Live data from Hacker News

IQ Matters Less Than You Think

nautil.us

141–150 of 347 posts

Re: IQ Matters Less Than You Think

#141

I started to write a much longer response but don't have time. My IQ was tested at 142 some decades ago and, from what I've read, would be higher cause the tests have changed. I was always very successful in my jobs but, when it came to starting my own business, I needed a lot of active encouragement or I would give up too quickly. However, in two cases, a business clicked with me, for some reason, which made me exci…

> and, from what I've read, would be higher cause the tests have changed.

That doesn't sound right - the Flynn effect causes IQ tests to get harder over time.

Also, I believe IQ reliably deteriorates with age.

Re: IQ Matters Less Than You Think

#142
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just started one for you. Now it's up to you to figure out, what has to be done and do it. Let me know when you think you have finished the test, and we will evaluate it.

Interesting. I have no incentive to do the test, so I wont. My willpower is based on consequences?

The evaluation of the test is simple. Your willpower is measured by the amount of hard work you dedicated to the problem of your own choice during the time interval of the test (which is your choice as well).

So if you truly have no incentive to do the test, then you have no incentive to do anything that you choose to, and zero willpower.

Re: IQ Matters Less Than You Think

#143
post #89

The title is a bit misleading. The study is basically comparing the path of the top 1% to the top 2% of the IQ distribution and arguing that it doesn't matter that much in term of extraordinary achievements (nobel prize, etc). If you compare the top 20% to the bottom 20% of the distribution I bet there will be a strong correlation to professional sucess.

And there's also probably a big difference between the top 0.01% percent and the top 1%. The difference between the top 1% and top 2% isn't very important for most types of talent. Being in one of those categories for athletic talent, for instance, wouldn't get you into a professional sports league of any kind.

Well, yes. Comparing top .01% to top 1% is akin to comparing top 1% to general population - NOT akin to comparing top 1% to top 2%. So a big difference should be expected/not surprising at all.

Re: IQ Matters Less Than You Think

#144

I started to write a much longer response but don't have time. My IQ was tested at 142 some decades ago and, from what I've read, would be higher cause the tests have changed. I was always very successful in my jobs but, when it came to starting my own business, I needed a lot of active encouragement or I would give up too quickly. However, in two cases, a business clicked with me, for some reason, which made me exci…

> and, from what I've read, would be higher cause the tests have changed. That doesn't sound right - the Flynn effect causes IQ tests to get harder over time. Also, I believe IQ reliably deteriorates with age.

The Flynn effect is misunderstood to be some sort of general humanist truth (because psychology classes generally present it as such), but the existence of a reversal in the Flynn effect in recent years may indicate that it was just a circumstance of the 20th century and not something that we can assume will continue forever.

Flynn effect and its reversal are both environmentally caused (2018)

https://sci-hub.tw/https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/0...

Re: IQ Matters Less Than You Think

#145
The key is not to confuse IQ as an isolated effect, but rather study it as an interactive effect, e.g. taken together with grit / perseverance, IQ likely becomes one of the best explanatory variables for success.

IQ is not a definitive 100% accurate predictor for intelligence, people expect that, and it doesn't work like that. But it doesn't mean it's not a predictor.

i.e. a lot of people say 'Feynman had an IQ of 125, I had an IQ of 140, but I'm not smarter than Feynman, thus I question IQ as a predictor for intelligence'. But that's a bit like saying 'Tyson was a small heavyweight boxer, but he's a more successful boxer than I am while I'm twice his size, thus I doubt size as a predictor for boxing success'.

Same with things like getting a college degree, and comparing your degreed success with that of Bill Gates who dropped out. It doesn't rule out education as a predictor.

Similarly, you can look at BMI and say that it is a predictor for being overweight (e.g. as a proxy for health, having too much fat, dietetc). But bodybuilders have high BMIs, the proxy doesn't work for them.

The key to all these edge-cases are interactive effects. Education works, but not when interacted with forgoing a billion dollar entrepreneurial opportunity like Gates or Zuckerberg. BMI works, but not interacted with a low-fat, high-muscle training goal. Size as a predictor works in combat sports, but can be overcome when low size is interacted with talent factors. Similarly, IQ works, but not in isolation, and not in every single case, but it is one of the more useful predictors with a lot of explanatory powers.

Lastly, estimating any predictor for a small subset of geniuses (the focus of this article), is hardly an effective metric when it's based on an IQ test that is designed for the general population.

Lastly, some bayesian perspectives... the article's premise is based on: how many high-IQ people go on to become a genius. Well, very few. Perhaps that's not because IQ doesn't matter, but rather that there's just very few geniuses. Instead if you look at geniuses and look at what their IQ is, it's virtually all substantially above average.

Insomuch as he's speaking to a rare strawman individual who holds the belief that IQ is the end-all metric of being a genius then yes, IQ doesn't matter as much as he thinks. Most other people however are much more nuanced about IQ and understand you can be unsuccessful with a high IQ and successful with a low IQ, but that it's a very strong predictor for success nonetheless.

Re: IQ Matters Less Than You Think

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MENSA?

I'm not at the level required for MENSA (140 in the UK) but all I heard when I looked into it is it's a bunch of pretty dysfunctional people trying to one-up each other. I already have Reddit and HN for that :-D

When I looked (decade ago), your description would have characterized their online haunts but not IRL meetings.

Maybe being online turns anything into Reddit/HN.

On the other hand, word was most members are inactive and only a small percentage turn up at IRL events at all, i.e. strong (self) selection effects.

Re: IQ Matters Less Than You Think

#147
post #10

I know a few people with >130 IQ and they all have executive disfunction and anxiety problems. So yes, the best CPU doesn't help if the IO is constantly blocked.

I know a few people with >130 IQ and they all have...

No, those are just the ones you know about. You know, the kind that tell people that they have a high IQ. You probably know more people with IQs > 130, you just don't know that you do because they're well-adjusted, and they don't feel the need to tell you about their high IQ.

Re: IQ Matters Less Than You Think

#148

Well, I like to think persistence matters more but getting into top 1% of everything requires more than determination. 1. Going from bad to good requires x amount of effort/persistence. 2. Going from good to best requires 1000x amount of effort. When you've put 800x amount of effort, you'll realize this harsh bitter fact. You have already given up on your hobbies, family, social life, ... and you are still considered…

+1. The method of getting from good to best also matters a lot. A coach definitely helps. You can't become the best of anything, in isolation. Deliberate practice also helps. I was not a believer in deliberate practice but once I started it, I am seeing good results. For instance, I can retain at least 30% more of what I have studied or coded or even just casually read. However, deliberate practice takes a toll. It's excruciating to do it even for 4 hours a day. Maintaining consistency is even harder. I have probably been able to do it for a week over the last couple of months.

Re: IQ Matters Less Than You Think

#149

I started to write a much longer response but don't have time. My IQ was tested at 142 some decades ago and, from what I've read, would be higher cause the tests have changed. I was always very successful in my jobs but, when it came to starting my own business, I needed a lot of active encouragement or I would give up too quickly. However, in two cases, a business clicked with me, for some reason, which made me exci…

Talent is a trap. It has taken me years to see this, but because "talent" is really how easily you can accomplish at a high level, it can be a shock when you run into an area where you need growth.

I was limiting myself from growing in important areas because I gave up too easily when my "talent" didn't shine through. I should have realized at some point that it's all work in the end, and sometimes you have to slug through it.

Re: IQ Matters Less Than You Think

#150
post #10

I know a few people with >130 IQ and they all have executive disfunction and anxiety problems. So yes, the best CPU doesn't help if the IO is constantly blocked.

Not exactly a scientific analogy, but it reminds me of rolling for stats in D&D or similar, where points in one area usually mean less points available for other areas.

It also seems like there's variance in the amount of "points" available normally. Dolph Lundgren for example seems to be playing with higher stats than most people.

Acquired Savants like Jason Padgett who seemingly become able to use dormant brain areas and Phineas Gage who's personality went in seemingly the opposite direction make me wonder if there might be some way to manipulate those odds-to make sure the IO doesn't wind up being a chokepoint.

Post reply on HN