@TheFallibleFiend Save your mother, who is sure to come busting through your door at any time and tell you to go out and find a job, keep it down or get to bed, I find it hard to believe that you've ever talked to a woman, in person.
@TheFallibleFiend Nice rebuttle. Kudos on keeping up the front. Your assessment of mensans and creationists is general and would apply to a large cross section of society. It's like saying that some mensans I know can't swing a hammer.
@miketacoma5 I'm still trying to find value in your posts, but neither logic nor English comprehension seems among your virtues. I have not assessed Mensans. Creationists, in general, are grossly ignorant of science.
@TheFallibleFiend The value's in there. At any rate, there's also the value of a person's opinion, even the ones with which I disagree and I most certainly value everybody's right to formulate, possess and aver them. It's merely simple fact that when they tend to be, or even seem to be pointed, you invoke response.
@miketacoma5 I struggle to find virtue in everyone, but I don't value everyone's opinions on every subject. I would trust my life to my dad's judgment on how to survive in the woods, but I would not attach special significance to his opinions on relativity.
@violentlyhappy1 I always wanted to be bald. No desire for a "cure." The obesity thing is in the process of being remedied. Lost 30 pounds since that video was made - and continuing to lose. OTOH, you will still have feces for brains tomorrow.
hmmm, seems like people that dont score high on IQ tests think it's some scam, or that it's not anything special or that it's something thats a mismeasured thing, and of course the smartest ones, are the ones that can't even get into mensa, let alone the others that requrie even higher Iq's
Remember that IQ is a system of classifications which is one of the favorite tools of the controlling so called elites of society. Why all this emphasis on quantification? Because they want to show you false proof through numbers, meaningless statistics and made up equations. IQ is perhaps the biggest lie since the lie of white superiority--and they are very connected because it is the so called whites who score the highest, but now it's also Asians--this is now dual supremacy.
@Elesparto It's been a long time since I looked at it, but I think it's always been the case that Asians and Jews have on average scored higher than non-Jewish whites who have scored higher (on average) than blacks and Hispanics - not that it means that much to me.
My point is clear; IQ is a lie created to monopolize the arena of intelligence on a sociological level by those belonging to elitist institutions like the Ivy League universities, the top tier of government, and corporations. The whole idea is to stratify by race, and by socioeconomic positioning. It is an instrument of war directed at certain groups of people deemed inferior by European and Asian standards--I am Hispanic and I do not believe in the detrimental lie of IQ.
I have a high IQ. If you are only average intelligence you can still do all the wonderful things I have done. You can still do well at school. It just means you will have to study unlike me.
Holy crap. That woman seems to be a complete moron. She sounds like a little child, whose brain absorbs everything, but she doesn't know how to fully utilize whats been absorbed, making the absorbed stimuli worthless.
I had a similar experience in med school. Basically, I acknowledged what was known about immunity in the lungs, and then asked the professor about a conflict with the definition. There was a young Indian girl who was present who laughed and shook her head "no," as if I was asking a yes or no question (I wasn't)...and the professor laughed and told me that I didn't understand basic immunity. Really annoying, since I certainly understood the assumptions.
I have no formal education. I talk to a lot of people that are informally educated like myself -- Creationist and Evolutionist alike. So... if a human was born in a remote villiage or island, and with no exposure to schools or learning, but his mind functioned like Moguly (In the Jungle Book); would you consider him as having a high I.Q. and meets the qualifications for becoming a member of Mensa? If the answer is yes- then I'd say it is tea time... Which solar system was in question anyway?
I don't get the creationist thing. I think people with all sorts of belief systems are prone to exhibiting the traits you describe. I've had several creationist friends and i've never really found it to be a sticking point but then I guess I’m not the kind of person to probe people heavily about their beliefs; if you probe sensitive areas then you need to behave sensitively as not only can you offend but you're likely to get all sorts of mis-information when a person becomes defensive.
Your understanding of intelligence testing and IQ is completely skewed. I spent most of my 20s working with gifted children and administering psychometric tests (IQ). The majority of IQ tests on the net are bogus and not recognized by the APA. Rote memorization is only a small part of an overall test. Standardized tests are administered over the course of at least an hour and consist of several sections, two of which are non-verbal and based on problem solving. Sorry about your arrogant friend
It's true that some mensans are professors and scientists, just as true that some are janitors and machinists. 'Intelligence' is a nebulous thing, people will still follow their own inclinations and preferences. Just because you are 6'8", doesn't mean you want to play basketball.
HA! Once you used the word "disparity" along with saying that " I imagine there are people with 160's and 180's and so forth (who) are members of Mensa and, you know, that's that's great..." shows your arrogance 100%, as you accuse members of "hubris", and yes, you're guilty of it. No, you're not "dogging them". Alrighty then.
States are bias when it comes to females! Example... If you are a guy and you want a pill for birth control... they don't have it, but they do for females! Another Example is the SRS office not supporting a family staying together in counseling and instead trying to break up the Family! The same States that coverup the Truth about Health Care!
@joshbickett LOL I concur. He's taking so many sidesteps and interludes that in the end he runs out of time before he can clearly make his point. A bit of scripting in preparation, and sticking to the story would definitely improve the quality of the message.
It does make you wonder whether the people who offended him reacted to his statements, or perhaps rather to his style of communication....
@youneac Insisting that I'm stupid because I questioned traditional knowledge based on current information was a reaction to my style of communication? Makes perfect sense.
It is not clear to me why you would expect Mensans to lack the shortcomings and fallibilities that are common among human beings. Having a high IQ just means having a greater ability to learn; it doesn't necessarily mean having learned more.
With society having a tendency to cast out individuals who deviate from the mainstream, you're likely to find a higher incidence of people with less developed social skills among the more intelligent, including those in Mensa.
which i used to visit (on and off) - GoldenKobold by his name -
...and i can honestly say that he impressed me as smart (it is hard to make an impression on me)... when after a rather short stay on YT he broke camp and took all his personal belongings (mainly what one could call (i would call!) "exhibitious material") with him, i thought to myself: now, that chap was *really* smart!!
(Why are we willing to sell us so cheap to the "machines"?!)
you cannot really judge somebody by one set test that mensa has created. for example somebody might do well in an iq test but in the real world cannot deal well with people and be cool. sombody with a high iq might not be able to skateboard very well. I don't believe in judging people in one set way. The education system likes to judge people by how they perform in a system they have set but are never tested performing in their own way of thinking and ideas. i don't like labelers
@1982FMJ I concur. This is why some 10 years back the concept of EQ was introduced, which said more about a person's ability to function socially. Still, even if we had a hundred metrics like IQ and EQ, it still would be a poor measurement of the compound quality of a person.
A 130 iq isn't really that high in the grand scheme of things. Id say its about average for a doctor or a lawyer or an Ivy League grad. The average university faculty or corporate boardroom probably has a higher collective iq than a mensa meeting. Mensa is largely for above average IQ people who have failed at life, and arnt a part of any high iq group which is actually accomplishing something.
@jacobins3000 I agree with the 1st sentence. I agree with the first part of the second. Don't have enough experience with corporate boardrooms to guess the other part. The third, I doubt. I've been to some Mensa meetings. There are maybe a few people like that there, but most are just maybe unsatisfied (which is I guess a kind of failure), or looking for something else.
@TheFallibleFiend I'm just saying that there are plenty of organizations out there which have higher average IQ's than MENSA does, and these groups often actually accomplish something in the real world.
Why for example, would a top scientist, or a writer for the New Yorker, or a college professor spend his time at MENSA meetings, when his colleagues are probably smarter than they are? Most brilliant individuals are able find their own way into high iq groups, those who fail to do so join MENSA.
@jacobins3000 Following your reasoning, almost everyone who is a member of any club, group or society would be a failure. That's an odd view on membership of social movements.
Have a look at List_of_Mensans on Wikipedia. You're labeling some of my favorite authors, actors/actresses and scientists as failures.
@youneac Well, not really. Most clubs are based around specific interests. Obviously normal successful people might not be able to find other individuals who share their particular esoteric interests outside of an organized club. Basing a club purely on intellect is something rather different. If you can't make connections with other intelligent people on your own, then you are most likely a loser.
@jacobins3000 The best thing about Mensa is not the main club, but the subgroups. They're called "SIGs" IIRC. This is where people who have other interests get to congregate. Also, while I agree that Asimov is not the smartest guy on the planet, that's largely because he's been dead for almost 20 years.
@TheFallibleFiend Again, i'm not sure why these people don't just get jobs corresponding with their intellectual interests. Why not just become a professor and get paid for doing the exact same thing? Is there any type of intellectual endeavor that a university won't pay a group of sufficiently intelligent people to pursue?
I was taking of course about the list as a whole. I think I implied that Asimov might be one of the few possible exceptions but I really don't know that much about the guy.
@jacobins3000 Some of them are professors (like Asimov), and engineers, and CPAs, and lawyers. Others are janitors, machinists, and so forth.
Being good at the university is more than just intelligence. You have to apply your intelligence, which is a very different thing. Some of them get it and others don't.
@jacobins3000 What is your impression that most Mensans have jobs not corresponding with their intellect based on?
And if this were true , which I don't believe, why didn't that buddy of yours who is so good at juggling things join the circus? Why didn't the guy in the pub who is so good at telling jokes become a professional comedian? Why didn't the guy who loves to play with guns join the army? There's loads of reasons why people choose professions other than the ones they seem most apt for.
@jacobins3000 "Why not just become a professor and get paid for doing the exact same thing? Is there any type of intellectual endeavor that a university won't pay a group of sufficiently intelligent people to pursue?" Answer: Education in the US is heavily based in POLITICS, with little interest in actual advancement of "intellect". And let's not forget the political correctness that has resulted in the complete dumbing down of the students in the social experiment that Universites have become.
@TheBelcherChannel Education around the world is heavily based on economics. If you can prove me wrong please do. The more people that can, the happier I am !
@jacobins3000 One could find basketball players on any field or court. Ergo, anyone who joins a basketball club is someone who can't make connections with other basketball players on their own and thus is a loser?
And that's ignoring the majority of clubs that are not about a specific interest such as the Lions, the Rotary, scouting, country clubs, etc.
You're really going out of your way to sustain your prejudice.
@youneac Perhaps I should have clarified that I am speaking of people who spend a large amount of time hanging around MENSA events, rather than anyone how happens to hold a membership. I like Dilbert cartoons, and Ive read a couple books by Asimov, but these are hardly the most brilliant people on the planet.
@jacobins3000 The clarification is appreciated, but it contradicts your earlier statement: "...those who fail... join Mensa".
Einstein once said (or at least is attributed as having said): "Most people, when they claim that they're thinking, are merely adjusting their prejudices."
@TheFallibleFiend Thanks for the amendment. I had checked that attribution too, but failed to find any reference as to where/when James might have said this. If you have this info, I'd appreciate it.
It is by no means an isolated statement, and likely uttered by multiple people. Voltaire already said: "Prejudices are what fools use for reason", Charles Mildmay: "Reasoning against a prejudice is like fighting against a shadow; it exhausts the reasoner, without visibly affecting the prejudice."
@youneac No direct source, though it seems he is commonly credited with it. The closest I could find on the net was that it was attributed, quoted in Evan Esar, editor, The Dictionary of Humorous Quotations, 1949. I haven't checked that book to see if Esar sources it.
the smartest people in the world do not have the highest IQ'S. Simply put you must apply Logic, Common Sense, and understanding. something that MANY mensians lack. No offense..
@Triple9Stud Charles Darwin's was a towering human intellect. You sound like a know-nothing nitwit, barely capable of composing an intelligent sentence, but pretending to be smarter than he is. It's obvious to anyone that you're an idiot. Astronomers voted the answer 8 for a short while, but any answer is partly arbitrary - which was the point. You really are pathetically and obviously stupid.
sorry, m8, it was the machine that brought me back to you (and probably not probabilisticly (even if strange things happen to me some times))... so, randomly saying some thing to you that might at least make some sense (in this context):
i can't find it terribly intelligent to try to enlighten Darwin Deniers (you know whom i mean). I won't say you why though (think hard!), it's just one piece of my mind that i once wanted to offer you (and have now somewhat belatedly) ((thx))
I think that hubris that you're talking about is the result of some of these people having wrapped a lot of their self worth up in having superior intelligence. The smarter they feel, and the dumber they can make you seem, the better off they are. It's sad. T_T
@TheFallibleFiend Sorry i don't want to get on you but it has nothing to do with short attention spans when the speaker isn't able to structure his or her speech.
Structure your speech, don't make the sentences to long and don't use 'ah' and 'em's. Nobodies going to interrupt you.
I have also had similar experiences, and I, like you refuse to join Mensa. I think that the mere fact that they joined Mensa indicates they need to validate their intelligence. Usually people who perceive themselves as intelligent think less of everybody around them, and by that, perhaps explaining your scenario.
Of your three encounters, the Pluto thing was well argumented and thought of. The Reptile thing,I would not call you an idiot for it, but I would really need to read that article.
A more damning, if possibly related, trait I have encountered (in the general public) is that most people conflate knowledge and intelligence. To know many things = intelligent, or to not know a thing = unintelligent.
The dumbest person on earth could presumably be taught any given fact. Anyone can be taught to say "A photon exibits the properties of both a wave and a particle". How many actually understand it. "Knowing" says nothing about your intellect. What you understand tells the tale!
I disagree. Intelligent individuals turn out to know more facts because they are naturally drawn towards things that stimulate the mind such as reading. On the other hand, the less intelligent ones tend to avoid mental activities coz they find it uninteresting and boring.
You will find out that, almost invariably, intelligent individuals possess more stock knowledge than their unintelligent counterpart.
Every time I've socialized with a Mensa member they're degraded me and implied I was a retard. Honestly, it seems as if they consider themselves superior to humanity.
Warm blooded dinosaures: the woman could not know absolutely whether they existed but was prepared to insult you in defence of her point, that is the problem.
Many intelligent people still fail to question what they have been told or investigate for themselves the origins of their "facts", and even then, fail to admit that real facts are very hard to come by.
In my opinion the most intelligent thing you can do sometimes is to admit that you don't really know.
The concept of "working definition" as opposed to "true definition", if there is such a thing, is something that you have learned and remembered. By using multiple heuristics your reasoning becomes more accurate, but also more subtle. However, your "understanding" is not inherently different in nature than your mensan-opponents' "memorised rules"
Although I'm on your side on each of the issues you presented (e.g. definition of planets, species, etc.) I disagree on your final conclusion. I think that ultimately, what you call "understanding" as opposed to "memorising" is just the complex interaction of other heuristics that you have learned. It includes more subtlety, but it is the same process. For example, you are obviously more familiar with the arbitrary nature of definitions
Judging by the video you seem like a bright guy. You said in the video that you're not planning to join mensa and I just can't help wonder - why have you gone to meetings, activly updated yourself whith information on their website and how come you have mensan friends (coincedences?)...
I just don't understand why you put effort in something you're not interested in.
Yeah smart people can sometime be arrogant about being smart. But hey, at least theyre being arrogant about a productive trait. Most people are arrogant because they are better looking, or can drink more beer, or have bigger muscles and can push others around. Arrogance can be bad, but it isnt the worst sin. I wouldnt mind a society where Mensans and others in a similar category would be put on a pedestal, rather than putting people like Steve-O or Rihanna on a pedestal.
Arrogance doesn't bother me. Being a condescending prick and being wrong is irritating. Everything else I agree with. We ought to admire people who are legitimately smart in the same way we admire people who are great musicians or great athletes. There is a problem though: Super-athleticism is obvious to everyone. I don't know jack about basketball, but watching MJ play gave me goosebumps. But most people can't detect intelligence much greater than their own.
the minimum IQ is 130, which is gifted, not genius. The point of the club is to have intellectual discussion and participate in events, and mostly have fun.
its weird that some people develop a sort of superiority complex over something you were born with, saying you are better than someone because you have a higher IQ can be compared with thinking you are better than someone beacuse you are white. of course im not assuming that those people are nearly as bigoted as a white supremacist but there is a loose connection in the fact that it is arrogant to flaunt superiority over something as random as your IQ or skin colour
A genius is an individual who successfully applies a previously unknown technique in the production of a work of art, science or calculation, or who masters and personalizes a known technique. A genius typically possesses great intelligence or remarkable abilities in a specific subject, or shows an exceptional natural capacity of intellect and/or ability, especially in the production of creative and original work, something that has never been seen or evaluated previously.
My point is that he said I.Q. doesn't matter anymore, but when it comes down to it, if the qualifying difference between two people is based on I. Q. and not based of personality or work ethic, it does make a difference.
Oh, and try stay away from the term "genius." It is misused often and should not be used to discuss people just because their I.Q,'s are in the top 2%. That alone does not make a "genius."
You are quite wrong about this. If two potential workers have all the same qualifications and personality, except that one has a very high I.Q. and the other has an average I.Q. - I would take the person with the higher I.Q. and so would you.
Having a higher I.Q. can make a real difference in strategic planning, engineering, mathematics (practical or theoretical) and sciences (practical and theoretical).
It's not clear to me that I would prefer the person with the higher IQ. If the higher IQ guy had no better qualifications than the lower IQ guy, I might figure that the higher IQ was a slacker or that the higher IQ guy had trouble putting his abstract understanding into practice.
However, more to the point, two people almost never have the "same" qualifications.
Twice I've given job recommendations in favor of guys who were about to be rejected on the basis of mediocre test scores.
I was saying that if two people were equal in the amount of education, and approximate work history, but one person's I.Q. was higher than the other, you would pick the person with the higher I.Q.
A person of average intelligence can get a post graduate degree and work in management, like someone with a higher I.Q.
Are you saying that of the person with the higher I.Q. has not cured cancer or proven string-theory and holds a non "genius" position that he is a slacker?
For reference, I don't ask a person's IQ when I interview and have completely ignored it on those few cases where it was proffered on a resume. It's no more relevant than, say, the fact that a guy teaches Sunday school or belongs to an honor society.
What do you view as an accomplishment that stands out? He may be a great pianist but chose not to be a professional one. He may be working on a new "theory of everything" at home.
Are accomplishments in the workplace alone where IQ must be recognized?
I had an intern who among other things discovered that a deployed series of robots had bad accelerometers. The company won a follow on contract for $150K (or maybe it was $300K, I don't recall exactly). He applied for a full time job after work and I gave a strong recommendation for him. The prospective employer called me and asked ...
"You gave this guy the highest marks, but our tests show his IQ is only about average. How do you explain that?"
My answer was this: I can't explain it. I don't know anything about your test or what it's really measuring. All I can tell you is this: and then I related the story how this kid worked his ass off every day, checked and rechecked his answers, worked with our vendor and customer and finally won us a great deal of $, and then I asked, "How would you rate him?" He got the job.
You asked what I considered a great accomplishment that stands out. I gave not a hypothetical example, but a real one. It doesn't have to be a cure for cancer or the follow-on to M-theory. It could just be the guy has actually demonstrated that he's really determined and knows how to do that kind of work.
Consider this: he might easily have lost that position to some other kid who had scored much higher on the IQ test, but had much weaker demonstrated skills.
Okay - again, As I have stated more than once here, there is more to a person than their I.Q. Your intern proved that point in spades, however you seem to keep leaning toward "the guy with the higher I.Q. is a slacker and therefore shouldn't get a job over someone with an average I.Q.
If said hypothetical person was a slacker, then you are right, but the scenario I posed was that if both candidates are equal in EVERY way but I.Q.,what would be your reason to go with the guy with the lower IQ?
I don't have sufficient detail in that hypothetical case to say. In reality, I've never seen identical resumes.
Here's another real example - not about I.Q., but GRE which is a rough proxy.
I was interviewing a candidate with perfect GRE scores, but his GPA was only 3.4 (low end of acceptable here), IIRC - at a good school, but not a great school. Now say there was another candidate, roughly comparable, but a bit lower GRE. In our case, we gave it to the second guy.
I gotta say, it is very telling that you refuse to answer a simple question where the play field is level in all respects except in one. This is hypothetical and you have everything you need to answer the questions - but won't.
You clearly will not hire someone with a higher IQ over someone with an average IQ even if they have a great work ethic, great work and educational history if you can hire someone else. I think you need to look at why this is.
There are situations where I would hire the guy with the higher IQ, but I wouldn't hire him strictly because of his IQ. It depends on the exact circumstances. Reality is not hypothetical. I don't know how to make it any clearer than that.
WOW! Seriously man, is that how you answered questions in math and science classes when you were in school?
"I'm sorry teacher, but it isn't realistic for every apple to weigh the same amount, so I can't possibly give an accurate with a total weight of the bag of apple Susie is carrying home from the market."
No one asked for anything more than an answer to the hypothetical question I have now posed numerous times. There is some serious sour grapes coming from you in regard to IQ.
It's not sour grapes. It's experience. I have a high IQ, not extremely high, but pretty high. I just don't think it means the same thing that you think it means.
No, I do know what it means for someone to have a high I.Q. - And no, it doesn't mean that this attribute alone means someone is a better candidate for a job. In order to be a well-rounded and desired candidate, they need compassion, work ethic, passion for what they do, proper education and work history, like anyone else.
So if you have two people with all these qualities but one can reason faster, understand abstract ideas more easily and see patterns faster- why go with someone who can't?
".... but one can reason faster, understand abstract ideas more easily and see patterns faster- why go with someone who can't?"
Because it's not clear to me that the guy with the higher IQ can do any of those things better than the other fellow, if they both otherwise have the same qualifications.
IQ tests measure these abilities. They do not measure your knowledge or if you know calculus, they measure how well and how quickly you see and understand abstractions, patterns and the ability to reason. Now if the job requires none of these things, then who cares, but I know that if I was hiring someone for strategic planning who has easily picked up the repeating patterns that emerge in any industry and can use that to our advantage, I want that guy.
I want that guy too, but it's not clear to me that - despite the claims made on behalf of it - that it actually does measure those abilities and more than that, it's not clear that even if it does measure them, that it reflects any ability to apply those to real-world problems.
IQ tests are done in schools to help determine if a child can be taught in mainstream classes or if they need special education - or if they should be in an accelerated program because they are "gifted". When properly administered these test are very accurate and studies have proven that again and again.
It's not that IQ doesn't translate, it's the person's work ethic. If all they care to do is skate by, then the benefits are counteracted. But that is not this situation at all.
The tests are probably sufficient for determining that in students, if they are not used alone. Tragically the people (at least some of them) who implement the results of these tests are not very smart themselves and can pigeon-hole students on no other criteria.
I think its indeterminate whether the work ethic holds in this situation ...
IF I knew NOTHING else about two candidates other than IQ and there was a significant difference between them in that alone, THEN I would probably take the one with the higher IQ. But THAT is not this case. Typically one has resume and often a cover letter. I'm looking for high intelligence, but more than that I'm looking for passion. I get plenty of resumes from brilliant people - but I want the particular person who actually cares A LOT about the the specific problem area.
Again, why you are unable to understand and use the information in the hypothetical alone is a mystery to me - other than the idea that you are so adamantly dismissive of the idea that IQ in certain situations makes a difference at work.
You clearly have been hurt by jackasses who think they way Mathlover314 seem to think: that anyone in Mensa is a genius and anyone who isn't is an idiot and not worthy of contribution (hence your three part diatribe about Mensans)...
I am not hurt by these jackasses. I have not made a three part diatribe about Mensans. I have discussed 3 particular Mensans who were not so smart as they thought. I could and have contemplated several times making other videos of interactions with Mensans whom I know to be brilliant. The fact that I haven't yet is a function of many things.
Your video above brings many thoughts to minds, not the least of which is both the look on your face, the tone in your voice and the content of the vid indicate you were indeed hurt by the ridiculous remarks of the mensans you are discussing. In no way were your comments about the planets or possible warm-blooded dinosaurs dumb (in fact the leatherback sea turtle is a warm-blooded reptile). The people you talked to were uninformed about that subject and deflected showing poor social skills...
... so you were stung by their reception to you rather valid ideas. But you also have this belief that as members of Mensa they should also have knowledge of everything. I find that intriguing because I don't know what would give you that idea? I guarantee you that if I start a conversation with Stephen Hawking about whether the multi-camera sitcom's major resurgence begins with this new season or next year's, he will be at a loss to discuss it with appropriate knowledge.
By showing a bias against someone with a high IQ in the workplace, you are behaving the same way that woman who called you an idiot did. And, as my mother would say - that makes you just as bad as they are. By not showing bias at all and basing hiring on all criteria available for each individual (and NOT using past experience with someone else of high IQ as your guide) can you hire the right person for the job. To use your bias is a disservice to yourself and your company.
I'm not using past experience with someone of high IQ. My best guess is that everyone who makes it past my first screen has a high IQ. We're talking the difference between Mendelsohn and Mozart. Nor was I biased against the person with the higher IQ. Rather, I (along with the task leader) inferred that he was not so passionate as the other leading candidate. GREs are an indicator of something important, but perfect GREs don't necessarily xlate to high performance.
That said, you are clearly intelligent, not because of your test scores, but because of points you are trying to make about understanding as opposed to regurgitation of facts. Intellect is not about knowledge. Knowledge is acquired. Intellect is static. Intellect combines with knowledge is powerful, but there are some very intelligent people out there who for whatever reasons do not have the schooling to acquire the knowledge.
I am getting frustrated that although I have already stated here several times how IQ alone is not the measure of a person's abilities, however that seems to consistently fall on deaf ears each time I bring it up. Is that because my addressing all of your reservations with that information leaves your argument with nowhere to go? And if not, then why do you ignore that information so consistently in regard to the question I posed two days ago that you still cannot answer.
I understand that you don't take IQ alone as the measure of a person's abilities. I think that you have "addressed" all of my points, but not so thoroughly as you believe. If the two candidates are equal in every other way, then how has IQ of the person with the higher one helped him? Moreover how has the diminutive IQ of the other fellow harmed him?
Some people let their Mensa status get into their heads and they have to prove they're right every time (even when they're not). They should be smart enough to realize that calling people idiots makes them look unintelligent. Too bad Mensa tests don't measure emotional intelligence.
On the good side, most Mensans (at least in my experience) don't act like the ones I describe in these videos. Most seem average or above in emotional intelligence. But in those cases where there's a mismatch, boy is it jarring.
BO Jr. is NOT a natural born citizen of the United States. In fact, if he really is the biological son of BO Sr. he retains his British citizenship, to this day. Shouldn't require a genius I.Q. to figure this out. WAKE UP, AMERICA! You were duped. "I use reason for the few, emotion for the mass" Adolph Hitler national socialist
"I shall serve as a blank screen , upon which people will project their hopes & dreams" Barack Obama charlatan
I think that the ultimate problem with 'genius' is that in historical usage, it used to refer to men (and women) of great intellectual accomplishment and unusually deep insight. One can be brilliant and accomplish nothing or have only slightly deeper insight than the average person but be able to gain and apply knowledge quickly. These many small accomplishments might amount to very little. Bearing this in mind, I think that basing the criterion for genius on a simple test is absurd.
True, but it still makes me feel good when I take an IQ test. There are also many forms of "intelligence" and many of those forms can not be expressed in multiple choice. Conceptualization, for example, is better demonstrated through explanation than a, b, c, d, or e.
I agree with you, Mensa should raise the standards for admission. I have an IQ of 166, and I cannot believe that you can get in with a mere 130 IQ. By the way, 130+ (the top 2 percentile) is not genius. 130-139 is gifted (eligible for Mensa), 140-164 is genius, 165-184 is high genius, 185-199 is highest genius, and 200+ is highest genius. I just wanted to point out that you were wrong when you said 130+ is genius. Also, that question about the planets is not clear, why did you say 9?
I've read different things about what level qualifies as genius. "The Mensa Genius Quiz Book" says 2% is genius. So far as I can tell any bar is arbitrary. And so it doesn't surprise me that Mensans set the bar wherever they wish. As I mentioned and you are surely aware, there are groups with much higher requirements: ispe, four sigma, mega, e.g.
The Mensa Genius Quiz book is written by a couple of self-important people who want to be called geniuses. In fact, the psychologists doesn't even use the term "genius" at all anymore when measuring I.Q. They use the term "gifted" (mildly, moderately, or highly). And by gifted they mean in intelligence only.
Books like the quiz books are poorly (if ever really) edited and unless the person making the statement is a noted professional, take terms like "genius" as being opinion and not fact.
I did not say there were nine planets. What I said was that it was not clear there were nine planets and that one could make the case that there were only 8, or perhaps 10 planets. The other person insisted that there were 10 planets. This was years before the IAU made their decision and so was before most people were aware there was any controversy brewing.
Also, I don't think I was arguing that Mensa should raise their standards. I was only arguing that I don't think and IQ of 130 makes one a genius. In fact, I don't know that any specific IQ is sufficient. It wouldn't make sense the other way 'round - to say someone is not a genius, because her IQ is less than 130 (or 140).
Mensa doesn't use the word "genius." The requirement to get into Mensa is for your score to be in the top 2% of all people who took whatever accepted I.Q. test you took. The numbers are different depending on each test. A 148 on the Cattell is the same is getting a 132 on the Stanford Binet which is the same as getting a 130 on the WAIS. All of those scores put you in the top 2%.
Mensa doesn't say the members are all geniuses, just that their IQs are in the top 2%.
Many? I tend to not hear that word bandied about in events and various meetings unless: A) the person is talking about else, or B) they are a self-aggrandizing, insecure fool. What I do hear at times are people who refer to themselves as smarter than the general public. Or call them the "lower 98. That always bothers me and I tend to not spend time with those people.
But many mensans stay away from the word "genius" when talking about themselves. True genius is rare.
"Many" is pretty vague. I've met some number of Mensans more than 100 and probably less than 200. Most of them I barely met, but most of them seem pretty likable and even intelligent. Some of them (a couple dozen of them which I would consider "many," but you may consider otherwise) have used the term "genius" or some equivalent to describe themselves and have used their
memberships as "proof." Some very few of them (~ 2) were pathological about it.
I will not deny that Mensa has caused their own PR problems. The use of the "G' word is part of that problem. While I cannot imagine myself showing my card as proof of "genius," the people who do seem to be rather insecure and feel that their I.Q. defines them a great deal. But that should not define the group as a whole
I am concerned about how Mensa is perceived. Mensa's reason for being was to be of service, not to make other feel inferior - because they certainly aren't.
This series of videos was discussing a few isolated incidents and wasn't intended to convey anything in particular about Mensa or Mensans. There are a lot of people who are "almost smart" or are smart in ways I consider trivial. (Again, "lot" is relative and what is trivial is my personal perception.)
I like and get along w most Mensa members I meet. I even respect most of the ones I interact. OTOH, I don't consider most geniuses because of their membership. (& neither do they).
I understand that, in fact I stated it in my comment. However, I think that Mensa should higher their standards to only allow people with an IQ of 140 and up (geniuses).
I think that only people with a genius IQ should be allowed into the club because it is a social club for people who are different and want to interact with similar people. I think people with an IQ of 130 do not qualify as being extraordinarily intelligent, therefore, it gets rid of the entire purpose. Why do you not believe people with an IQ of 140 or over is a good description of a genius?
Firstly, I have already given a statement on what genius is so go back and read it. Second, no one uses the term genius to describe I.Q. alone. The words used in the psychological community are "gifted," and "superior intelligence," but genius? No. And third when people are just talking and spending time together - no one can tell who's IQ is in the 130's or 140's. And not or nothing - my IQ easily clears your cut off point , and I do not view myself as a genius.
I didn't redefine the term genius - the psychological community did. And I doubt you can tell the difference between someone who has an IQ in the 130's and who has an IQ in the 140's.
In my career I have met and spoken with, at length, NASA engineers, high-level politicians, world-class musicians and actors who's high IQ's are not a secret. Some of them hit your cut off and some do not, but are relatively close. and I gotta say I never thought...
...President Clinton to be less intelligent that Sharon Stone and their IQ's differ by more than ten points. In fact, time I have spent discussing politics and world events with Jodie Foster, I wouldn't have pegged her as not as bright as Geena Davis or Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Yet, according to you you can tell the difference between someone with an IQ in the 130's and someone with an IQ in the 140's without hesitation. I'd say that's hubris and you need to get your ego checked.
I'm sorry if you took offense, but what you said sounded very pompous, elitist and, frankly quite silly, so I pointed that out. Especially since you did not, and dare I say, cannot qualify your statement with any evidence of such an ability. And of course, the big question is: why would you WANT to make the distinction of "he's only highly gifted, but she's got an IQ 8 points higher and therefore is a 'genius.' " It's utter rubbish.
If you don't make a distinction between people's IQ, they would let people with IQs of 50 in! The point is to attract people with high IQs in order to carry on intelligent conversations with people.
They already have more restrictive societies - and less. Those societies don't have so large a membership. I'm not in Mensa, so I don't care, but it would seem unfair to me to change the rules on members post facto. Even if you grandfathered in existing members, it might make them feel unwelcome.
It is obvious to me any probably everyone who is reading this conversation that you really have a NEED to be called a genius. I think the more important issue is WHY do you feel the need to be called a genius? I don't have that need, even though by your estimation I am one (an assertion I already disagreed with in a previous post). Why do you need people to define you in such a way?
This has been flagged as spam show
We Love Mitt =)
TheRealMichaelBaer 1 week ago
Wait, did you delete my commentary?
GoforBroke4 4 weeks ago
@GoforBroke4 No. Your demonstration of brainlessness is still there.
TheFallibleFiend 4 weeks ago
2:39 I'm calling BS. Women???? C'mon...who do you think you're fooling?
miketacoma5 1 month ago
@miketacoma5 What? You don't think women could belong to Mensa?
TheFallibleFiend 1 month ago
@TheFallibleFiend Save your mother, who is sure to come busting through your door at any time and tell you to go out and find a job, keep it down or get to bed, I find it hard to believe that you've ever talked to a woman, in person.
miketacoma5 1 month ago
@miketacoma5 Married, have big house, 2 kids in college, have job, make good money. The crap-factory between your ears has failed you.
TheFallibleFiend 1 month ago 3
@TheFallibleFiend Kudos on the front.
miketacoma5 1 month ago
@TheFallibleFiend Nice rebuttle. Kudos on keeping up the front. Your assessment of mensans and creationists is general and would apply to a large cross section of society. It's like saying that some mensans I know can't swing a hammer.
miketacoma5 1 month ago
@miketacoma5 I'm still trying to find value in your posts, but neither logic nor English comprehension seems among your virtues. I have not assessed Mensans. Creationists, in general, are grossly ignorant of science.
TheFallibleFiend 1 month ago
@TheFallibleFiend The value's in there. At any rate, there's also the value of a person's opinion, even the ones with which I disagree and I most certainly value everybody's right to formulate, possess and aver them. It's merely simple fact that when they tend to be, or even seem to be pointed, you invoke response.
miketacoma5 1 month ago
@miketacoma5 I struggle to find virtue in everyone, but I don't value everyone's opinions on every subject. I would trust my life to my dad's judgment on how to survive in the woods, but I would not attach special significance to his opinions on relativity.
TheFallibleFiend 1 month ago
@TheFallibleFiend if you are so intelligent why havent you found a cure yet for baldness and obesity?
GoforBroke4 4 weeks ago
apparently brain power is not sufficient to cure baldness and obesity.
violentlyhappy1 2 months ago
@violentlyhappy1 I always wanted to be bald. No desire for a "cure." The obesity thing is in the process of being remedied. Lost 30 pounds since that video was made - and continuing to lose. OTOH, you will still have feces for brains tomorrow.
TheFallibleFiend 2 months ago
hmmm, seems like people that dont score high on IQ tests think it's some scam, or that it's not anything special or that it's something thats a mismeasured thing, and of course the smartest ones, are the ones that can't even get into mensa, let alone the others that requrie even higher Iq's
TheMensaGenius 3 months ago
Remember that IQ is a system of classifications which is one of the favorite tools of the controlling so called elites of society. Why all this emphasis on quantification? Because they want to show you false proof through numbers, meaningless statistics and made up equations. IQ is perhaps the biggest lie since the lie of white superiority--and they are very connected because it is the so called whites who score the highest, but now it's also Asians--this is now dual supremacy.
Elesparto 4 months ago
@Elesparto It's been a long time since I looked at it, but I think it's always been the case that Asians and Jews have on average scored higher than non-Jewish whites who have scored higher (on average) than blacks and Hispanics - not that it means that much to me.
TheFallibleFiend 4 months ago
@TheFallibleFiend
My point is clear; IQ is a lie created to monopolize the arena of intelligence on a sociological level by those belonging to elitist institutions like the Ivy League universities, the top tier of government, and corporations. The whole idea is to stratify by race, and by socioeconomic positioning. It is an instrument of war directed at certain groups of people deemed inferior by European and Asian standards--I am Hispanic and I do not believe in the detrimental lie of IQ.
Elesparto 4 months ago
I have a high IQ. If you are only average intelligence you can still do all the wonderful things I have done. You can still do well at school. It just means you will have to study unlike me.
77tubuck 8 months ago
Holy crap. That woman seems to be a complete moron. She sounds like a little child, whose brain absorbs everything, but she doesn't know how to fully utilize whats been absorbed, making the absorbed stimuli worthless.
She definitely lacks social intelligence.
SmileyVlog 10 months ago
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
rapreborn 10 months ago
I had a similar experience in med school. Basically, I acknowledged what was known about immunity in the lungs, and then asked the professor about a conflict with the definition. There was a young Indian girl who was present who laughed and shook her head "no," as if I was asking a yes or no question (I wasn't)...and the professor laughed and told me that I didn't understand basic immunity. Really annoying, since I certainly understood the assumptions.
generation1313 11 months ago
I have no formal education. I talk to a lot of people that are informally educated like myself -- Creationist and Evolutionist alike. So... if a human was born in a remote villiage or island, and with no exposure to schools or learning, but his mind functioned like Moguly (In the Jungle Book); would you consider him as having a high I.Q. and meets the qualifications for becoming a member of Mensa? If the answer is yes- then I'd say it is tea time... Which solar system was in question anyway?
RatStreet2 11 months ago
I don't get the creationist thing. I think people with all sorts of belief systems are prone to exhibiting the traits you describe. I've had several creationist friends and i've never really found it to be a sticking point but then I guess I’m not the kind of person to probe people heavily about their beliefs; if you probe sensitive areas then you need to behave sensitively as not only can you offend but you're likely to get all sorts of mis-information when a person becomes defensive.
DragonsTooth 1 year ago
The people who called you idiots sound like they just need proper socializing...or perhaps a little less coffee.
DragonsTooth 1 year ago
Your understanding of intelligence testing and IQ is completely skewed. I spent most of my 20s working with gifted children and administering psychometric tests (IQ). The majority of IQ tests on the net are bogus and not recognized by the APA. Rote memorization is only a small part of an overall test. Standardized tests are administered over the course of at least an hour and consist of several sections, two of which are non-verbal and based on problem solving. Sorry about your arrogant friend
ritter89 1 year ago
r u from mensa? i really want to know
dignasy 1 year ago
It's true that some mensans are professors and scientists, just as true that some are janitors and machinists. 'Intelligence' is a nebulous thing, people will still follow their own inclinations and preferences. Just because you are 6'8", doesn't mean you want to play basketball.
stayjit1 1 year ago
@stayjit1 Great example. I want to borrow it if you don't mind.
samikalastaja 1 year ago
@samikalastaja Of course you may 'borrow' it. It's all yours.
stayjit1 1 year ago
HA! Once you used the word "disparity" along with saying that " I imagine there are people with 160's and 180's and so forth (who) are members of Mensa and, you know, that's that's great..." shows your arrogance 100%, as you accuse members of "hubris", and yes, you're guilty of it. No, you're not "dogging them". Alrighty then.
TheBelcherChannel 1 year ago
States are bias when it comes to females! Example... If you are a guy and you want a pill for birth control... they don't have it, but they do for females! Another Example is the SRS office not supporting a family staying together in counseling and instead trying to break up the Family! The same States that coverup the Truth about Health Care!
911truthseekers 1 year ago
@joshbickett LOL I concur. He's taking so many sidesteps and interludes that in the end he runs out of time before he can clearly make his point. A bit of scripting in preparation, and sticking to the story would definitely improve the quality of the message.
It does make you wonder whether the people who offended him reacted to his statements, or perhaps rather to his style of communication....
youneac 1 year ago
@youneac Insisting that I'm stupid because I questioned traditional knowledge based on current information was a reaction to my style of communication? Makes perfect sense.
TheFallibleFiend 1 year ago
@TheFallibleFiend QED
youneac 1 year ago
It is not clear to me why you would expect Mensans to lack the shortcomings and fallibilities that are common among human beings. Having a high IQ just means having a greater ability to learn; it doesn't necessarily mean having learned more.
With society having a tendency to cast out individuals who deviate from the mainstream, you're likely to find a higher incidence of people with less developed social skills among the more intelligent, including those in Mensa.
youneac 1 year ago
addendum:
there once was one mensa guy here on YT
which i used to visit (on and off) - GoldenKobold by his name -
...and i can honestly say that he impressed me as smart (it is hard to make an impression on me)... when after a rather short stay on YT he broke camp and took all his personal belongings (mainly what one could call (i would call!) "exhibitious material") with him, i thought to myself: now, that chap was *really* smart!!
(Why are we willing to sell us so cheap to the "machines"?!)
TheRavingRandomist 1 year ago
you cannot really judge somebody by one set test that mensa has created. for example somebody might do well in an iq test but in the real world cannot deal well with people and be cool. sombody with a high iq might not be able to skateboard very well. I don't believe in judging people in one set way. The education system likes to judge people by how they perform in a system they have set but are never tested performing in their own way of thinking and ideas. i don't like labelers
1982FMJ 1 year ago
@1982FMJ I concur. This is why some 10 years back the concept of EQ was introduced, which said more about a person's ability to function socially. Still, even if we had a hundred metrics like IQ and EQ, it still would be a poor measurement of the compound quality of a person.
BTW Isn't "labelers" a label? :)
youneac 1 year ago
A 130 iq isn't really that high in the grand scheme of things. Id say its about average for a doctor or a lawyer or an Ivy League grad. The average university faculty or corporate boardroom probably has a higher collective iq than a mensa meeting. Mensa is largely for above average IQ people who have failed at life, and arnt a part of any high iq group which is actually accomplishing something.
jacobins3000 1 year ago
@jacobins3000 I agree with the 1st sentence. I agree with the first part of the second. Don't have enough experience with corporate boardrooms to guess the other part. The third, I doubt. I've been to some Mensa meetings. There are maybe a few people like that there, but most are just maybe unsatisfied (which is I guess a kind of failure), or looking for something else.
TheFallibleFiend 1 year ago
@TheFallibleFiend I'm just saying that there are plenty of organizations out there which have higher average IQ's than MENSA does, and these groups often actually accomplish something in the real world.
Why for example, would a top scientist, or a writer for the New Yorker, or a college professor spend his time at MENSA meetings, when his colleagues are probably smarter than they are? Most brilliant individuals are able find their own way into high iq groups, those who fail to do so join MENSA.
jacobins3000 1 year ago
@jacobins3000 Are you speaking from personal experience, or just pure prejudice?
youneac 1 year ago
@youneac Neither, I am speaking through a priori logical deduction; no farther empirical evidence, nor irrational prejudice, is required.
If, Mensa members had succeeded at a high iq profession,
Or are generally sociable people with a wide circle of acquaintances.
Then, they would already be spending a lot of their time around high iq people,
Therefore, membership in Mensa redundant and unnecessary for anyone who has succeeded at life.
jacobins3000 1 year ago
@jacobins3000 Following your reasoning, almost everyone who is a member of any club, group or society would be a failure. That's an odd view on membership of social movements.
Have a look at List_of_Mensans on Wikipedia. You're labeling some of my favorite authors, actors/actresses and scientists as failures.
youneac 1 year ago
@youneac Well, not really. Most clubs are based around specific interests. Obviously normal successful people might not be able to find other individuals who share their particular esoteric interests outside of an organized club. Basing a club purely on intellect is something rather different. If you can't make connections with other intelligent people on your own, then you are most likely a loser.
jacobins3000 1 year ago
@jacobins3000 The best thing about Mensa is not the main club, but the subgroups. They're called "SIGs" IIRC. This is where people who have other interests get to congregate. Also, while I agree that Asimov is not the smartest guy on the planet, that's largely because he's been dead for almost 20 years.
TheFallibleFiend 1 year ago
@TheFallibleFiend Again, i'm not sure why these people don't just get jobs corresponding with their intellectual interests. Why not just become a professor and get paid for doing the exact same thing? Is there any type of intellectual endeavor that a university won't pay a group of sufficiently intelligent people to pursue?
I was taking of course about the list as a whole. I think I implied that Asimov might be one of the few possible exceptions but I really don't know that much about the guy.
jacobins3000 1 year ago
@jacobins3000 Some of them are professors (like Asimov), and engineers, and CPAs, and lawyers. Others are janitors, machinists, and so forth.
Being good at the university is more than just intelligence. You have to apply your intelligence, which is a very different thing. Some of them get it and others don't.
TheFallibleFiend 1 year ago
@TheFallibleFiend Hello, I came upon your video and I think it is unique. I wish to stay in contact and to discuss topics.
JAZZSTARish 1 year ago
@jacobins3000 What is your impression that most Mensans have jobs not corresponding with their intellect based on?
And if this were true , which I don't believe, why didn't that buddy of yours who is so good at juggling things join the circus? Why didn't the guy in the pub who is so good at telling jokes become a professional comedian? Why didn't the guy who loves to play with guns join the army? There's loads of reasons why people choose professions other than the ones they seem most apt for.
youneac 1 year ago
@jacobins3000 "Why not just become a professor and get paid for doing the exact same thing? Is there any type of intellectual endeavor that a university won't pay a group of sufficiently intelligent people to pursue?" Answer: Education in the US is heavily based in POLITICS, with little interest in actual advancement of "intellect". And let's not forget the political correctness that has resulted in the complete dumbing down of the students in the social experiment that Universites have become.
TheBelcherChannel 1 year ago
@TheBelcherChannel Education around the world is heavily based on economics. If you can prove me wrong please do. The more people that can, the happier I am !
bobzechikon 1 year ago
@jacobins3000 One could find basketball players on any field or court. Ergo, anyone who joins a basketball club is someone who can't make connections with other basketball players on their own and thus is a loser?
And that's ignoring the majority of clubs that are not about a specific interest such as the Lions, the Rotary, scouting, country clubs, etc.
You're really going out of your way to sustain your prejudice.
youneac 1 year ago
@youneac Perhaps I should have clarified that I am speaking of people who spend a large amount of time hanging around MENSA events, rather than anyone how happens to hold a membership. I like Dilbert cartoons, and Ive read a couple books by Asimov, but these are hardly the most brilliant people on the planet.
jacobins3000 1 year ago
@jacobins3000 The clarification is appreciated, but it contradicts your earlier statement: "...those who fail... join Mensa".
Einstein once said (or at least is attributed as having said): "Most people, when they claim that they're thinking, are merely adjusting their prejudices."
youneac 1 year ago
@youneac William James wrote "Most people think they're thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
TheFallibleFiend 1 year ago
@TheFallibleFiend Thanks for the amendment. I had checked that attribution too, but failed to find any reference as to where/when James might have said this. If you have this info, I'd appreciate it.
It is by no means an isolated statement, and likely uttered by multiple people. Voltaire already said: "Prejudices are what fools use for reason", Charles Mildmay: "Reasoning against a prejudice is like fighting against a shadow; it exhausts the reasoner, without visibly affecting the prejudice."
youneac 1 year ago
@youneac No direct source, though it seems he is commonly credited with it. The closest I could find on the net was that it was attributed, quoted in Evan Esar, editor, The Dictionary of Humorous Quotations, 1949. I haven't checked that book to see if Esar sources it.
TheFallibleFiend 1 year ago
the smartest people in the world do not have the highest IQ'S. Simply put you must apply Logic, Common Sense, and understanding. something that MANY mensians lack. No offense..
zjbeast 1 year ago
omg... give me a fuckin break... the question was simple... which included pluto.
stop trying to be a smart ass. jesus christ. You are an idiot. You don't know better.
the answer is 9.
Reptiles are obvious cold blooded-- including dinosaurs.
fuck charles darwin. His iq was in the toilet at around 130
and you sound like an envious bitch. Fat, bald people are not smart.
p.s. that's a woman for you.
Triple9Stud 1 year ago
@Triple9Stud Charles Darwin's was a towering human intellect. You sound like a know-nothing nitwit, barely capable of composing an intelligent sentence, but pretending to be smarter than he is. It's obvious to anyone that you're an idiot. Astronomers voted the answer 8 for a short while, but any answer is partly arbitrary - which was the point. You really are pathetically and obviously stupid.
TheFallibleFiend 1 year ago 2
@TheFallibleFiend
sorry, m8, it was the machine that brought me back to you (and probably not probabilisticly (even if strange things happen to me some times))... so, randomly saying some thing to you that might at least make some sense (in this context):
i can't find it terribly intelligent to try to enlighten Darwin Deniers (you know whom i mean). I won't say you why though (think hard!), it's just one piece of my mind that i once wanted to offer you (and have now somewhat belatedly) ((thx))
TheRavingRandomist 1 year ago
@Triple9Stud Your acct has the hallmarks of a troll. Is your stupidity just an act to waste people's time?
TheFallibleFiend 1 year ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
@Triple9Stud "charles darwin['s] iq was in the toilet at around 130"
Or 165.
google. com/search?q=darwin+cox+iq
hitssquad 1 year ago
I think that hubris that you're talking about is the result of some of these people having wrapped a lot of their self worth up in having superior intelligence. The smarter they feel, and the dumber they can make you seem, the better off they are. It's sad. T_T
devourerofbabies 1 year ago
Top 2% is 3 standard deviations above the mean, which a statistician would qualify as being an "outlier".
devourerofbabies 1 year ago
@joshbickett Channel is not for people with short attention spans.
TheFallibleFiend 1 year ago
@TheFallibleFiend Sorry i don't want to get on you but it has nothing to do with short attention spans when the speaker isn't able to structure his or her speech.
Structure your speech, don't make the sentences to long and don't use 'ah' and 'em's. Nobodies going to interrupt you.
johndagger 1 year ago
hubris
quazarphazar 1 year ago
@quazarphazar
There is lots of this in this video.
quazarphazar 1 year ago
I have also had similar experiences, and I, like you refuse to join Mensa. I think that the mere fact that they joined Mensa indicates they need to validate their intelligence. Usually people who perceive themselves as intelligent think less of everybody around them, and by that, perhaps explaining your scenario.
Of your three encounters, the Pluto thing was well argumented and thought of. The Reptile thing,I would not call you an idiot for it, but I would really need to read that article.
Anichels 1 year ago
Sounds to me like these ladies called you -or came close to calling you- an idiot over something THEY didn't know.
Humility about how uncertain our knowledge of reality remains would become them - AND ALL OF US.
amoxtlacatl 1 year ago
That's pretty much the sum of it. Maybe they just had bad days - or maybe I was exuding a "kick me" aura.
TheFallibleFiend 1 year ago
A more damning, if possibly related, trait I have encountered (in the general public) is that most people conflate knowledge and intelligence. To know many things = intelligent, or to not know a thing = unintelligent.
The dumbest person on earth could presumably be taught any given fact. Anyone can be taught to say "A photon exibits the properties of both a wave and a particle". How many actually understand it. "Knowing" says nothing about your intellect. What you understand tells the tale!
TheCelticChimp 2 years ago 18
@TheCelticChimp
Similar, possibly worse conflations exist - that of intelligent and wise.
- Thinking that proficiency in one field makes you proficient in other, unrelated fields - or infallible in your actual field.
- Thinking that booksmart makes you streetsmart.
- Thinking that intelligence and wisdom are the same (you can be a very intelligent person and make very stupid mistakes in life).
amoxtlacatl 1 year ago
@TheCelticChimp
I disagree. Intelligent individuals turn out to know more facts because they are naturally drawn towards things that stimulate the mind such as reading. On the other hand, the less intelligent ones tend to avoid mental activities coz they find it uninteresting and boring.
You will find out that, almost invariably, intelligent individuals possess more stock knowledge than their unintelligent counterpart.
zulfikarl 1 year ago
Every time I've socialized with a Mensa member they're degraded me and implied I was a retard. Honestly, it seems as if they consider themselves superior to humanity.
friendlynicholas 2 years ago 3
Don't associate her obvious character flaws with her high intelligence any more than you would associate them with her being a woman.
TheNoodlyAppendage 2 years ago 3
You're right.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
I understand what you mean.
Warm blooded dinosaures: the woman could not know absolutely whether they existed but was prepared to insult you in defence of her point, that is the problem.
Many intelligent people still fail to question what they have been told or investigate for themselves the origins of their "facts", and even then, fail to admit that real facts are very hard to come by.
In my opinion the most intelligent thing you can do sometimes is to admit that you don't really know.
STUCASHX 2 years ago 13
@STUCASHX I second that emotion.
JAZZSTARish 1 year ago
The concept of "working definition" as opposed to "true definition", if there is such a thing, is something that you have learned and remembered. By using multiple heuristics your reasoning becomes more accurate, but also more subtle. However, your "understanding" is not inherently different in nature than your mensan-opponents' "memorised rules"
rakoon3434 2 years ago
Although I'm on your side on each of the issues you presented (e.g. definition of planets, species, etc.) I disagree on your final conclusion. I think that ultimately, what you call "understanding" as opposed to "memorising" is just the complex interaction of other heuristics that you have learned. It includes more subtlety, but it is the same process. For example, you are obviously more familiar with the arbitrary nature of definitions
rakoon3434 2 years ago
Judging by the video you seem like a bright guy. You said in the video that you're not planning to join mensa and I just can't help wonder - why have you gone to meetings, activly updated yourself whith information on their website and how come you have mensan friends (coincedences?)...
I just don't understand why you put effort in something you're not interested in.
Have you ever applied for mensa membership?
1234s6 2 years ago
@1234s6
If the guy has mensan friends first, then he may have been invited to mensa meetings and been exposed to the information that way.
I think he's more interested in the general definition of intelligence and how to accurately measure it, than in mensa as an organisation.
STUCASHX 2 years ago
Yeah smart people can sometime be arrogant about being smart. But hey, at least theyre being arrogant about a productive trait. Most people are arrogant because they are better looking, or can drink more beer, or have bigger muscles and can push others around. Arrogance can be bad, but it isnt the worst sin. I wouldnt mind a society where Mensans and others in a similar category would be put on a pedestal, rather than putting people like Steve-O or Rihanna on a pedestal.
mrgimp420 2 years ago
Arrogance doesn't bother me. Being a condescending prick and being wrong is irritating. Everything else I agree with. We ought to admire people who are legitimately smart in the same way we admire people who are great musicians or great athletes. There is a problem though: Super-athleticism is obvious to everyone. I don't know jack about basketball, but watching MJ play gave me goosebumps. But most people can't detect intelligence much greater than their own.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
the minimum IQ is 130, which is gifted, not genius. The point of the club is to have intellectual discussion and participate in events, and mostly have fun.
orangefan9 2 years ago
tests that measure performance, or ability?
dekoork1 2 years ago
You miss the point of Mensa!
Intelligence and knowledge is NOT the same!!!
I am a Mensian, but it doesn't mean that I know everything about everything.
It is... well, stupid to even think so.
Teodosijevic 2 years ago
@Teodosijevic I don't think it's I who have missed the point of Mensa. Rather, I think some few Mensans miss the point of it.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
Well, that is too :))
In my days in Mensa I have met some quite stupid people, well at least stupid in social sense.
So I guess you both, or rather all for of you (you and tree women you mentioned) kind of started at the really wrong way.
So again: Intelligence is NOT the same as Knowledge!
Teodosijevic 2 years ago
its weird that some people develop a sort of superiority complex over something you were born with, saying you are better than someone because you have a higher IQ can be compared with thinking you are better than someone beacuse you are white. of course im not assuming that those people are nearly as bigoted as a white supremacist but there is a loose connection in the fact that it is arrogant to flaunt superiority over something as random as your IQ or skin colour
lewbewl 2 years ago
Intelligence is not just memorizing. Its part of it, but you've got to understand WELL
videosdatreta 2 years ago
A genius is an individual who successfully applies a previously unknown technique in the production of a work of art, science or calculation, or who masters and personalizes a known technique. A genius typically possesses great intelligence or remarkable abilities in a specific subject, or shows an exceptional natural capacity of intellect and/or ability, especially in the production of creative and original work, something that has never been seen or evaluated previously.
tartfuel 2 years ago
My point is that he said I.Q. doesn't matter anymore, but when it comes down to it, if the qualifying difference between two people is based on I. Q. and not based of personality or work ethic, it does make a difference.
Oh, and try stay away from the term "genius." It is misused often and should not be used to discuss people just because their I.Q,'s are in the top 2%. That alone does not make a "genius."
tartfuel 2 years ago
You are quite wrong about this. If two potential workers have all the same qualifications and personality, except that one has a very high I.Q. and the other has an average I.Q. - I would take the person with the higher I.Q. and so would you.
Having a higher I.Q. can make a real difference in strategic planning, engineering, mathematics (practical or theoretical) and sciences (practical and theoretical).
tartfuel 2 years ago
It's not clear to me that I would prefer the person with the higher IQ. If the higher IQ guy had no better qualifications than the lower IQ guy, I might figure that the higher IQ was a slacker or that the higher IQ guy had trouble putting his abstract understanding into practice.
However, more to the point, two people almost never have the "same" qualifications.
Twice I've given job recommendations in favor of guys who were about to be rejected on the basis of mediocre test scores.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
I was saying that if two people were equal in the amount of education, and approximate work history, but one person's I.Q. was higher than the other, you would pick the person with the higher I.Q.
A person of average intelligence can get a post graduate degree and work in management, like someone with a higher I.Q.
Are you saying that of the person with the higher I.Q. has not cured cancer or proven string-theory and holds a non "genius" position that he is a slacker?
tartfuel 2 years ago
I'm saying I might wonder why he hasn't actually accomplished more than the guy with the lower IQ.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
For reference, I don't ask a person's IQ when I interview and have completely ignored it on those few cases where it was proffered on a resume. It's no more relevant than, say, the fact that a guy teaches Sunday school or belongs to an honor society.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
What do you view as an accomplishment that stands out? He may be a great pianist but chose not to be a professional one. He may be working on a new "theory of everything" at home.
Are accomplishments in the workplace alone where IQ must be recognized?
tartfuel 2 years ago
I had an intern who among other things discovered that a deployed series of robots had bad accelerometers. The company won a follow on contract for $150K (or maybe it was $300K, I don't recall exactly). He applied for a full time job after work and I gave a strong recommendation for him. The prospective employer called me and asked ...
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
"You gave this guy the highest marks, but our tests show his IQ is only about average. How do you explain that?"
My answer was this: I can't explain it. I don't know anything about your test or what it's really measuring. All I can tell you is this: and then I related the story how this kid worked his ass off every day, checked and rechecked his answers, worked with our vendor and customer and finally won us a great deal of $, and then I asked, "How would you rate him?" He got the job.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
That's great. What is your point? That people of average intelligence excel in many, many arenas? Well of course they do.
As I said before, IQ does not define the person. It can be an advantage in certain situations, but it is not all a person is.
Your intern had a terrific work ethic and an eye for detail. I don't understand what your point is.
tartfuel 2 years ago
You asked what I considered a great accomplishment that stands out. I gave not a hypothetical example, but a real one. It doesn't have to be a cure for cancer or the follow-on to M-theory. It could just be the guy has actually demonstrated that he's really determined and knows how to do that kind of work.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
Consider this: he might easily have lost that position to some other kid who had scored much higher on the IQ test, but had much weaker demonstrated skills.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
Okay - again, As I have stated more than once here, there is more to a person than their I.Q. Your intern proved that point in spades, however you seem to keep leaning toward "the guy with the higher I.Q. is a slacker and therefore shouldn't get a job over someone with an average I.Q.
If said hypothetical person was a slacker, then you are right, but the scenario I posed was that if both candidates are equal in EVERY way but I.Q.,what would be your reason to go with the guy with the lower IQ?
tartfuel 2 years ago
I don't have sufficient detail in that hypothetical case to say. In reality, I've never seen identical resumes.
Here's another real example - not about I.Q., but GRE which is a rough proxy.
I was interviewing a candidate with perfect GRE scores, but his GPA was only 3.4 (low end of acceptable here), IIRC - at a good school, but not a great school. Now say there was another candidate, roughly comparable, but a bit lower GRE. In our case, we gave it to the second guy.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
I gotta say, it is very telling that you refuse to answer a simple question where the play field is level in all respects except in one. This is hypothetical and you have everything you need to answer the questions - but won't.
You clearly will not hire someone with a higher IQ over someone with an average IQ even if they have a great work ethic, great work and educational history if you can hire someone else. I think you need to look at why this is.
tartfuel 2 years ago
There are situations where I would hire the guy with the higher IQ, but I wouldn't hire him strictly because of his IQ. It depends on the exact circumstances. Reality is not hypothetical. I don't know how to make it any clearer than that.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
WOW! Seriously man, is that how you answered questions in math and science classes when you were in school?
"I'm sorry teacher, but it isn't realistic for every apple to weigh the same amount, so I can't possibly give an accurate with a total weight of the bag of apple Susie is carrying home from the market."
No one asked for anything more than an answer to the hypothetical question I have now posed numerous times. There is some serious sour grapes coming from you in regard to IQ.
tartfuel 2 years ago
It's not sour grapes. It's experience. I have a high IQ, not extremely high, but pretty high. I just don't think it means the same thing that you think it means.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
No, I do know what it means for someone to have a high I.Q. - And no, it doesn't mean that this attribute alone means someone is a better candidate for a job. In order to be a well-rounded and desired candidate, they need compassion, work ethic, passion for what they do, proper education and work history, like anyone else.
So if you have two people with all these qualities but one can reason faster, understand abstract ideas more easily and see patterns faster- why go with someone who can't?
tartfuel 2 years ago
".... but one can reason faster, understand abstract ideas more easily and see patterns faster- why go with someone who can't?"
Because it's not clear to me that the guy with the higher IQ can do any of those things better than the other fellow, if they both otherwise have the same qualifications.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
IQ tests measure these abilities. They do not measure your knowledge or if you know calculus, they measure how well and how quickly you see and understand abstractions, patterns and the ability to reason. Now if the job requires none of these things, then who cares, but I know that if I was hiring someone for strategic planning who has easily picked up the repeating patterns that emerge in any industry and can use that to our advantage, I want that guy.
tartfuel 2 years ago
I want that guy too, but it's not clear to me that - despite the claims made on behalf of it - that it actually does measure those abilities and more than that, it's not clear that even if it does measure them, that it reflects any ability to apply those to real-world problems.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
IQ tests are done in schools to help determine if a child can be taught in mainstream classes or if they need special education - or if they should be in an accelerated program because they are "gifted". When properly administered these test are very accurate and studies have proven that again and again.
It's not that IQ doesn't translate, it's the person's work ethic. If all they care to do is skate by, then the benefits are counteracted. But that is not this situation at all.
tartfuel 2 years ago
The tests are probably sufficient for determining that in students, if they are not used alone. Tragically the people (at least some of them) who implement the results of these tests are not very smart themselves and can pigeon-hole students on no other criteria.
I think its indeterminate whether the work ethic holds in this situation ...
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
IF I knew NOTHING else about two candidates other than IQ and there was a significant difference between them in that alone, THEN I would probably take the one with the higher IQ. But THAT is not this case. Typically one has resume and often a cover letter. I'm looking for high intelligence, but more than that I'm looking for passion. I get plenty of resumes from brilliant people - but I want the particular person who actually cares A LOT about the the specific problem area.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
Again, why you are unable to understand and use the information in the hypothetical alone is a mystery to me - other than the idea that you are so adamantly dismissive of the idea that IQ in certain situations makes a difference at work.
You clearly have been hurt by jackasses who think they way Mathlover314 seem to think: that anyone in Mensa is a genius and anyone who isn't is an idiot and not worthy of contribution (hence your three part diatribe about Mensans)...
tartfuel 2 years ago
I am not hurt by these jackasses. I have not made a three part diatribe about Mensans. I have discussed 3 particular Mensans who were not so smart as they thought. I could and have contemplated several times making other videos of interactions with Mensans whom I know to be brilliant. The fact that I haven't yet is a function of many things.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
Your video above brings many thoughts to minds, not the least of which is both the look on your face, the tone in your voice and the content of the vid indicate you were indeed hurt by the ridiculous remarks of the mensans you are discussing. In no way were your comments about the planets or possible warm-blooded dinosaurs dumb (in fact the leatherback sea turtle is a warm-blooded reptile). The people you talked to were uninformed about that subject and deflected showing poor social skills...
tartfuel 2 years ago
... so you were stung by their reception to you rather valid ideas. But you also have this belief that as members of Mensa they should also have knowledge of everything. I find that intriguing because I don't know what would give you that idea? I guarantee you that if I start a conversation with Stephen Hawking about whether the multi-camera sitcom's major resurgence begins with this new season or next year's, he will be at a loss to discuss it with appropriate knowledge.
tartfuel 2 years ago
By showing a bias against someone with a high IQ in the workplace, you are behaving the same way that woman who called you an idiot did. And, as my mother would say - that makes you just as bad as they are. By not showing bias at all and basing hiring on all criteria available for each individual (and NOT using past experience with someone else of high IQ as your guide) can you hire the right person for the job. To use your bias is a disservice to yourself and your company.
tartfuel 2 years ago
I'm not using past experience with someone of high IQ. My best guess is that everyone who makes it past my first screen has a high IQ. We're talking the difference between Mendelsohn and Mozart. Nor was I biased against the person with the higher IQ. Rather, I (along with the task leader) inferred that he was not so passionate as the other leading candidate. GREs are an indicator of something important, but perfect GREs don't necessarily xlate to high performance.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
Hmm. So if someone only cares to listen to you talk for ten minutes as opposed to over 26 minutes, they must not be smart?
I did not say you were biases in that one instance, but your responses to my query show a bias, as does your vid.
tartfuel 2 years ago
My use of the term "screen" was ambiguous. I was not referring to my YT vids, but to the screening process I use at work to evaluate intern resumes.
Anyone who gets past my intern screening process is a pretty smart person; probably most of them even have high IQs.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
gotcha
tartfuel 2 years ago
That said, you are clearly intelligent, not because of your test scores, but because of points you are trying to make about understanding as opposed to regurgitation of facts. Intellect is not about knowledge. Knowledge is acquired. Intellect is static. Intellect combines with knowledge is powerful, but there are some very intelligent people out there who for whatever reasons do not have the schooling to acquire the knowledge.
tartfuel 2 years ago
I am getting frustrated that although I have already stated here several times how IQ alone is not the measure of a person's abilities, however that seems to consistently fall on deaf ears each time I bring it up. Is that because my addressing all of your reservations with that information leaves your argument with nowhere to go? And if not, then why do you ignore that information so consistently in regard to the question I posed two days ago that you still cannot answer.
tartfuel 2 years ago
I understand that you don't take IQ alone as the measure of a person's abilities. I think that you have "addressed" all of my points, but not so thoroughly as you believe. If the two candidates are equal in every other way, then how has IQ of the person with the higher one helped him? Moreover how has the diminutive IQ of the other fellow harmed him?
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
Some people let their Mensa status get into their heads and they have to prove they're right every time (even when they're not). They should be smart enough to realize that calling people idiots makes them look unintelligent. Too bad Mensa tests don't measure emotional intelligence.
sillipaa 2 years ago
On the good side, most Mensans (at least in my experience) don't act like the ones I describe in these videos. Most seem average or above in emotional intelligence. But in those cases where there's a mismatch, boy is it jarring.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
BO Jr. is NOT a natural born citizen of the United States. In fact, if he really is the biological son of BO Sr. he retains his British citizenship, to this day. Shouldn't require a genius I.Q. to figure this out. WAKE UP, AMERICA! You were duped. "I use reason for the few, emotion for the mass" Adolph Hitler national socialist
"I shall serve as a blank screen , upon which people will project their hopes & dreams" Barack Obama charlatan
kiiifute1 2 years ago
What is the purpose of spamming my video with a completely unrelated comment?
Pull your head out of your back side and get an education. Maybe then you will be able to distinguish an urban legend from a fact.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
Comment removed
tartfuel 2 years ago
I think that the ultimate problem with 'genius' is that in historical usage, it used to refer to men (and women) of great intellectual accomplishment and unusually deep insight. One can be brilliant and accomplish nothing or have only slightly deeper insight than the average person but be able to gain and apply knowledge quickly. These many small accomplishments might amount to very little. Bearing this in mind, I think that basing the criterion for genius on a simple test is absurd.
Baustrophedonic 2 years ago
True, but it still makes me feel good when I take an IQ test. There are also many forms of "intelligence" and many of those forms can not be expressed in multiple choice. Conceptualization, for example, is better demonstrated through explanation than a, b, c, d, or e.
eatmyplanet 2 years ago
I agree with you, Mensa should raise the standards for admission. I have an IQ of 166, and I cannot believe that you can get in with a mere 130 IQ. By the way, 130+ (the top 2 percentile) is not genius. 130-139 is gifted (eligible for Mensa), 140-164 is genius, 165-184 is high genius, 185-199 is highest genius, and 200+ is highest genius. I just wanted to point out that you were wrong when you said 130+ is genius. Also, that question about the planets is not clear, why did you say 9?
MathLover314 2 years ago
I've read different things about what level qualifies as genius. "The Mensa Genius Quiz Book" says 2% is genius. So far as I can tell any bar is arbitrary. And so it doesn't surprise me that Mensans set the bar wherever they wish. As I mentioned and you are surely aware, there are groups with much higher requirements: ispe, four sigma, mega, e.g.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
The Mensa Genius Quiz book is written by a couple of self-important people who want to be called geniuses. In fact, the psychologists doesn't even use the term "genius" at all anymore when measuring I.Q. They use the term "gifted" (mildly, moderately, or highly). And by gifted they mean in intelligence only.
Books like the quiz books are poorly (if ever really) edited and unless the person making the statement is a noted professional, take terms like "genius" as being opinion and not fact.
tartfuel 2 years ago
Interesting fact about psychologists no longer using the term.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
I did not say there were nine planets. What I said was that it was not clear there were nine planets and that one could make the case that there were only 8, or perhaps 10 planets. The other person insisted that there were 10 planets. This was years before the IAU made their decision and so was before most people were aware there was any controversy brewing.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
(error: the other person insisted that there were exactly 9 planets)
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
Also, I don't think I was arguing that Mensa should raise their standards. I was only arguing that I don't think and IQ of 130 makes one a genius. In fact, I don't know that any specific IQ is sufficient. It wouldn't make sense the other way 'round - to say someone is not a genius, because her IQ is less than 130 (or 140).
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
Mensa doesn't use the word "genius." The requirement to get into Mensa is for your score to be in the top 2% of all people who took whatever accepted I.Q. test you took. The numbers are different depending on each test. A 148 on the Cattell is the same is getting a 132 on the Stanford Binet which is the same as getting a 130 on the WAIS. All of those scores put you in the top 2%.
Mensa doesn't say the members are all geniuses, just that their IQs are in the top 2%.
tartfuel 2 years ago
I don't know whether the Mensa organization uses the word "genius," but many mensans do.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
Many? I tend to not hear that word bandied about in events and various meetings unless: A) the person is talking about else, or B) they are a self-aggrandizing, insecure fool. What I do hear at times are people who refer to themselves as smarter than the general public. Or call them the "lower 98. That always bothers me and I tend to not spend time with those people.
But many mensans stay away from the word "genius" when talking about themselves. True genius is rare.
tartfuel 2 years ago
"Many" is pretty vague. I've met some number of Mensans more than 100 and probably less than 200. Most of them I barely met, but most of them seem pretty likable and even intelligent. Some of them (a couple dozen of them which I would consider "many," but you may consider otherwise) have used the term "genius" or some equivalent to describe themselves and have used their
memberships as "proof." Some very few of them (~ 2) were pathological about it.
True genius is indeed rare.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
Guesswork of course, based on a small sample set and obviously fallible personal recollections.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
I will not deny that Mensa has caused their own PR problems. The use of the "G' word is part of that problem. While I cannot imagine myself showing my card as proof of "genius," the people who do seem to be rather insecure and feel that their I.Q. defines them a great deal. But that should not define the group as a whole
I am concerned about how Mensa is perceived. Mensa's reason for being was to be of service, not to make other feel inferior - because they certainly aren't.
tartfuel 2 years ago
This series of videos was discussing a few isolated incidents and wasn't intended to convey anything in particular about Mensa or Mensans. There are a lot of people who are "almost smart" or are smart in ways I consider trivial. (Again, "lot" is relative and what is trivial is my personal perception.)
I like and get along w most Mensa members I meet. I even respect most of the ones I interact. OTOH, I don't consider most geniuses because of their membership. (& neither do they).
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
I understand that, in fact I stated it in my comment. However, I think that Mensa should higher their standards to only allow people with an IQ of 140 and up (geniuses).
MathLover314 2 years ago
My question is why? What is to be achieved?
And again, lose the "genius" moniker. It is not a valid description of someone with a 140 I.Q.
tartfuel 2 years ago
I think that only people with a genius IQ should be allowed into the club because it is a social club for people who are different and want to interact with similar people. I think people with an IQ of 130 do not qualify as being extraordinarily intelligent, therefore, it gets rid of the entire purpose. Why do you not believe people with an IQ of 140 or over is a good description of a genius?
MathLover314 2 years ago
Firstly, I have already given a statement on what genius is so go back and read it. Second, no one uses the term genius to describe I.Q. alone. The words used in the psychological community are "gifted," and "superior intelligence," but genius? No. And third when people are just talking and spending time together - no one can tell who's IQ is in the 130's or 140's. And not or nothing - my IQ easily clears your cut off point , and I do not view myself as a genius.
tartfuel 2 years ago
You cannot redefine the word "genius". In addition, I could tell if I were speaking with a "gifted" person vs. a "genius".
MathLover314 2 years ago
I didn't redefine the term genius - the psychological community did. And I doubt you can tell the difference between someone who has an IQ in the 130's and who has an IQ in the 140's.
In my career I have met and spoken with, at length, NASA engineers, high-level politicians, world-class musicians and actors who's high IQ's are not a secret. Some of them hit your cut off and some do not, but are relatively close. and I gotta say I never thought...
tartfuel 2 years ago
...President Clinton to be less intelligent that Sharon Stone and their IQ's differ by more than ten points. In fact, time I have spent discussing politics and world events with Jodie Foster, I wouldn't have pegged her as not as bright as Geena Davis or Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Yet, according to you you can tell the difference between someone with an IQ in the 130's and someone with an IQ in the 140's without hesitation. I'd say that's hubris and you need to get your ego checked.
tartfuel 2 years ago
Excuse me, I would appreciate if you did not insult me like that.
MathLover314 2 years ago
I'm sorry if you took offense, but what you said sounded very pompous, elitist and, frankly quite silly, so I pointed that out. Especially since you did not, and dare I say, cannot qualify your statement with any evidence of such an ability. And of course, the big question is: why would you WANT to make the distinction of "he's only highly gifted, but she's got an IQ 8 points higher and therefore is a 'genius.' " It's utter rubbish.
tartfuel 2 years ago
If you don't make a distinction between people's IQ, they would let people with IQs of 50 in! The point is to attract people with high IQs in order to carry on intelligent conversations with people.
MathLover314 2 years ago
Making a distinction is what Mensa already does by giving two tests, or accepting one previously administered test. What is your point?
tartfuel 2 years ago
They already have more restrictive societies - and less. Those societies don't have so large a membership. I'm not in Mensa, so I don't care, but it would seem unfair to me to change the rules on members post facto. Even if you grandfathered in existing members, it might make them feel unwelcome.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
You are correct, that is why Roland Berrill, the founder of mensa, should have only let geniuses in since the start in 1946.
MathLover314 2 years ago
It is obvious to me any probably everyone who is reading this conversation that you really have a NEED to be called a genius. I think the more important issue is WHY do you feel the need to be called a genius? I don't have that need, even though by your estimation I am one (an assertion I already disagreed with in a previous post). Why do you need people to define you in such a way?
tartfuel 2 years ago