason, simply because the numbers don't matter. The only reason I gave my SAT score was in order to further prove the meaninglessness of numbers.
I guess it attracts really, really smart people.
One time as a little kid I erased an entire sheet of paper because I had none left and our teacher was bitching at people to take out a sheet of paper.
You did claim to have a genius level IQ. I don't claim that, and I don't know any reasonable, intelligent person that would. Most of my reaction to you was because, every time you post anything anywhere on these boards, you strike me as a mouth-breather.
Aside from that, does the number actually mean anything? Yes, it does. It means, basically, this is how you compare to your similarly ranked peers on a series of tasks designed to assess your capabilities involving tasks that this culture requires you to perform just about every day of your life.
Now, how you care to implement those capabilities does make a difference. It makes a big difference, but if you're lacking in a certain area of intelligence due to some sort of innate structural difference in your brain, you are going to have to work harder than others to overcome this problem.
Your IQ is not a predetermination of success, and nobody's claimed as such. That doesn't mean the number's meaningless or useless, like you assert. It's a useful measure, and has some very practical applications, especially when you consider that our construct of IQ is based around the kinds of tasks that people are expected to be good at in this culture.
I'm not sure there are enough people alive for anyone to get a 390 IQ.
Too bad only few of those people are as modest about it as I am.
I wouldn't be suprised if a fair few people on this board are geniuses going by IQ scores alone.
Yes, but which one?
Should I choose simple, yet lovable Gooey?
Or smart, but a pompous ass Gooey?
I'm pretty sure I went to school with that guy. Or maybe not. The guy I'm thinking of claimed 180 if I remember right. Did your guy drive at like 60 MPH through the parking lot by the church and always drive do the cafeteria from his dorm?
Can't you be simple, yet pompous Gooey?
I ain't sure what pompous means, but I know that I'm better than you!
I found out several things I never knew about myself on my 20th birthday. One was that as a child I was allergic to pretty much every type of food. I remembered getting sick from donuts and always having to eat jello cake on birthday, but never knew why. The other, is that as a child I was ambidextrous. Apparently, some doctor or teacher or something told my parents to make me choose a hand because my handwriting would suffer later on in life. If only they hadn't done that. My handwriting is so bad now, I'm not sure it could have gotten worse. Or maybe they just made me choose the wrong hand...
I am the the most modest person ever.
To be fair, usage of the internet does require a certain level of education, and the ability and interest to discuss various topics suggests a higher level of education, and maybe even intellect. I mean, there are some factors thatexist here which make sense. It is thesame with noticing that the percentage of people who wear corrective lenses that are more educated, or considered to be"smarter" is higher than those without corrective lenses, simply because a heavy amount of readingtext, especially if you have been doing it continuously since childhood, puts one at a higher risk for eye issues that require corrective lenses.
It is also a fact that most people are full of shit.
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
http://troublethinking.wordpress.com (Updated Wed) http://twitter.com/#!/Durandal4532
I'll have you know that I use both my mouth AND nose for respiratory purposes, thank you.
When I say I havea genius level IQ, I am saying that when I got my IQ tested, at the behest of my parents, I was given a number, and told that it was above genius level. I find this to be pretty funny, because I don't think that I am at all different than anyone else. Still, thereis some number out there that catagorizes me as being something that is somehow different. The idea that an arbitrary line amonga numberscale, combined with a score I recieved on some kind of standardized test, can supposedly objectively define what I am, wholy amuses me, especially because the vast variety of factors and their effects in life far outweigh some arbitrary distinction of where I rank on a number scale.
I never said that IQ exists without any sort of basis, or that it is ENTIRELY without meaning, my point was simply that in PRACTICAL application, it really makes no difference.
The fact is that I mentioned my IQ level solely for the purpose of pointing out that it didn't have any neccesary bearing on anything, and really to state that, clearly, I am NOT a genius. No one objected to me mentioning my GPAs or my SAT scores. Is the issue simply that I did not give a specific number for my IQ, but rather stated simply "genius level". Would you have the same issues if I'd just given you a number? Personally, I find giving a number to be MORE presumptuous, when it comes to IQ, and prefer to merely talk about ranges, when I bother to talk about IQs at all.
I can multiply three-digit numbers in my head and kick ass at Trivial Pursuit while drunk enough that I can't walk in a straight line, so I'd wager that not all people become stupid when under the influence.
Maddie: "I am not!"
Riley: "You're a marsupial!"
Maddie: "I am a placental mammal!"
I'd use the same excuse, except eye issues simply run in my family. The fact that I wear glasses almost certainly has nothing to do with the fact that I would stay up all night reading, because EVERYONE in my family wears glasses.
I can walk in a straight line BETTER drunk rather than sober.
Mostly because I actually put effort into it.
Oh, I THINK I'm smarter when I'm drunk, that's for sure.
The thing is, when I actually impliment those "great ideas" while drunk, THATS when I feel really stupid while sobering up.
Playing small pranks on overly sensitive roommates just isn't a good idea, no matter how much they deserve it.
No, and also he lived in [removed to drive cel insane], which you probably don't. I'm not especially surprised to find there're two of them.
Some of my friends call me a genius, even though I patently am not. I'm the sort of person who randomly forgets the meanings of words and walks into doors. It makes me wonder if I present a very suave and witty exterior, or if I just have very stupid friends.
IMO, IQ is fucking worthless, what matters is how much you apply what you have.
It's not that easy. Different parts of the brain could be affected while others are not. Such as people who forget how to speak but still know how to read, or when you cut brains in half and each side of the body does things differently, or when ElJeffe is drunk but can still multiply, etc..
You know what you don't get? The following things:
1. "Genius level" is not arbitrary for any test. It's based on the bell curve.
2. Nobody has ever argued that an IQ is a predetermination for success, nor that the number you receive is 100% accurate. In fact, all major tests have a built in scale to determine the level of accuracy the tester believes he or she achieved, and scales an IQ range instead of just tagging a single number. Imagine that!
3. You're arguing about something that you think happens, but actually doesn't. Nobody that's ever taken seriously thinks their IQ is some magical number; if they do, they're just as stupid as you're being. It's a useful number for a variety of reasons, but you don't seem to get that. Instead, you just rail off about how it doesn't make a difference. What, pray tell, is it trying to make a difference in?
4. Anectdotes olol. That's all you're doing. "I'm a lazy dolt, but I've received high scores on IQ tests, so they must be useless!" Good fucking job. The truth of the matter, and this is very important, is that it has correlated very, very well, time and time again, with certain types of success, particularly job success. Just because you haven't done any sort of research on the matter doesn't give you the right to make claims based on your own experience.
IQ scores have many, many practical applications. Read a fucking book about it instead of making baseless conjectures.
KABOOM!
Accuracy is about how close you are to the right answer.
Yeah, I got that.
But, aren't both those numbers Yar gave Precise with the chance of being inAccurate?
[Edit]
Wait, I just re-read what Yar actually said and realised I am being dumb... due to lack of reading comprehension. My bad. I'll leave this all here for humility.
Isn't baseless conjecture whatthe internet is for?
Honestly, though, this thread asked for our opinions on IQ, so I gave mine. I wasn't responding to anyone else in the thread, merely stating that I feel IQ to be meaningless. If you want to disagree with me and discuss that, that's cool, I'm down for it. Coming at me with two fists swinging, though, declaring that I have no right to my opinions, which this thread had asked for, THAT is what doesn't make sense.
Wanna start over, and pretend I just posted my first post in this thread? I'd love to discuss with you where you disagree with my opinions in a far more civilized manner.
Edit: I just double checked the OP, and actually, it only asked for what my IQ is, not my opinions on it, so why don't we pretend that all I ever posted was "genius level". Would that make you happy?
I'm good at figuring out what people want to be told. That is basically my only skill. Not that I use it all that much, but it's pretty good for class work and job interviews.
Yes, you're not allowed to have an opinion on something that is factual in nature until you have informed yourself.
Are you saying that my opinion is akin to racism?
My opinion is simply that I do not believe that IQ has any realistic bearing on reality in any way that actually matters. I'm not saying that there is no theory behind it, or any of that stuff, simply that, when it comes to real world application, it isn't a big enough factor to outweigh anything else. You keep saying that no one would call IQ a measure of success, etc. In fact. most of what you have said in argument to that is that no one said otherwise. If so, that's great. It seems like we're all in agreement, then. I'm not talking about IQ at all on the academic or theoretical level, or even on the applied acadmic or theoretical level. All that I have been saying is that when it comes down to pure real world application, IQ just doesn't matter.
Can you pick out two guys on the street, and tell which one has a higher IQ without testing them?
That DOES NOT mean that IQs have no value at all, just that they have a nominal value in the real world. There are too many other factors, like motivation, ammount of effort, amount of education, etc., for IQ to really make a difference. If you had two exactly identical subjects in all ways except for IQ, would it make a difference then? I guess it would, but you DON'T have those subjects, because that is a theoretical approach. People aren't identical in the real world.
What, exactly, is the part of that argument which would some how change if I "saw the light" by readingtexts on the subject?
Joline Lovejoy: Gifted Priest/Pistoleer - Chains of Corvis IKRPG
Western IQ inventories measure how well you think within the parameters of what is important in Western cultures.
Yes, there are many fucking factors to an individual. Seriously, since when have I said that there aren't? Another bold bit, because you really, really don't understand a single fucking thing.
IQ doesn't affect change, but rather acts as an indicator variable. Because it correlates highly with several things, it is useful for indicating the level or status of a correlating variable.
As such, it does have a realistic bearing on reality in a way that actually matters.
You know what's fun about this question? You can, based on societal trends. If one is, say, a bum, and the other is wearing surgical scrubs... you get the point. Will it be a 100% accurate measure? No, but more often than not, it will be correct.
If you have two subjects who are not identical, it can, and often will, make a difference. This is because your IQ, however intangible of a concept as it is, is a permanent aspect of an individual. Just as much as any of those other things you mentioned, it is an important part, and is often inextricably tied to those other things. We use it every day in social interactions, memory recall, spatial conceptualization, learning new information, organizing information, coordinating thoughts, etc.
You seem to think it's just some number that indicates retarded, not retarded, and genius. It's not, as what that single number actually is is a weighted average of numerous numbers. All those numbers are also weighted averages of other numbers, which are often likewise. Again with the bold:
What IQ actually is, what it really represents, is an individuals level of efficacy in the kinds of tasks we are all asked to perform every single day of our lives.
If you don't think that's an important indicator, you're an idiot.
To dismiss the entire concept of intelligence testing because you don't think it applies to you is just dumb though. These things (and I'm talking about the serious tests- you can tell how serious they are because their acronyms don't spell anything cool) are standardised to death, they are correlated with other empirical measures, their content validity is excellent, their predictive validity is better than any other generalised predictor of performance. The tests are reliable bost internally and in test-retest measures. In short IQ tests are fucking dandy.
That said- there are plenty of problems with IQ testing. The American cultural bias is one, as things can get messing when you standardise for different cultures. The proportion of non-correlations is another, and one that makes IQ tests a fairly suspect set of selection criteria. The Flynn effect isn't so much a problem as a quirk, either in testing or the population, but it's a pretty interesting one.
The point is that these problems are all real, but you can't talk about them with any kind credibility if your first response is IQ tests is to call them a crock of shit.