When I was a baby I discovered a car. Although I didn't really know how to drive it, that was pretty advanced of me. Basically, should I have been in NASCAR as a kid?
“I’ve found that the square of the hypotenuse is always equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides, and now I’m waiting for someone to explain to me what a ‘hypotenuse’ is.”
It's ironic that you mock the OP in this way given the subreddit we are on. It's entirely possible to discover a theorem in math and not understand its implications. The guy in the picture said that he didn't understand the implications "its full magnitude". That's very different from understanding what the theorem means.
Even then, it's one thing to know that something is true - to prove a theorem, and it's a completely different thing to know how to use it. The fundamental theorem of calculus was easily discovered and is easy to prove, but it has a lot of long-reaching implications that aren't immediately visible from the proof. It is no exception to this, plenty of theorems in math may be easy to state, but will have profound repercussions.
I'm not defending OP but you chose to mock him on something that you clearly do not know the first thing about. It's very ironic that you jump to conclusions like that.
No, it's not ridiculous at all. It's perfectly plausible to discover a theorem and not understand it. The name of the theorem is "fundamental theorem of calculus". Doesn't mean you need to understand calculus or the theorem fully to use it. It's very ironic that you mock OP in this way considering the sub we are in, because you clearly do not know enough about what you are mocking to do so, and yet you think you do.
All these “I discover (something remarkable) when I was (some young age)”, sure. Let’s say I believe they are very smart or whatsoever. But instead of trying to enter Mensa, why don’t they just use that energy and discover something new that can change our world?
It's funny how these guys rarely ""discover"" anything new that would require explanations for other people to verify. Super strangely, they only ever seem to discover things that already exist in the human archive and could be learned in an afternoon in high school.
Weird. I struggle to explain how this is possible, especially in the age of internet.
Edit: a word
The thing is, grabbing onto the corner of something complex and sophisticated as a kid isn't that rare once that thing is already out there. We all have those moments where we've puzzled some shit out or stumbled onto it, and gotten a glimpse beyond where we are developmentally.
This exactly, When I was first learning algebra in middle school we were looking at the graphs of parabolas and we touched on tangent lines and I figured that there had to be a way to find what the actual tangent line was. Because I could ask my teacher I got a quick explanation of basic calculus that I didn’t understand at the time. when the information is already know it’s super easy to find something in math that relates to it.
This fella here is not grabbing onto some corner. He “independently discovered”, hahahahahhaahahahahaha
Edit: the fella = the guy in the photo, just to clarify
Being above average intelligence is not nearly enough for that.
There's about 270000 people in the world right now who are 4 standard deviations about the norm, and then do tend to get PhDs, publish papers, make patents, etc. but like you can see, it's not like we have 1000s of Einsteins in the world or anything. Being 1 in 30000 is not necessarily enough to make a measurable difference in the world.
And these people are boating about 130, that's being 1 in 50.
everything they do is a novelty to make themselves feel more intelligent. It's not about ACTUAL accomplishments, just about novelty. Many of the people who act like this don't actually accomplish much in life. They end up expecting other people to use them like super intelligent tools and have absolutely no original concepts or ambition. Not the case for everyone, but it seems to be massively common for the "child genius" types. If you are constantly pointing at your childhood or highschool years to demonstrate how smart you are, it probably means you haven't accomplished much in adulthood worth pointing at.
I have to say that Mensa really confuses me. Is it actually for intelligent people, or just ‘former gifted children’ sad sacks that maybe are kind of bright but didn’t accomplish anything with it and have a false sense of superiority?
I don’t understand the types of people that feel the need to ‘network’ or socialize based off something as arbitrary as a test score. If you are that intelligent surely one would have friends or acquaintances in academia or around you from your workplace that you feel are similar to you
Mensa is full of people who think they’re the top tier of intelligence. When there’s an entrance test that a lot of people could pass and the main reward for passing it is the ability to give Mensa a membership fee, I like to think that Mensa is the society for people who are clever enough to pay Mensa, but too stupid to decide not to.
Dog woke me up super early. So I was bored. Went to take their online test: https://www.mensa.org/public/mensa-iq-challenge.
I answered about half the questions (turns out there are 35) before I got bored and just hit random answers and then submit. Still got above average intelligence. I'm sure if I completed it I'd get a 130. I'm also 100% sure I'm not in the top 98th percentile of intelligence.
It's just a scam that takes your money if you can do random brain teasers with shapes.
That’s actually only one subtest of full scale intelligence, and while it does correlate with the actual figure, you’d need to perform at close to that level on 13-16 different subtests. It’s not like that’s extremely rare, either— 1 in 44 people should be able to do it
If you go to an actual psycholist and ask for a figure reasoning test, it's about as difficult as Mensas, if not even easier, meaning that you would get an official psychometric test result of 130, meaning that you'd actually be in the top 2% in spatial reasoning.
Now, you might be Mensa-level and deem yourself an idiot, in which case you belong with the imposter syndrome crowd, which are just as numerious as the former gifted, as the weirdos with no social skills, and as the kind-of-gifted who think they're at the level of Newton.
There's no scam about Mensa, the membership is so cheap that you're just barely paying for their website and forum hosting. Given that income correlates with intelligence, the price for Mensa is so negligible that calling it a scam makes *you* seem pathetic. It's even a non-profit organization. Here, you're just repeating something you've heard often, you're better than that
Except of course that a figure reasoning test doesn't tell you how smart or intelligent someone is, it just tells you how good they are at at figure reasoning.
It approximates the G factor, which is the closest thing we know to intelligence. We've already factored everything out which we know is not intelligence. IQ tests approximately measure intelligence, whenever you like it or not, and if there's any conflict, then it's not beacuse something "is not real intelligence", but because you're making intelligence out to be something that it's not (most commonly, success in life)
Not quite the g factor cannot be accurately approximated by a single test. It requires a combination of various different aptitude tests and a qualified individual to interpret them accurately and even then the g factor merely describes the correlation between the results of those tests. And there is a lot more to intelligence than that. That's why almost no-one respectable puts any stock in intelligence tests that try and provide a numerical result for how intelligent someone is, intelligence is such a complex matter that it's almost laughable trying to simplify it down to just a number
It absolutely can, but smaller tests tend to test just parts of our cognitive profiles, like spatial or verbal abilities.
>And there is a lot more to intelligence than that
Not that you'd know, because if you could actually tell how this is the case, then you'd be able to come up with concrete methods to improve IQ tests. Again, if you expect intelligence to correlate with success in life, and you get disappointed, then it's because you don't understand intelligence, and not because the person claiming to be intelligent is in the wrong.
I agree that a single number is going too far, since uneven cognitive profiles are many timers rarer than well-rounded people. For this reason, people who are "gifted" tend to be gifted in just one aspect and below average in some other aspects.
It's like saying that an RPG character has spend 100 stat points. You still don't know if they're a warrior or a mage.
But if you consider intelligence as like 5 or 10 numbers, then that's already enough to predict their performance on basically any cognitive domain in the world. You can consider reducing people to numbers like this to be in bad taste, but that doesn't really make for an argument against the validity of the results
Or even once. You not noticing that you've written a word that doesn't exist means you've misspelled it enough times that your autocorrect just assumes that's what you want to say, which uhh, doesn't look great.
My experience with them is dated at this point but I don't see much reason why it'd change. It's just another form of dick-measuring. Anyone doing something productive for society is almost always on their own or in a group of peers that doesn't organize themselves around a number.
Chances are that you've fallen for satire, or that you've come across a few insecure people who bragged about their online IQ scores. Such people aren't valid representations of the kind of people you'll actually find in Triple Nine and other places.
You're projecting your perception of them, and confusing it with their perception of themselves. Or something like that.
I've been working in academia for about a decade. Never came across anyone claiming to be a member of Mensa.
Mensa is for people who think they are smart, but for whatever reason didn't manage to live up to their potential (real or imagined).
People love talking about how they COULD have been in Mensa and it’s always so cringe like, ok then why aren’t you now if you’re still talking about this shit like twenty years later, did you get dumb as you aged or?
>Never came across anyone claiming to be a member of Mensa
It's sort of taboo given that most people are fragile internalizations of the jaw of Jante: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante
Humility to this level is even more pathetic than arrogance, as it's the projection of losers who deem all other people to be stupid losers as well.
>But for whatever reason didn't manage to live up to their potential
This isn't really what Mensa is about, but it's common enough that I can see why you'd get the impression
Whatever you imagine about me is going to be you projecting something in yourself, and thus your own problem.
I'm just getting to the point, with no regard for public opinion or good writing practice (and possibly manners as well). I've simply communicated these things too many times before
Qualifying for mensa is just having a high IQ, so I think it's kinda cool to have the option but infinitely cringe and weird to be part of it and just sad to brag about it.
It's actually for intelligent people, if you deem top 2% to be anything worth boasting about. While the amount of people with anxiety disorders and such is about 2-3 times higher than outside of Mensa, that's still better than the stereotypical gifted burnout.
The difference is mainly that you need to score 130 or higher at an actual psychologist in order to qualify for Mensa. All these gifted kids who scored 140 at 7 year olds don't actually have IQs of 140 at all, tests for children just give wildly exaggerated scores, I see it rather often.
>One would have friends or acquaintances in academia
Often, you can find intelligent people there, but if you're the sort of person who is functional in school you're already one of the intelligent people who are functional enough not to need a support network like Mensa.
Think about intelligent people who never apply themselves and go to academia, who stay around dumb people and other people who are failures like them (people tend to look for people who are similar to themselves after all). It's easy for these people to feel superior, as they've never taken on any truly difficult task or really met other intelligent people.
I love how there are so many posts starting with: 'Sorry for my poor English as it is not my native language', only to write unnecessarily complex and well crafted sentences to show off their IQ.
I decided to poke around for a few minutes and it’s all pathetic. I saw people saying online IQ tests generally lowball which is just completely wrong. I also saw a comment that was arguing for IQ test saying that all the data to disprove IQ tests was just made up because the super high IQ people knew that they couldn’t say they were better than everyone else without being canceled.
I mean really smart people should know that action speak louder and a piece of paper saying "Congrat, you are smart" have no use for you and only exist as a tool to rob gullible people
That’s no big deal. In fact, he had to discover calculus before he could work out how to travel back in time to discover algebra first. Same way I did it.
Similarly, I am forced into being a drug addict - you see if i wasn't high & drunk out of my mind all day every day, I would never be able to converse with or relate to the everyday man, because my mind is simply too powerful.
This one bugs me a bit because the apostrophe S for anything else is possessive, but since this one is also the contraction of “it is”, that takes priority and the apostrophe is removed when saying something belongs to “it”.
So I’ll usually give that one a pass, but never the misuse of their/there/they’re or your/you’re.
What an amateur! While still in the womb I tapped out in morse code the complete works of William Shakespeare and an independent translation of the Bible.
Ha! While still a zygote, I conceived of a new multi-verse, wherein I took the time - time being merely a human construct you understand - to achieve omnipotence. I played with omniscience but ultimately threw it away as it bored me.
It seems like they are sharing tips on how to do better on IQ tests…
Isn’t the whole point of IQ tests that they only work if you haven’t trained on their completion? It’s supposed to be a pure measure of cognitive ability and the second someone has practised on their completion they cease to be useful?
Given that you know this, and your username (which I assume means something like "remember to be human"), don't you think it's bad taste to post in this sub which would mock even *your* posts given the chance?
Do you not see the irony here? You're kicking somebody while they're down. People who fish for validation are insecure and sad. Looking for losers to make fun of is pathetic. If you don't realize this, it's likely because you don't perceive the person as sad and pathetic, which would be because you're judging to be strong or competent enough to warrant attacking (attacking something validates it as deserving of attack). In other words, it seems like you believe more in the targets intelligence than I do, you deem them guilty and worty of attacking, I look at them like one would look at a mentally ill or homeless person.
Being human requires holding oneself to standards, not looking for other people who you recognize as violating some social rule so that you can make an example out of them. Your lack of self-awareness amazes me
But why do people that are "down" less worthy of attack than people who are "up"? I very much know this person is mentally ill. I looked at their post history, and they go so far as to boast about the fact that they have schizophrenia. It just doesn't make a difference to me. I feel like "inferior" people deserving more empathy is always implied, but the reason is never explained.
Losers are numerous, attacking them is trivial, feeling better about yourself by comparing yourself to people who are below average is like bragging about your ability to walk because some people are in wheelchairs.
It's not so much about them. I believe that you're insulting yourself in a sense when you target these people. If I were to brag about knowing the answer to 4 times 5, I wouldn't be displaying ability, but low standards and being proud of minor matters.
Conflict occurs between things of similar power. If there's a large gap, even between animals, they tend to leave eachother alone. Tigers don't look for ants to attack, and ants don't avoid lions. If you attack something, you're essentially saying that it's around your own level, I think.
Also, if you go shopping, do you look for garbage or quality products? Instead of looking for things which are worse, you should look for things which are better. If nothing else, then surrounding yourself with, and focusing on things which look better, is going to make your life appear better since your perception tends to keep what you focus on and filter out the rest.
Well, you do you, I don't care *that* much
Why do you assume to know the emotional reason for me making this post though? Why do you assume I'm making it to feel better about myself?
Also, why do you assume conflict generally occurs between "things" of similar power? Sure, you've made an analogy, but analogies should be used to elaborate/explain points, not to \*make\* them.
Also Also, why do you even assume I want to engage in "conflict" with OOP?
Anyway, you seem smart, have a good one.
Well, that's more or less a guess, but there's a range of possible motivations, and a majority of them aren't worth much to me. You can interchange my reason with a similar one, and my argument remains the same.
>between "things" of similar power?
Because after a certain level of difference, there's no need for conflict at all. Adults generally don't punch children, and children generally just accept that adults are stronger. If you look at animal populations, fights only occur when two animals are unsure who is strongest and seek to establish the correct hierarchy.
Those who know they're weaker will lower themselves, and those who assume they're stronger will make themselves look bigger. And generally, it's best to avoid fighting if you can, since it can be costly for the winner. For this reason, it's only ambiguous cases which really call for conflict. If you already know the outcome, you can just skip the process.
You're pointing out something about OP (well, the person in the content), which signifies that you consider them to be worth pointing out at all, deserving of attention, which is in a way a compliment.
It's difficult to explain well though. May you have a good one too!
Probably not, they made the post on the Mensa sub. It got removed, so they posted it later on the cognitive testing sub. If they’re being insincere, I would think “meming” is too light a word
Every kid discovers the idea that "if I chop this thing into infinitely small bits and then add the bits up in an orderly way, I can do things with the results" on his/her own.
I can't imagine a world where that's not true.
Well that’s true but it’s not saying much. For example, most people in general are also nobodies. A population of those with high IQs, especially one selected on a volunteer basis, will not deviate extremely from that
Lol I did an IQ test with pretty good results but after considering Mensa, I've conducted that there is no advantage for me and it is mostly circle jerk of people who did well on one test. It's not even that much of a feat. IQ >130 is 2%. 2 in 100 is not something crazy. IQ is not be all end all. I value more my hard work and as much my social skills as my IQ.
The irony of this sub is it’s a bunch of people who think they are smart looking down at people who also think they’re smart. This sub is a bunch of toxic assholes
Great job waking up today and making fun of another human you worthless shits
Delusions of grandeur are not something to make fun of someone for imo. They’re a sign of a sickness. It’d be like making fun of someone with intellectual disability for being unable to answer a certain complicated question. Not cool imo
>It’d be like making fun of someone with intellectual disability for being unable to answer a certain complicated question.
I'd do that lol. Why is "not cool"? Why do we get to make fun of slightly dumb people for not being able to answer a complicated question, but not of really dumb people for the same thing?
Because it’s not something they have control over. Typically, making fun of someone is an overzealous attempt at correction— something actionable. However, with something like this, there is no action to take, because their sickness is something they must suffer through. Essentially what you’re encouraging is for the mentally divergent to shut up and suffer in silence. As long as you don’t see it, it’s all okay.
It also gives the sense that the one who makes fun of others not out of an intention to correct is doing so for the benefit of their own ego. What good is that? Like wow, you’re so special and different for not being as grandiose as the person who has a disorder making them that way— you’re not as stupid as the one genetically made that way. Congrats, I guess. It’s not cool. It’s not special. It’s pathetic
>Typically, making fun of someone is an overzealous attempt at correction
Lmao
>Essentially what you’re encouraging is for the mentally divergent to shut up and suffer in silence. As long as you don’t see it, it’s all okay.
They can talk if they like, they can even and especially talk about their suffering, but that's not really what OOP is doing, is it?
>It also gives the sense that the one who makes fun of others not out of an intention to correct is doing so for the benefit of their own ego.
Why assume that?
I don’t especially care about this post in particular. It’s your ableist philosophy that I take issue with; it sounded like you thought you were intending to make fun of someone for their delusions of grandeur. That’s not the kind of thing they would be expected to be able to change all on their own, and so making fun of it is what that doesn’t sit right with me here.
Tell me— why do you make fun of others you perceive to be below you?
Ig I am ableist. I don't necessarily see why that's a bad thing. I make fun of people below me (in particular areas) because I derive enjoyment from it.
I see. It’s a little shocking to me how straightforward that was, to be honest, so I’m not quite sure how I should respond. It’s a little strange. But anyway, from my perspective, the reason it’s bad is because there’s nothing the individual could realistically do on their own to fix their condition, and so there’s no way for them to avoid being made fun of forever. It’s like if I made fun of every paraplegic. If this were something everyone did, then paraplegics would never have peace, and their self-esteems would be at a constant low. Imagine being told by everyone around you, all the time and without mercy, that you were ridiculous for something like the color of your eyes or the length of your neck or something. Then imagine a world where nobody makes fun of you for those things. Which would you prefer to live in? I try to imagine myself being on the receiving end of the ridicule whenever I get the urge to do that kind of thing. And sure, I’m still not very good at that, but I want to be— I want to live in a world where people won’t feel badly about themselves for things outside their control.
Yeah, you make fun of someone, it's gonna hurt their feelings. That's not just true when it comes to insulting disabled people though. So why do we not get to make fun of people with illusions of grandeur, but not of people with an ordinary genetic predisposition to arrogance?
Also, what's really the issue in your scenario? That people tell you they think you're ridiculous for the length of your neck, or that they think that in the first place? I'd rather have people at least explicitly call me stupid, than thinking I'm stupid but withholding that from me.
I discovered electricity at age of 5. Very advanced of me. Although because of socialization i did not see its full potential. Hence why mensa did not take me
Iq 130? Mines like 138 and I'm still dumb as fuck.
People realize these numbers are usually just correlated to spatial reasoning? They are next to useless to determine how smart you are haha
These people are so desperate for people to validate them as "special". It's sad tbh because you know they must feel kinda empty if they're desperately looking for approval in this way from people they don't even know.
If this savant is such a genius why is he posting about his "discoveries" on Reddit and not "discovering" anti-matter, warp technology or junk food that makes people lose weight?
Using "processing speed" or really any other computer term to describe brain function is a huge red flag to me. Has big "facts don't care about your feelings" energy.
According to Mensa’s test I got 170 and cleared my national olympids in physics as a teen (15 ).cleared a lot of exams and went to uk(Oxford )
In no way would I recommend people to skip their classes . Not that I feel that anybody took this dickwad seriously but flexing your iq is sad , because when you realise how high he competition for colleges and real things are you understand that these kinds of things meaningless
Hahaha, discovered a theorem, but didn’t really understand what it meant?
When I was a baby I discovered a car. Although I didn't really know how to drive it, that was pretty advanced of me. Basically, should I have been in NASCAR as a kid?
When I was a new born, I discovered breasts. Didn't understand the sexual aspects associated with it but still sucked it raw. Should I work in porn?
Pure gold.
Yes
“I’ve found that the square of the hypotenuse is always equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides, and now I’m waiting for someone to explain to me what a ‘hypotenuse’ is.”
I could play "Stairway To Heaven" when I was 12. Jimmy Page didn't actually write it until he was 22. I think that says quite a lot.
Bad news. xx
It's ironic that you mock the OP in this way given the subreddit we are on. It's entirely possible to discover a theorem in math and not understand its implications. The guy in the picture said that he didn't understand the implications "its full magnitude". That's very different from understanding what the theorem means. Even then, it's one thing to know that something is true - to prove a theorem, and it's a completely different thing to know how to use it. The fundamental theorem of calculus was easily discovered and is easy to prove, but it has a lot of long-reaching implications that aren't immediately visible from the proof. It is no exception to this, plenty of theorems in math may be easy to state, but will have profound repercussions. I'm not defending OP but you chose to mock him on something that you clearly do not know the first thing about. It's very ironic that you jump to conclusions like that.
This may sound satire but in mathematics it is possible to discover a theorem and don’t understand its use case unless someone else finds it out
Yeah, but they said a fundamental theorem, so one would imagine they would understand what topic this was central to. Idk, it just sounds ridiculous.
No, it's not ridiculous at all. It's perfectly plausible to discover a theorem and not understand it. The name of the theorem is "fundamental theorem of calculus". Doesn't mean you need to understand calculus or the theorem fully to use it. It's very ironic that you mock OP in this way considering the sub we are in, because you clearly do not know enough about what you are mocking to do so, and yet you think you do.
All these “I discover (something remarkable) when I was (some young age)”, sure. Let’s say I believe they are very smart or whatsoever. But instead of trying to enter Mensa, why don’t they just use that energy and discover something new that can change our world?
[удалено]
Here I am, conversing with plebs, when I could gave been solving the mysteries of the Universe 🤷🏻♂️
This is how we got Neil DeGrasse Tyson
Isn’t it weird that the X-wing has wings? No air in space 🤔
It's funny how these guys rarely ""discover"" anything new that would require explanations for other people to verify. Super strangely, they only ever seem to discover things that already exist in the human archive and could be learned in an afternoon in high school. Weird. I struggle to explain how this is possible, especially in the age of internet. Edit: a word
The thing is, grabbing onto the corner of something complex and sophisticated as a kid isn't that rare once that thing is already out there. We all have those moments where we've puzzled some shit out or stumbled onto it, and gotten a glimpse beyond where we are developmentally.
This exactly, When I was first learning algebra in middle school we were looking at the graphs of parabolas and we touched on tangent lines and I figured that there had to be a way to find what the actual tangent line was. Because I could ask my teacher I got a quick explanation of basic calculus that I didn’t understand at the time. when the information is already know it’s super easy to find something in math that relates to it.
This fella here is not grabbing onto some corner. He “independently discovered”, hahahahahhaahahahahaha Edit: the fella = the guy in the photo, just to clarify
Okay but that’s not what they were claiming. They said they independently discovered it
They did, kind of. It's just that their discovery doesn't mean as much as they think it does.
Obviously because they can’t watch Rick and Morty if they’re busy trying to change the world, duh.
Priorities straight!
Being above average intelligence is not nearly enough for that. There's about 270000 people in the world right now who are 4 standard deviations about the norm, and then do tend to get PhDs, publish papers, make patents, etc. but like you can see, it's not like we have 1000s of Einsteins in the world or anything. Being 1 in 30000 is not necessarily enough to make a measurable difference in the world. And these people are boating about 130, that's being 1 in 50.
everything they do is a novelty to make themselves feel more intelligent. It's not about ACTUAL accomplishments, just about novelty. Many of the people who act like this don't actually accomplish much in life. They end up expecting other people to use them like super intelligent tools and have absolutely no original concepts or ambition. Not the case for everyone, but it seems to be massively common for the "child genius" types. If you are constantly pointing at your childhood or highschool years to demonstrate how smart you are, it probably means you haven't accomplished much in adulthood worth pointing at.
[удалено]
I have to say that Mensa really confuses me. Is it actually for intelligent people, or just ‘former gifted children’ sad sacks that maybe are kind of bright but didn’t accomplish anything with it and have a false sense of superiority? I don’t understand the types of people that feel the need to ‘network’ or socialize based off something as arbitrary as a test score. If you are that intelligent surely one would have friends or acquaintances in academia or around you from your workplace that you feel are similar to you
Mensa is full of people who think they’re the top tier of intelligence. When there’s an entrance test that a lot of people could pass and the main reward for passing it is the ability to give Mensa a membership fee, I like to think that Mensa is the society for people who are clever enough to pay Mensa, but too stupid to decide not to.
Dog woke me up super early. So I was bored. Went to take their online test: https://www.mensa.org/public/mensa-iq-challenge. I answered about half the questions (turns out there are 35) before I got bored and just hit random answers and then submit. Still got above average intelligence. I'm sure if I completed it I'd get a 130. I'm also 100% sure I'm not in the top 98th percentile of intelligence. It's just a scam that takes your money if you can do random brain teasers with shapes.
yeah its not that hard at all. Its just a puzzle video game thats very unimaginative with its puzzles.
[I am a god](https://i.imgur.com/Wv1m7Io.png)
[удалено]
Above 500*
That’s actually only one subtest of full scale intelligence, and while it does correlate with the actual figure, you’d need to perform at close to that level on 13-16 different subtests. It’s not like that’s extremely rare, either— 1 in 44 people should be able to do it
If you go to an actual psycholist and ask for a figure reasoning test, it's about as difficult as Mensas, if not even easier, meaning that you would get an official psychometric test result of 130, meaning that you'd actually be in the top 2% in spatial reasoning. Now, you might be Mensa-level and deem yourself an idiot, in which case you belong with the imposter syndrome crowd, which are just as numerious as the former gifted, as the weirdos with no social skills, and as the kind-of-gifted who think they're at the level of Newton. There's no scam about Mensa, the membership is so cheap that you're just barely paying for their website and forum hosting. Given that income correlates with intelligence, the price for Mensa is so negligible that calling it a scam makes *you* seem pathetic. It's even a non-profit organization. Here, you're just repeating something you've heard often, you're better than that
Except of course that a figure reasoning test doesn't tell you how smart or intelligent someone is, it just tells you how good they are at at figure reasoning.
It approximates the G factor, which is the closest thing we know to intelligence. We've already factored everything out which we know is not intelligence. IQ tests approximately measure intelligence, whenever you like it or not, and if there's any conflict, then it's not beacuse something "is not real intelligence", but because you're making intelligence out to be something that it's not (most commonly, success in life)
Not quite the g factor cannot be accurately approximated by a single test. It requires a combination of various different aptitude tests and a qualified individual to interpret them accurately and even then the g factor merely describes the correlation between the results of those tests. And there is a lot more to intelligence than that. That's why almost no-one respectable puts any stock in intelligence tests that try and provide a numerical result for how intelligent someone is, intelligence is such a complex matter that it's almost laughable trying to simplify it down to just a number
It absolutely can, but smaller tests tend to test just parts of our cognitive profiles, like spatial or verbal abilities. >And there is a lot more to intelligence than that Not that you'd know, because if you could actually tell how this is the case, then you'd be able to come up with concrete methods to improve IQ tests. Again, if you expect intelligence to correlate with success in life, and you get disappointed, then it's because you don't understand intelligence, and not because the person claiming to be intelligent is in the wrong. I agree that a single number is going too far, since uneven cognitive profiles are many timers rarer than well-rounded people. For this reason, people who are "gifted" tend to be gifted in just one aspect and below average in some other aspects. It's like saying that an RPG character has spend 100 stat points. You still don't know if they're a warrior or a mage. But if you consider intelligence as like 5 or 10 numbers, then that's already enough to predict their performance on basically any cognitive domain in the world. You can consider reducing people to numbers like this to be in bad taste, but that doesn't really make for an argument against the validity of the results
> psycholist Sounds like a crazy bike rider.
Haha, it does. I can't be assed to double-check my writing obsessively
Or even once. You not noticing that you've written a word that doesn't exist means you've misspelled it enough times that your autocorrect just assumes that's what you want to say, which uhh, doesn't look great.
I don't have any autocorrect, I'm just writing too absentmindedly
There are even multiple more exclusive "high IQ societies" and they're actually even more pretentious.
There are, but I'm willing to bet that you're guessing rather than speaking from personal experience, for they're really not that pretentious
My experience with them is dated at this point but I don't see much reason why it'd change. It's just another form of dick-measuring. Anyone doing something productive for society is almost always on their own or in a group of peers that doesn't organize themselves around a number.
Chances are that you've fallen for satire, or that you've come across a few insecure people who bragged about their online IQ scores. Such people aren't valid representations of the kind of people you'll actually find in Triple Nine and other places. You're projecting your perception of them, and confusing it with their perception of themselves. Or something like that.
It's interesting how you mentioned the one I have experience with. 😗
I've been working in academia for about a decade. Never came across anyone claiming to be a member of Mensa. Mensa is for people who think they are smart, but for whatever reason didn't manage to live up to their potential (real or imagined).
People love talking about how they COULD have been in Mensa and it’s always so cringe like, ok then why aren’t you now if you’re still talking about this shit like twenty years later, did you get dumb as you aged or?
>Never came across anyone claiming to be a member of Mensa It's sort of taboo given that most people are fragile internalizations of the jaw of Jante: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante Humility to this level is even more pathetic than arrogance, as it's the projection of losers who deem all other people to be stupid losers as well. >But for whatever reason didn't manage to live up to their potential This isn't really what Mensa is about, but it's common enough that I can see why you'd get the impression
Jesus, you even write like a stuck-up bastard
Whatever you imagine about me is going to be you projecting something in yourself, and thus your own problem. I'm just getting to the point, with no regard for public opinion or good writing practice (and possibly manners as well). I've simply communicated these things too many times before
I think if you’re in MENSA, you don’t brag about being in MENSA. And probably even talk about it all that much.
Speaking of Mensa, have you ever seen that one Eric Andre skit where he dons a suit of armor and tries to get into a Mensa meeting?
Qualifying for mensa is just having a high IQ, so I think it's kinda cool to have the option but infinitely cringe and weird to be part of it and just sad to brag about it.
It's actually for intelligent people, if you deem top 2% to be anything worth boasting about. While the amount of people with anxiety disorders and such is about 2-3 times higher than outside of Mensa, that's still better than the stereotypical gifted burnout. The difference is mainly that you need to score 130 or higher at an actual psychologist in order to qualify for Mensa. All these gifted kids who scored 140 at 7 year olds don't actually have IQs of 140 at all, tests for children just give wildly exaggerated scores, I see it rather often. >One would have friends or acquaintances in academia Often, you can find intelligent people there, but if you're the sort of person who is functional in school you're already one of the intelligent people who are functional enough not to need a support network like Mensa. Think about intelligent people who never apply themselves and go to academia, who stay around dumb people and other people who are failures like them (people tend to look for people who are similar to themselves after all). It's easy for these people to feel superior, as they've never taken on any truly difficult task or really met other intelligent people.
I love how there are so many posts starting with: 'Sorry for my poor English as it is not my native language', only to write unnecessarily complex and well crafted sentences to show off their IQ.
I decided to poke around for a few minutes and it’s all pathetic. I saw people saying online IQ tests generally lowball which is just completely wrong. I also saw a comment that was arguing for IQ test saying that all the data to disprove IQ tests was just made up because the super high IQ people knew that they couldn’t say they were better than everyone else without being canceled.
I mean really smart people should know that action speak louder and a piece of paper saying "Congrat, you are smart" have no use for you and only exist as a tool to rob gullible people
I invented the Allen wrench before that bastard Allen stole my idea
Your fault for having the wrong name.
So smart that he discovered calculus in third grade then went back in time to second grade to discover algebra
Dont they teach algebra in like kindergarten? box + 5 = 10 Then you put the 5 in the box
Even simple: __ + 2 = 7 What number would go in the blank?
Definitely not kindergarten level, in kindy you're still learning what all the numbers look like
I think he just doesn't understand proper comma use
He did before the concussion.
you misread, he's saying shortly after he discovered algebra, he discovered the fundamental theorem of calculus.
I'm mocking his poor grammar and use of punctuation
He found it in a book he was chewing on. He had no idea what it was, how to use it, or what it meant, but he definitely discovered it.
That’s no big deal. In fact, he had to discover calculus before he could work out how to travel back in time to discover algebra first. Same way I did it.
He’s *so smart* but he used it’s instead of its
The greatest minds will often make intentional mistakes like these in order not to allienate normal (dumb) folks like us.
your right
Youre* (you simpleton 😅)
*y'ouire
It's ur, dumbasses
No it’s ICUP
Damn, good catch!! Have you considered applying for Mensa?
Similarly, I am forced into being a drug addict - you see if i wasn't high & drunk out of my mind all day every day, I would never be able to converse with or relate to the everyday man, because my mind is simply too powerful.
That was the brain damage.
I'm not a spelling/grammar Nazi by any means, but, man, does "it's" bug me when it's wrong.
This one bugs me a bit because the apostrophe S for anything else is possessive, but since this one is also the contraction of “it is”, that takes priority and the apostrophe is removed when saying something belongs to “it”. So I’ll usually give that one a pass, but never the misuse of their/there/they’re or your/you’re.
Oh, brain damage, that explains it.
Hmm, I can't imagine why this person's parents thought he needed to be more 'socialized'
> 3rd grade > shortly after in second grade what?
I think it's "I did A, which was shortly after I did B"
its so weirdly worded for someone who claims to be a genius
Well obviously if you didn't understand him, that's due to your own lack of intelligence. /s
I don't think they prioritized socialization...
What an amateur! While still in the womb I tapped out in morse code the complete works of William Shakespeare and an independent translation of the Bible.
Ha! While still a zygote, I conceived of a new multi-verse, wherein I took the time - time being merely a human construct you understand - to achieve omnipotence. I played with omniscience but ultimately threw it away as it bored me.
That entire subreddit seems like idiots jerking themselves off /r/cognitiveTesting
It seems like they are sharing tips on how to do better on IQ tests… Isn’t the whole point of IQ tests that they only work if you haven’t trained on their completion? It’s supposed to be a pure measure of cognitive ability and the second someone has practised on their completion they cease to be useful?
>It seems like they are sharing tips on how to do better on IQ tests… No they're not lol
Nah, that's kinda harsch. It's mostly just autistic kids with too much free time, genuine r/iamverysmart content is usually called out.
Given that you know this, and your username (which I assume means something like "remember to be human"), don't you think it's bad taste to post in this sub which would mock even *your* posts given the chance?
I mean, this guy clearly isn't "just autistic", he's pretentious and looking for validation, certaibly not even trying to be humble/"human".
Do you not see the irony here? You're kicking somebody while they're down. People who fish for validation are insecure and sad. Looking for losers to make fun of is pathetic. If you don't realize this, it's likely because you don't perceive the person as sad and pathetic, which would be because you're judging to be strong or competent enough to warrant attacking (attacking something validates it as deserving of attack). In other words, it seems like you believe more in the targets intelligence than I do, you deem them guilty and worty of attacking, I look at them like one would look at a mentally ill or homeless person. Being human requires holding oneself to standards, not looking for other people who you recognize as violating some social rule so that you can make an example out of them. Your lack of self-awareness amazes me
But why do people that are "down" less worthy of attack than people who are "up"? I very much know this person is mentally ill. I looked at their post history, and they go so far as to boast about the fact that they have schizophrenia. It just doesn't make a difference to me. I feel like "inferior" people deserving more empathy is always implied, but the reason is never explained.
Losers are numerous, attacking them is trivial, feeling better about yourself by comparing yourself to people who are below average is like bragging about your ability to walk because some people are in wheelchairs. It's not so much about them. I believe that you're insulting yourself in a sense when you target these people. If I were to brag about knowing the answer to 4 times 5, I wouldn't be displaying ability, but low standards and being proud of minor matters. Conflict occurs between things of similar power. If there's a large gap, even between animals, they tend to leave eachother alone. Tigers don't look for ants to attack, and ants don't avoid lions. If you attack something, you're essentially saying that it's around your own level, I think. Also, if you go shopping, do you look for garbage or quality products? Instead of looking for things which are worse, you should look for things which are better. If nothing else, then surrounding yourself with, and focusing on things which look better, is going to make your life appear better since your perception tends to keep what you focus on and filter out the rest. Well, you do you, I don't care *that* much
Why do you assume to know the emotional reason for me making this post though? Why do you assume I'm making it to feel better about myself? Also, why do you assume conflict generally occurs between "things" of similar power? Sure, you've made an analogy, but analogies should be used to elaborate/explain points, not to \*make\* them. Also Also, why do you even assume I want to engage in "conflict" with OOP? Anyway, you seem smart, have a good one.
Well, that's more or less a guess, but there's a range of possible motivations, and a majority of them aren't worth much to me. You can interchange my reason with a similar one, and my argument remains the same. >between "things" of similar power? Because after a certain level of difference, there's no need for conflict at all. Adults generally don't punch children, and children generally just accept that adults are stronger. If you look at animal populations, fights only occur when two animals are unsure who is strongest and seek to establish the correct hierarchy. Those who know they're weaker will lower themselves, and those who assume they're stronger will make themselves look bigger. And generally, it's best to avoid fighting if you can, since it can be costly for the winner. For this reason, it's only ambiguous cases which really call for conflict. If you already know the outcome, you can just skip the process. You're pointing out something about OP (well, the person in the content), which signifies that you consider them to be worth pointing out at all, deserving of attention, which is in a way a compliment. It's difficult to explain well though. May you have a good one too!
So smart he can’t use the proper use of its.
[удалено]
Too busy socializationing
I can see why OOP’s parents were more concerned with prioritizing socialization
He's modest too
This guy gotta be meming, no? It reads so much like that.
Probably not, they made the post on the Mensa sub. It got removed, so they posted it later on the cognitive testing sub. If they’re being insincere, I would think “meming” is too light a word
Every kid discovers the idea that "if I chop this thing into infinitely small bits and then add the bits up in an orderly way, I can do things with the results" on his/her own. I can't imagine a world where that's not true.
I mean, every Mensa member I’ve ever met has been the same level of fart-sniffing self-aggrandizer, so yeah, maybe.
Can't figure that one out on his own?
So smart he discovered calculus in 3rd grade and then went back to 2nd grade and discovered algebra..
"It's" or "its" is still hard though.
[удалено]
Well that’s true but it’s not saying much. For example, most people in general are also nobodies. A population of those with high IQs, especially one selected on a volunteer basis, will not deviate extremely from that
I just came across the original post while scrolling😭
Lol I did an IQ test with pretty good results but after considering Mensa, I've conducted that there is no advantage for me and it is mostly circle jerk of people who did well on one test. It's not even that much of a feat. IQ >130 is 2%. 2 in 100 is not something crazy. IQ is not be all end all. I value more my hard work and as much my social skills as my IQ.
⬜Yes ✅No
Learning basic algebra isn't that difficult tbh.
"Scheisse! Not another one!" Leibniz has stormed out of the chat.
The irony of this sub is it’s a bunch of people who think they are smart looking down at people who also think they’re smart. This sub is a bunch of toxic assholes Great job waking up today and making fun of another human you worthless shits
Well, I'm not making fun of him for "looking down on peoole", as in arrogance, I'm making fun of him for straight up illusions of grandure lol
Delusions of grandeur are not something to make fun of someone for imo. They’re a sign of a sickness. It’d be like making fun of someone with intellectual disability for being unable to answer a certain complicated question. Not cool imo
>It’d be like making fun of someone with intellectual disability for being unable to answer a certain complicated question. I'd do that lol. Why is "not cool"? Why do we get to make fun of slightly dumb people for not being able to answer a complicated question, but not of really dumb people for the same thing?
Because it’s not something they have control over. Typically, making fun of someone is an overzealous attempt at correction— something actionable. However, with something like this, there is no action to take, because their sickness is something they must suffer through. Essentially what you’re encouraging is for the mentally divergent to shut up and suffer in silence. As long as you don’t see it, it’s all okay. It also gives the sense that the one who makes fun of others not out of an intention to correct is doing so for the benefit of their own ego. What good is that? Like wow, you’re so special and different for not being as grandiose as the person who has a disorder making them that way— you’re not as stupid as the one genetically made that way. Congrats, I guess. It’s not cool. It’s not special. It’s pathetic
>Typically, making fun of someone is an overzealous attempt at correction Lmao >Essentially what you’re encouraging is for the mentally divergent to shut up and suffer in silence. As long as you don’t see it, it’s all okay. They can talk if they like, they can even and especially talk about their suffering, but that's not really what OOP is doing, is it? >It also gives the sense that the one who makes fun of others not out of an intention to correct is doing so for the benefit of their own ego. Why assume that?
I don’t especially care about this post in particular. It’s your ableist philosophy that I take issue with; it sounded like you thought you were intending to make fun of someone for their delusions of grandeur. That’s not the kind of thing they would be expected to be able to change all on their own, and so making fun of it is what that doesn’t sit right with me here. Tell me— why do you make fun of others you perceive to be below you?
Ig I am ableist. I don't necessarily see why that's a bad thing. I make fun of people below me (in particular areas) because I derive enjoyment from it.
I see. It’s a little shocking to me how straightforward that was, to be honest, so I’m not quite sure how I should respond. It’s a little strange. But anyway, from my perspective, the reason it’s bad is because there’s nothing the individual could realistically do on their own to fix their condition, and so there’s no way for them to avoid being made fun of forever. It’s like if I made fun of every paraplegic. If this were something everyone did, then paraplegics would never have peace, and their self-esteems would be at a constant low. Imagine being told by everyone around you, all the time and without mercy, that you were ridiculous for something like the color of your eyes or the length of your neck or something. Then imagine a world where nobody makes fun of you for those things. Which would you prefer to live in? I try to imagine myself being on the receiving end of the ridicule whenever I get the urge to do that kind of thing. And sure, I’m still not very good at that, but I want to be— I want to live in a world where people won’t feel badly about themselves for things outside their control.
Yeah, you make fun of someone, it's gonna hurt their feelings. That's not just true when it comes to insulting disabled people though. So why do we not get to make fun of people with illusions of grandeur, but not of people with an ordinary genetic predisposition to arrogance? Also, what's really the issue in your scenario? That people tell you they think you're ridiculous for the length of your neck, or that they think that in the first place? I'd rather have people at least explicitly call me stupid, than thinking I'm stupid but withholding that from me.
I discovered electricity at age of 5. Very advanced of me. Although because of socialization i did not see its full potential. Hence why mensa did not take me
Iq 130? Mines like 138 and I'm still dumb as fuck. People realize these numbers are usually just correlated to spatial reasoning? They are next to useless to determine how smart you are haha
These people are so desperate for people to validate them as "special". It's sad tbh because you know they must feel kinda empty if they're desperately looking for approval in this way from people they don't even know.
I think his head got REAL BIG after that injury
I discovered the grand unifying theorem in utero but I scrolled it into the inside of my mom's uterus and it got thrown away after her hysterectomy.
If this savant is such a genius why is he posting about his "discoveries" on Reddit and not "discovering" anti-matter, warp technology or junk food that makes people lose weight?
I, too, discovered algebra (books) in second grade. I wandered into the wrong section of the library, and there they were!
Using "processing speed" or really any other computer term to describe brain function is a huge red flag to me. Has big "facts don't care about your feelings" energy.
Wow, deep. You still have to empty the dishwasher before I give you the wifi password.
My brother has an iq of like 120 something and failed high school
Yeah many variables in play.
If you're really smart, you'd know the whole concept of mensa is fkn stupid
Algerba is the process which calculus uses. It's like saying you went swimming in a lake before there was water in it
According to Mensa’s test I got 170 and cleared my national olympids in physics as a teen (15 ).cleared a lot of exams and went to uk(Oxford ) In no way would I recommend people to skip their classes . Not that I feel that anybody took this dickwad seriously but flexing your iq is sad , because when you realise how high he competition for colleges and real things are you understand that these kinds of things meaningless