🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Feb 2025 03:44:37 UTC No. 16582126
The thing that gives IQ the most credibility isn't the fact that it has over 100 years of science backed evidence. It's based on a very real observation. A person's ability in one academic subject predicts similar ability in others, and if you express this correlation amongst a sample group as a factor and then take any person's average academic ability and compare it to this factor, you can express their ability in comparison with the sample group in the form of a rudimentary IQ.
What's funny is, when you ask people who deny IQ what they believe a good indication of intelligence is, they will often point towards academic ability. Not realising that this is the earliest form of identifying IQ. The nuanced explanation they demand of intelligence is what modern IQ has come to identify.
Simply, if forms of measurable ability can be correlated with others, it can be incorporated into IQ tests, and what makes IQ so robust is the fact that nearly all forms of measurable aptitude do in fact correlate with one another. It's not just some made up pseudo-science, it's based on an undeniable and incredibly strong correlation between different forms of ability.
Often, when people claim that IQ doesn't account for all forms of intelligence, they refer to aspects of human behaviour that cannot be objectively measured, such as loose terms like creativity. The problem here is that for no discernable reason people try to co-opt intelligence into meaning something incredibly vague, when in fact the only meaningful aspects of intelligence is that which we can measure. Intelligence simply means the power of someone's mind, and power can be measured, if you possess aspects of mind that seemingly provide no discernible benefit, how can this be called intelligence?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Feb 2025 03:49:31 UTC No. 16582134
>>16582126
I do not know what else provide to your statement OP, so I'll just agree with you.
Saying intelligence isn't defined by IQ is on the same level as saying beauty is subjective.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Feb 2025 04:17:58 UTC No. 16582151
>>16582134
...but IQ is defined by intelligence...
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Feb 2025 17:44:17 UTC No. 16582736
This post is quite imprecise. Yes, different forms of observed performance correlate with one another, but outside of the testing room and especially in school this could be due to any number of things (conscientiousness, self-assuredness, education, enjoyment, need for cognition, etc.) The fact that intelligence is largely single-factor is true, but it can't be accepted just because it superficially seems reasonable.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Feb 2025 17:59:49 UTC No. 16582760
Intelligence is severely underrated in today's idiocracy.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Feb 2025 18:12:44 UTC No. 16582779
Oh you have an IQ? Tell me about differential geometry. Oh you don't know? How can that be? I thought you were so intelligent?
You can be the best puzzle solver in the world and it's not going to translate into SHIT, retard.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Feb 2025 20:06:14 UTC No. 16582898
>>16582779
Someone with a high IQ will learn about it faster than someone with a low IQ. IQ is about how fast you are able to learn things
Stop guessing start learning at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 01:35:30 UTC No. 16583282
>>16582126
Cool more blabbering about IQ this litterally has no effect on your life outcomes.
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 13:40:12 UTC No. 16583616
>>16582779
you don't understand IQ
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 13:45:30 UTC No. 16583625
>>16582126
150 IQ reporting in
I cannot learn a 2nd language to save my life but boy can I rotate some fucking shapes like a banshee
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 13:46:35 UTC No. 16583628
>>16582126
knowing many pattern models is different from knowing many pattern models and having the right information to crunch with them.
if essential information is missing you will reach the wrong results, no matter your pattern recognition skills.
why many times brainlets in the know btfo high IQs in debates.
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 13:47:32 UTC No. 16583629
>>16583628
>he isn't 1v1ing the universe exclusively with a-priori knowledge
NGMI
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 13:51:11 UTC No. 16583634
>>16583629
knowledge is power there's good reasons it isn't shared.
brainlets with the right information make better calls than high IQs with the wrong information or no information. this isn't debatable.
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 13:52:20 UTC No. 16583635
>>16583634
Wrong, you're just a midwit.
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 13:54:10 UTC No. 16583637
>>16583635
stop projecting you brainlet.
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 13:57:38 UTC No. 16583641
>>16583637
Seethe
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 14:00:53 UTC No. 16583645
>>16583641
a well read idiot who can't form any original though will have an edge based on the information he knows. that's how they "cheat", in the sense of posing like higher IQs than they really are. this is not only about reading, it's about access to certain knowledge.
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 14:03:40 UTC No. 16583646
>>16583645
You are just a midwit
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 14:06:40 UTC No. 16583649
>>16583646
scared? gotcha bitch
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 14:07:36 UTC No. 16583651
>>16583649
It's okay that you're a midwit, you will never have the 160 IQ beauty, it isn't yours to have. Sorry about your luck.
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 14:09:29 UTC No. 16583654
>>16583651
that's not up to you brainlet
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 14:09:51 UTC No. 16583655
>>16583654
The seethe is palpable. Accept your limitations.
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 14:10:58 UTC No. 16583657
>>16583655
notice how you felt the need to reply to my post, it touched some insecurity you have, enough to decide the energy required to say something about it is completely worth it. especially if it's the cost to defend your ego.
that's how I know you're a pseud.
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 14:11:51 UTC No. 16583660
>>16583657
>Failing at psychoanalysis
Many such midwit cases
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 14:13:18 UTC No. 16583663
>>16583660
keep dreaming anon. your fantasy is starting to show its cracks. you have to be quick, patch everything up. it will eventually break anon, you will face the reality that you are just a brainlet larping as a high IQ.
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 14:18:46 UTC No. 16583668
>>16583663
Just accept that you are simply not capable, you have a limitation that others do not have. Sorry about your luck sweet cheeks.
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 16:14:49 UTC No. 16583746
>>16583634
>>16583628
Not true. For a brainlet to call out a high IQ for being wrong, he would need to understand properly the topic which he is talking about, and most of the times they do not. High IQs, even if wrong, have a proper understanding of what they are talking about, and will take advantage over the brainlet by making arguments on the stuff he does not understand. So most times, the high IQ will prove the brainlet "wrong", even if the brainlet is right and the high IQ is wrong. Although the most realistic interaction is the brainlet being half right, the high IQ trying to correct him, and the brainlet being a donkey not listening every time.
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Feb 2025 16:33:39 UTC No. 16583762
>>16582126
Lower IQ people can still have an above average academic ability.
On the other hand, as evident in recently in my country, if the teaching medium is shit, it stunts the academic ability of average students.
the fact that PISA results have significant deviations over years is already damming evidence.
IQ matters the most when you are a standard deviation above mean.
OP is a faggot.
raphael at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 04:47:11 UTC No. 16584326
>>16583762
>lower iq can have above average academic ability
lol
then why does gpa correlate .3+ with g/IQ?
on average higher g people are better at school
theres no measurable sub test thats just for school unless you mean the sat the g loading on that is .6+
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 06:37:23 UTC No. 16584382
>>16582126
Idk. Was in GATE. Went to a US top 3 school on a scholarship. Ended up a humanities fag. Sure, it might be above 130 or something, but I think most of it is discipline and having guardrails around you when you're young (function of the father). I would like to switch into medicine or software engineering, but I am almost 30. Quite depressing. You think von Neumann would have been who he is without an 18-room apartment and a financier landed gentry father who prodded him towards theoretical pursuits? Probably not.
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 06:48:08 UTC No. 16584388
IQ is merely one battlefield in the war of common sense, namely that not all human beings are equally intelligent. This is something the liberal establishment considers verboten to explicitly express due to the strong melanin correlations, but regardless of color we all understand the fundamentally lower level of human intelligence that exists within the mind of midwits and below. They're lesser. We know this.
No matter what you call it, IQ, g, whatever, it is a matter of fact that human intelligence distribution follows a bell curve. It's a meme book but modern society literally cannot deal with this concept. It just completely shatters all the equity initiatives at the get-go. These fucking people can't learn like us. They just can't. Nothing will be able to make them able to do this, no matter what number you assign to it, they're just fucking retards.
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 06:55:31 UTC No. 16584398
>>16583746
>to understand properly
To properly understand.
>t. High IQ Big Penis
Barkon !8v8vr3ErDk at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 12:35:53 UTC No. 16584694
IQ
1. Nerd designs test
Point A. This is unnatural and imperfect
2. Test is taken by peers
Point B. This is cheap and again imperfect
Result:
IQ does not correlate to intelligence
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 13:21:07 UTC No. 16584726
>>16584694
take off that tripcode, you're not that smart
Barkon !8v8vr3ErDk at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 13:25:24 UTC No. 16584729
>>16584726
Worse to be a retard who complains instead of debates.
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 13:28:51 UTC No. 16584733
>>16582126
IQ is total pseudoscience. Remember that when it was first invented, they calculated it by estimating your "mental age" and comparing it to your actual age. There's no such thing as a fucking mental age. It is no doubt the invention of closeted pedophiles. It's all so retarded.
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 13:29:15 UTC No. 16584734
>>16584729
why do you think you're so important that everyone needs to debate you
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 13:52:43 UTC No. 16584748
I find it so funny that people are always praising good looking people but the moment someone shows their significantly higher intelligence all hell breaks loose.
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 13:56:29 UTC No. 16584753
>>16584748
no you see, they know how to subvert good looking people. way harder with smarter people. they know they can't pull their shit schemes
Barkon !8v8vr3ErDk at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 14:14:22 UTC No. 16584772
>>16584734
Sorry my intellectual words make you feel interested, but this is normal. You're just a schizo.
Barkon !8v8vr3ErDk at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 14:27:01 UTC No. 16584779
Good looks. Nice smelling farts. Signs of genetic dominance. Higher potential intelligence than dysgenic uggos.
Barkon !8v8vr3ErDk at Thu, 13 Feb 2025 14:28:07 UTC No. 16584780
>>16584753
Your poo stinks the house out, you have dysgenic poo. My poo smells acceptable and like good quality. I am more intelligent.
raphael at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 06:29:05 UTC No. 16586377
>>16582779
it quit literally does "retard"
if you score 115+ you can easily get a job in the government
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 07:03:49 UTC No. 16586405
>>16582126
>100 years of science backed evidence.
Psychology is psuedoscience. There is no "science" involved in the field. All objective indirect bodily measures are only indistinguishably vague approximations of underlying neurological dynamics. If all of your observation is made indirectly and based entirely upon empirically guided theoretical inferences then as a result no direct measurements can be made to quantify anything. Mind you, I can tell you at what temperature every time water will boil or freeze or the rate an object will accelerate due to gravitational pull. This is because these are non arbitrary DIRECTLY OBSERVABLE phenomena.
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 19:53:54 UTC No. 16587068
>>16586405
What you're describing is the difference between an exact and an inexact science. The difference between a field like Physics and Psychology is that Physics applies principles of exact science exclusively and, in general, Psychology does not, but this is not to say that Psychologists don't apply exact science or carry out scientific work.
IQ is absolutely science-backed in the sense that much of the evidence that supports comes in the forms of laws that can be expressed with precise quantitative measurements, allowing for accurate predictions and rigorous testing of hypotheses, I.e., an exact science. IQ isn't an exact science in itself, but much of the evidence that supports it is.
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 21:32:42 UTC No. 16587230
>>16587068
Again, using empirical methods doesnt suddenly make your field scientific or the results from coming from it valid. For example, meteorology, while not being an exact science itself, uses those principles of exact science and is a field that has scientific evidence to support it because of it. There you have an example of a study that has a great deal of uncertainty just like psychology but, because of its first principles you get actual concrete predictive power that simply isnt possible in any psychological field.
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 21:57:07 UTC No. 16587251
>>16586405
Get over it. You lost, liberal. Trump won. IQ won.
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 22:26:08 UTC No. 16587280
I scored 126 on a professionally administered test (WAIS-4) a couple years ago. I hate being a midwit.
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 22:56:43 UTC No. 16587317
Rate every currently available 4chan board by its average user's IQ, /sci/.
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Feb 2025 23:31:12 UTC No. 16587355
>>16582779
Low iq post
Anonymous at Sun, 16 Feb 2025 13:06:21 UTC No. 16587846
>>16586405
>I can't see it = not real
double digit IQ spotted
Anonymous at Sun, 16 Feb 2025 13:45:30 UTC No. 16587878
>>16587846
Those captured in Plato's Cave were very knowledgable about the movement of shadows on the wall yet they could not phantom reality.
Anonymous at Sun, 16 Feb 2025 13:49:04 UTC No. 16587880
>>16587230
I never claimed that the field was scientific, in fact, I described the exact opposite within the second sentence of my reply quite clearly. What you're saying isn't really relevant. The contention was whether the evidence that supports IQ is scientific, and much of it is.
Anonymous at Sun, 16 Feb 2025 16:47:42 UTC No. 16588053
>>16582779
You are fucking retarded wow.
Anonymous at Sun, 16 Feb 2025 17:04:56 UTC No. 16588068
>>16588053
(nta)
potential != effective performance
you just proved his point with your post
Anonymous at Sun, 16 Feb 2025 17:10:59 UTC No. 16588078
IQ has no credibility you retard. IQ is used by retards to make themselves feel better.