210 IQ Is Not Enough
41–50 of 284 posts
Re: 210 IQ Is Not Enough
#42How is Langan thought of as a smart guy? I can't read further because this guy to me is either a grifter or suffering from mental illness. The linked interview doesn't surprise me at all, daily wire readers/listeners are just as gullible and exploitable as people who would think that Langan is smart. Every smart person I've met in life so far has known that humility is key if you want other smart people to take you s…
Why assume he wants other smart people to take him seriously more than he wants to be authentic?
Re: 210 IQ Is Not Enough
#43For example if you read the biography of Von Neumann, it's remarkable that he was able to focus and work in the most noisy and distracting environments.
Re: 210 IQ Is Not Enough
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
> As World's Highest IQ Record Holder, I expect #BITCOIN is going to $220,000 in the next 45 days. > I will use 100% of my Bitcoin profits to build churches for Jesus Christ in every nation. > “For with God nothing shall be impossible.” (Luke 1:37) Something tells me maybe he doesn't actually have an IQ of 276.
While it seems unlikely, I wouldn't find it impossible (edit: learning more about IQ score, yeah 276 is definitly BS). You can be "intelligent" as in very good at solving logic puzzle and math problem, and the most obtuse and subjectively dumb person when it comes to anything else. It might be less likely but definitely happened. I have met people working in very advanced field having the perspective and reflection o…
Re: 210 IQ Is Not Enough
#45There are no such thing as 210 IQ. It correlates to 7.3 sigma, meanwhile 7-sigma event has a probability of approximately 1 in 390 billion. We only have 8 billion humans on Earth. These absurd claims about IQ is almost evidence that the claimant are nowhere close. For starters, any IQ tests are not going to be normalized to that range because it is impossible to normalize to that range as there are 0 realistic sample…
Re: 210 IQ Is Not Enough
#46The gauge I use for intelligence is how much stock a person puts into an IQ test. In my view, people who are able to question the legitimacy or applicability of IQ as a general measure of "intelligence", an idea that is highly contextual, are probably intelligent. They are at least smart enough to question social conceptions and to recognize the contingent nature of such conceptions. People who uncritically view IQ a…
Then there's my wife's co-worker, member of Mensa and self-proclaimed intelligent person. She's barely functional in normal society, completely locked in a "I'm smart, so I'm right" mentality. Even if she may be technically correct, she completely fails to understand that rules might be wrong or needs to be bent to make society work. Yet somehow she also manages to overthink things, needlessly complicating things and designs procedures that requires a higher than average IQ to understand and gets upset when those procedures aren't followed. You'd think that smart people would design simpler and easier solutions, but apparently that's not a given.
Re: 210 IQ Is Not Enough
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
The other problem with IQ is that it's not a fixed scale, so you can't really compare IQ scores across time. An IQ of 100 is average by definition. Even if the average "intelligence" (or whatever IQ measures, because it doesn't seem to be intelligence as people think of intelligence) rises or falls over time, that average will always be a 100 IQ.
why couldn't you? i've always imagined IQ as the raw potential? or am I misunderstanding
The average IQ of the people then would be 100, and the average IQ of people now would also be 100, even though there was a huge difference in intelligence. This is because 100 is defined as being the average rather than being an absolute measure.
Re: 210 IQ Is Not Enough
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
That assumes a normal distribution.
There is no assumption, that is the definition of IQ. Is human intelligence a normal distribution? Probably not. But IQ is extrapolated as such, and probably useless anyway. Which make absurd claims like this even more laughable.
Re: 210 IQ Is Not Enough
#49There are no such thing as 210 IQ. It correlates to 7.3 sigma, meanwhile 7-sigma event has a probability of approximately 1 in 390 billion. We only have 8 billion humans on Earth. These absurd claims about IQ is almost evidence that the claimant are nowhere close. For starters, any IQ tests are not going to be normalized to that range because it is impossible to normalize to that range as there are 0 realistic sample…
It is not impossible to roll two sixes on a single roll of two dies because it is more likely you won't.
Re: 210 IQ Is Not Enough
#50A really good litmus test of individual perspective and maturity, here. Already seeing comments nitpick specific arguments or points, which is itself the trap to shine a light on those individuals more obsessed with arbitrary external measures of their personal definition of success, rather than self-reflecting on said definition and asking whether or not this definition fits who they are or want to be as a person, o…