INTJ's and IQ

[Doppelbock]

I came across the following statistics:
* Only 2% of the general population are INTJ's
* 37% of INTJ's have IQ's that place them in the top 2% of the general population. (Next most is INTP, with a 20% chance.)

Thoughts/comments? Are we really that smart?

DB

[Firelie]

That's a hard one since most people don't share their IQ scores, and of the people who do share them, you can't be certain who's padding their score to seem smarter and who's telling the truth.

That being said, I'm not in that top 2%. *I think the score description said something about "appearing" to be a genius to less smart people, but not actually being one. lol

(This was an online IQ test, by the way. I'm not sure whether it was an "official" one or not)

[Guido]

IQ tests are funny. I did the common one from the High IQ society page (which I think is one of the most accurate internet ones available) awhile back, and raked up a nice 142 (or 146? I forget). I don't think it means all that much, it just shows I have a high aptitude to write their kind of test, despite doing rather poorly on all the word problems. I'm quite good at the ‘visualizing those 25 sided objects that have been flattened out’ questions where they ask you something like 'which of the following are correct representations' followed by a list of flattened out sections of the object but rotated.

What does that magic 142 number mean? I have no idea. I've always thought of intelligence being a vector with a very large number of elements that represent facets of different kinds of intelligences. (Go go linear algebra!) People who have a higher magnitude of this vector are smarter. IQ tests will only measure certain components of this vector. I found the test I wrote to measure my best components, such as my math calculation and my visualization abilities. However, someone 'smarter' than me could have done quite poorly while still having a total higher intelligence magnitude.

My ISTP dad for example, is bad at math and visualization, and not so great with words either. If I got him to write this test, he would get something ridiculously low. He is however, one of the smartest guys I know. He has an uncanny ability with street smarts and common sense. He also has an unbelievable memory with history and other fact related stuff he's interested in. It's not uncommon for him to hear an old song on the radio and say something like 'This song was written by ___ and it came out in the summer of ___. The first time I heard it, I was driving to ___ '. The strangest thing is, these aren't even choice memories as he’s told me thousands of them and they're rarely ever the same. These of course, are only the one's he's told me, so I have no idea how much of his life he has memorized o.0

An ENFJ friend of mine is a little retarded when it comes to reasoning at times. And has neither my skills, nor my fathers. But there isn't anyone else I would go to for advice on social issues, as she too is one of the smartest people I know. I’m pretty sure that she thinks I think she’s dumb, which entertains me :D

The only aspects I have been able to make solid judgments on, is that people with a higher intelligence magnitude than others have a few things in common. They have a higher mental bandwidth, allowing them to calculate or figure out more involving their specialties. This in turn allows them to handle bigger and more complicated puzzles that are able to fit into their bandwidth, to come up with better solutions in a faster amount of time. They also have a memory that's adept for this bandwidth. For example. My father's history memory, my errr robot? memory, and my ENFJ friend's people memory. I've also noticed that they tend to pull up their weaker 'components' as their magnitude gets higher. I never liked history, but I didn't have much problem memorizing the raw facts and doing well on tests... when I took the time to study that is. It’s usually pretty easy to get a feel of someone to figure out how smart they are.

In short, I do think that INTJs are smarter on average than most just because of the way our brains are wired. I'm not sure if there is a type out there that thinks more than we do. However, our type also gives us a big advantage in taking common IQ tests making them a little biased.

[Firelie]

You know what, that's exactly it. Good post, Guido.

[Tarrick]

Indeed. Our high intuition give us a great advantage while taking those tests.

[The Rose]

I have scored fairly well on IQ tests in the past.

[Lufus]

I think a lot of it comes back to your drive for self-improvement. Many people in school simply do the work because they're assigned it. INTJ's, on the otherhand, seem more likely to not only do the work, but comprehend it on a level that most don't.

[Rei]

Will read the really extremely good and long post later.

I got 135 or something, though I'm not sure how accurate that test was. That was a while ago and I feel like I've gotten dumber since. I think university makes people dumb...

Anyway, I'm actually more interested in finding out my EQ



And yes, INTJ are that smart ;D

[Firelie]

I got 135 or something, though I'm not sure how accurate that test was. *That was a while ago and I feel like I've gotten dumber since.

Yeah, I feel like I've gotten dumber since the last time I took an IQ test. Is it possible to get more dumb? lol

[Apococlock]

I must be an inferior INTJ because I tend to not score so well in the IQ area. Usually I only pull around a 120 (in the national high IQ society), give or take approximately five. I managed to meet their requirements but alas, it isn't something I would pay for.

The thing I really struggle with is visual memorization, which is unusual to me because I'm an artist, which means I visually memorize a lot of stuff in order to reproduce it. For whatever reason though I cannot seem to grasp the images the want me to memorize in the amount of time that they give, which means I fail the that area pretty hard.

Another thing that gets me is obscure questions about history that I could not possible know. "Who was the ruler of *insert generic country here* in the year *insert distant year here from over a century ago*?"

That sort of thing gets me, I use context clues the best I can to eliminate possible solutions, and I believe it helps if only a little.

Lastly is the Math and English. Both which I can fly through with reletive ease. While I've always despised math (because of the repetition of it as well as how it rarely applied to anything I cared about) I've always been able to easily grasp it. As for English, well, I'm somewhat of a freak at it. So those portions of any test are a cake walk.

Patterns are simple, so is a lot of the other logical tests.


Despite all of the flaws within my mind, it still is a reasonably high IQ, and since I'm probably the lowest here in that area, it should say a lot about the general INTJ population.

edit: And yes, there are many ways to get dumber. It's a matter of habits and memory loss and various other contributors.

[Guido]

I think a lot of it comes back to your drive for self-improvement. *Many people in school simply do the work because they're assigned it. *INTJ's, on the other hand, seem more likely to not only do the work, but comprehend it on a level that most don't.

That's exactly how I managed to sleep in the back of the class throughout well... all of my schooling :o It's almost as if most people just memorize how to get the answer rather than the understanding behind it. Because I had laid the ground work at an early age for math, learning new concepts took minutes instead the weeks it would take others.

[Jack]

If I can remember that far back I would say my IQ was in the range of about 130-135...It's not like the numbers matter anyways, it's how you use your "Genius", that makes you the intellectual that you are, I love writing and playing guitar...To me these 2 things are quite opposite from each other, and it was realized that this came natural for me in early adolescence.(I am self-taught in alot of meaningless things)I can't stand thinking of myself as a statistic, So!...Individuality is more important to me.

As for the % of INTJ's, ENTP's are also considered as 2% as well, I tend to sway between these two types.

So being INTJ and tendencies of ENTP with an IQ of 130-35, with the importance of trying to be myself, where does that put me "Statistically" as an individual?

[wise]

If I can remember that far back I would say my IQ was in the range of about 130-135...It's not like the numbers matter anyways, it's how you use your "Genius", that makes you the intellectual that you are, I love writing and playing guitar...To me these 2 things are quite opposite from each other, and it was realized that this came natural for me in early adolescence.(I am self-taught in alot of meaningless things)I can't stand thinking of myself as a statistic, So!...Individuality is more important to me.

As for the % of INTJ's, ENTP's are also considered as 2% as well, I tend to sway between these two types.

So being INTJ and tendencies of ENTP with an IQ of 130-35, with the importance of trying to be myself, where does that put me "Statistically" as an individual?







Jack, on the IHIQS test I scored 131, and was pleased with that. I don't believe that the score in and of itself determines your intelligence; you have to use it for it to be any good.

I did join their site, which may deduct points from my score for paying the money. I have enjoyed it though. There are a lot of really strange people with high IQs, then there are some really nice people with high IQs. I have to admit that some of them talk over my head; sometimes because of their intelligence and other times because they're just strange.

[Romeo]

I think I scored 142.

[StJimmy]

i don't really know what my IQ is but i can say that during highshool i consistently tested in the 98+ percentile on every standardized test i ever took. but then again i have a way with multiple choice, it's like cheating. /shrug

[Max T]

I score 128- 130.
Bright enough to know I'm not that bright (and be able to do something about it).

In the investment world, its generally agreed that anything above 125 is superfluous to success, and IQ above 145 can be dangerous as you are either a. overconfident in your abilities (Long Term Capital Management fund implosion) or b. too frustrated by the 'illogical' movements of the markets.

Instead, what matters alot is knowing yourself- your cognitive blindspots and general fallibility- and thereby thinking rationally as opposed to 'deeply'.

This 'intrapersonal intelligence' that I value is one of Howard Gardner's multiple intelligences
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
... INTJs surely measure dumb in a few areas (e.g. interpersonal and poss. bodily (sporting) intelligence).

[The Rose]

...This 'intrapersonal intelligence' that I value is one of Howard Gardner's multiple intelligences
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
... INTJs surely measure dumb in a few areas (e.g. interpersonal and poss. bodily (sporting) intelligence).I'm thankful to have learned about the different intelligences many years ago.
It helped me appreciate my ISTPs "other" strengths.

[Jbmontag]

Depending on the test, my score ranges from 129 to 142. I prefer multiple intelligence theory to standard IQ tests. I believe the interplay of these different types of intelligence give a more adequate description of human achievement.


Almost like the MBTI, every aspect is represented, it is just a matter to what degree.

[Tarrick]

Oh are we dropping scores then?
142-5.

In any event, Jbmontag, do you know of any place to take a multiple intelligence theory test online?

[deicruxified]

likewise... then when we had the national career exams so just to determine what kind of career would suit us so that we'd know what to take in college, i got superior in math, art, kinesthetics, science and english...i did rank high in multiple intelligences and i'm a balanced brain as well which actually was more trouble coz way back then, i don't know what course i'm going to take.

iq's more of math and english which is pretty unfair for others who are inclined in music or art...

[Ian]

I qualified for Mensa in 1983 - just did the test for fun and never really thought too much about having an IQ score in the top 1%.

To me, it just means I am good at things called 'IQ tests' , nothing more.

Having said that, I could tell the time when I was 2 years old, had my first wrist watch at 3 and got through the first 3 years of infants school in about 12 months - only to be kept back while my peers caught up. I also remember, in those early years, getting into trouble for not doing my addition / sutraction sums using the beads in the plastic pots on the table - I could just look at the problem on the card and write the right answer down.

Looking back, now 46, it has been downhill ever since ;)

[Jbmontag]

Oh are we dropping scores then?
142-5.

In any event, Jbmontag, do you know of any place to take a multiple intelligence theory test online?


No i don't actually, the only tests I have taken were at a learning center on the campus I went to college. I'll look around though and send you any links I might find though.

[phoenix]

Dropping scores:

I was formally tested once (not one of those online things, but an actual paid-for IQ test...thanks Mom!). I got 144. I guess it says something that I was a bit disappointed at the time.

The one score I'm proudest of was the 800 I got on the analytical portion of the GRE. I figure that makes up for the *measly* 144 *;)

[Tarrick]

Dropping scores:

I got 144. I guess it says something that I was a bit disappointed at the time.


If I remember correctly, doesn't "Genius" level start at about 150?

And a chart:
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Max T]

150+ IQ just shows how long the tails to that normal distribution really are (and some poor sods at <50 IQ too).

Is the mean (100) fixed over time or likely to rise to say 110 (by today's standards) in 2050?
It's joked that the NT Bill Gates would have been useless 1000 years ago, but thrives today. Does that mean in the future more high IQ people will prevail?

Conversely, that lower intelligence people will continue to tend to have large families, to support one another against the general unfairness in society. And so balancing out society to remain at 100 IQ.

[phoenix]

Dropping scores:

I got 144. I guess it says something that I was a bit disappointed at the time.


If I remember correctly, doesn't "Genius" level start at about 150?




I didn't say I was being reasonable about my disappointement. *:P

I guess it's just another indicator of how hard we are on ourselves. Even at that age (I think it was 3rd grade) I expected myself to perform better. I don't think it would have mattered how well I performed....I would have wanted to do better.

[Doppelbock]

Dropping scores:

I got 144. I guess it says something that I was a bit disappointed at the time.


If I remember correctly, doesn't "Genius" level start at about 150?




I didn't say I was being reasonable about my disappointement. :P

I guess it's just another indicator of how hard we are on ourselves. Even at that age (I think it was 3rd grade) I expected myself to perform better. I don't think it would have mattered how well I performed....I would have wanted to do better.


Yep. You're definitely an INTJ. ;-)

Incidentally: Elsewhere on the web I came across a poll, on a high-IQ forum, to find out the MBTI types of the members of this particular high-IQ club. The #1 response (about 31%) was INTP; #2 was INTJ (about 22%).

DB

[aude]

Sucks that i could never really do the whole iq testing. Since i have eidetic imagery those test kinda rely on certain aspect that i cannot do. And also i have the understandability to utilize several forms of reasoning and thought process that i tend to get muddle when i do an iq test. The last time took the test i had a iq around 136 or so. I cant complain but it feels low to me.

[biased]

IQ tests are really more a test of my motivation to go through with it and actually try more than anything.

[wolf]

Thoughts/comments? Are we really that smart?
None, really.

Yes, on specific types of intellectual tasks that IQ tests tend to test for.

[bikerscars]

i've never had the desire to take the iq test

seems pointless to me

but i'd bet i'd score over 100 ;D

[Jeroen Jan-Willem]

If I remember correctly, doesn't "Genius" level start at about 150?
A normal distribution has 95% within two standard deviations of the mean, and the standard deviation on IQ tests is something like 16 IIRC.

[GOD]

I came across the following statistics:
* Only 2% of the general population are INTJ's
* 37% of INTJ's have IQ's that place them in the top 2% of the general population. *(Next most is INTP, with a 20% chance.)

Thoughts/comments? *Are we really that smart?

DB

Given that pattern recognition is quite widely used in IQ tests it pretty much plays into the hands of the INTJ's, as we are pattern recognition people.

My IQ ranges from around 133 to 145 depending on what IQ test I take.

A number of people have commented on my ability to parallel process both on a super analytical level and then just left field through in a super creative concept.

(To me, true IQ is envisioning new ideas and concepts, to peer beyond current knowledge into the intellectual abyss).

The last key to being an INTJ and having a good IQ is to have lots of motivation. If you've got that you can kick down doors that’s for sure.... The hard part though today is that there is so much structure in these huge organizations that they kill freedom of expression and ability.

PS: I have a sneeking suspicion that INTJ's are just evolved ISTJ's who's IQ has led to so much thinking that the S turns into an N. Thats why I call INTJ's alpha leaders/brains. (And the ISTJ's are smarter than the ISFJ's - Oh that would be sexist... lol... I'm just unwinding from the NT in terms of proximity of fit SO its OK as a scientific query!!)

[Epicurus]

I did a IQ test once on the internet, not very seriously answered and in a rush but I did manage to get 122.

[INTJoe]

That is pretty amazing, 57% of those in the top 2% are INT's. Where did you come across this stat?

It definitely makes sense, though. The I, the N, and the T should all lend themselves towards natural abstract intelligence I'm sure.

I'm not top 2%, but I'm close. I think I'm right around 130 which is about top 3%

I've got an INTP friend who is around 128 or so. Close to Mensa level, but neither of us has tried for it.

[eyebyte_AtWork]

Dropping scores:

I got 144. I guess it says something that I was a bit disappointed at the time.


If I remember correctly, doesn't "Genius" level start at about 150?

And a chart:
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



I thought it was 160.

[INTJoe]

Dropping scores:

I got 144. I guess it says something that I was a bit disappointed at the time.


If I remember correctly, doesn't "Genius" level start at about 150?

And a chart:
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



I thought it was 160.



"Genius" is an arbitrary term, so it really holds little water, but I always heard 150 is "genius". I mean, a 120 would appear to be genius through the eyes of a 92-IQed stripper.

[BadgerDad]

Yes.

[ps646566]

I think that the perception that a so-called INTJ personality type bestows an inherent advantage in terms of success in standard IQ tests is somewhat simplistic. Given that INTJ types are blessed with substantially higher IQ on average than the general population (so the statistics apparently tell us), the connection is arguably the other way round. In other words, those possessing the logical and intuitive thinking powers, and capacity for abstraction that are a prerequisite for high intelligence will tend to display the effects of these traits in their personalities. It is reported that more than one third of so-called gifted people (the 2% with IQ > 130) are in this personality classification. It would be interesting to know what the other two thirds are, and in particular how many ESFP's number among them

[ShaiGar]

I came across the following statistics:
* Only 2% of the general population are INTJ's
* 37% of INTJ's have IQ's that place them in the top 2% of the general population. (Next most is INTP, with a 20% chance.)

Thoughts/comments? Are we really that smart?

DB
top 5%... fuck i wouldnt mind being smart enough to qualify as a savant.

[Raven Queen]

INTPs are more intelligent than INTJs. So there.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

(Of course, I'm biased...)

[GOD]

INTPs are more intelligent than INTJs. So there.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

(Of course, I'm biased...)

Having any level of IQ doesn't matter a monkey's if you can't put it into action.

Thats the problem with the P. Non delivery, diverging off by starting more and more ideas without following through to conclusion on the initial one.

Pound for Pound the INT's should be equal, its just that the J's will actualise the concept.

[Chainsaw Dundee]

I scored up on an online IQ test as 120, sleep deprived. I tend to do crappily on certain questions, but Im good at the mathematics, patterns, and visualization based questions.

As a side note, I don't understand why trivia questions are even on IQ tests. I'd consider IQ as capacity to learn and reason, not what you have already learned.

[Nomad]

I've had to take a number of these things over the years, and I've had a 11 point spread. Not particularly consistent. I am also hopeless at mathematics. I don't have a lot of faith in IQ tests and I think Guido is correct.

-Nomad

[ps646566]

I suspect that the online tests are somewhat less reliable because they are not time bounded as 'examination conditions' tests invariably are. This may explain the wide spread of scores.

[INTJoe]

INTPs are more intelligent than INTJs. So there.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

(Of course, I'm biased...)

Having any level of IQ doesn't matter a monkey's if you can't put it into action.

Thats the problem with the P. Non delivery, diverging off by starting more and more ideas without following through to conclusion on the initial one.

Pound for Pound the INT's should be equal, its just that the J's will actualise the concept.


Yeah, and since we're all "I's", it doesn't matter because we don't stick out neck out and sell our plans and ideas, so we're all monkeys. The ESFX's would look at us and say "So you are way smarter, but people listen to me because they think I'm normal."

IQ is great, but we pay a price for it.

[wsb3499]

Hi All

Before we get too enthralled with IQ scores, we should think of why they were designed. Also, do your goals in life require the same personal strengths that produced those elevated numerical symbols that give you that ego buzz. Successful people, whatever that is to you, are the result of considerably more than the extreme right-sided placement on a Bell Curve. It isn't a bad start, but its only a start.

[anara]

we are obviously all very smart. my iq is 144, which seems to be very common around here. great!

i come from a family of geniuses (if i do say so myself). my grandparents are mathematicians, scientists and MENSA members! ah.. and what is this crap scientific american MIND is saying about each generation being smarter than the next? i highly doubt that.. mathematically it doesn't make much sense, but scientifically i am open to learning something about it.

[Fecal McAngry]

people with a higher intelligence magnitude than others have a few things in common. They have a higher mental bandwidth, allowing them to calculate or figure out more involving their specialties. This in turn allows them to handle bigger and more complicated puzzles that are able to fit into their bandwidth, to come up with better solutions in a faster amount of time. They also have a memory that's adept for this bandwidth. For example. My father's history memory, my errr robot? memory, and my ENFJ friend's people memory. I've also noticed that they tend to pull up their weaker 'components' as their magnitude gets higher.
You are right. The leading expert in this field is an INTJ, Arthur Jensen. His Magnum opus is on exactly this subject, and is titled: The g Factor: The Science of Mental Ability.

Review: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"...performances on all mental tests are positively correlated: If Al outscores Bert on the first assignment (say, vocabulary or reaction-times), bet on Al in the next test, no matter how dissimilar (e.g., math, paper-folding, or distinguishing musical pitches). This pervasive correlation is why a crude one-number IQ score is so implausibly useful, rivaling a "conscientiousness" rating as the best single predictor of a host of real world consequences. Lurking behind IQ is a "general factor" or "g" that plays a role (of varying magnitudes) in the accomplishment of any and every mental task, from taking a test to making a living.

Even more strikingly, these "differential" psychologists have finally pushed beyond the social sciences and into the medical laboratory. PET scans and EEG's, which can now roughly estimate IQ's (and thus g's), show that high-g brains work more quickly, economically, and consistently, like well-greased engines. In fact, this analogy could be almost literally true, if Edward M. Miller's hypothesis pans out that one determinant of general mental ability is the thickness of the fatty myelin coating neurons..."

[Nomad]

I suspect that the online tests are somewhat less reliable because they are not time bounded as 'examination conditions' tests invariably are. This may explain the wide spread of scores.


Nah, they were all given by Psychologists. I've had to take a lot of these tests because they could never figure out how so bright a kid could utterly fail at math, and also because of my job in the military. I had whole batteries of these types of tests when I was in the service. I admit some of the point spread might be due a a small quantity of blood in my alcohol stream.

-Nomad

[HarleyQuinn]

I just whizzed through the High Society IQ Test and scored a 115 on the TA3 section while being distracted by TV and Music.

I can't remember taking a formal IQ Test although I'm sure that I'd be above average bordering high intelligence again.

[OFL]

My iq test scores are between: 162 - 167

Like what others have been saying, IQ is just one tool that can be used to identify different intelligences. Not every genius is going to be great at math or writing and so forth. Genius can be expressed in many ways. In the US genius seems to be associated with the ENTP type of intelligence, where their work is more visible to the general public. The pubic generally does not know who have invented all those amentites that they love to consume, so intelligence is shown to the public through popular culture media avenues that do a horrendous job at showing what intellecual talent really is, and what it is capable of achieving. The public buys into these reprsentations because they are too lazy to look it up fo themselves. Now unless you are providng something the public wants they will not accept that you are intellectually talented. They want concrete evidence, but that does not mean that if someone does not have concrete evidence they are not a genius.The pubic just has a warped idea of intelligence.

Your iq score does not tell if you are a geius or not. It just says how well you know the test material on the given test. There are no tests that can analyze every type of intelligence, and doubt there will be one any time soon. There is not enough money in it for proper research to be done and that would be a gigantic study.

If you have an inkling that you might be gifted intellectually you should do the proper research into the subject to find out. Some people go through their entire life thinking they were not smart, when it turns out they were very intelligent and never was exposed to their talents. I actually solved many unanswered questions about myself through my research. Just my 2 cents.

OFL ;D

[Zceiv]

I took an IQ test last year in 9th grade.
I think it is wrong. It said I had an IQ of 91. But then on another test it said I had a Post College reading level. Also when I took a IQ test in kindergarden I scored 115 on the test.

[Intrawebs]

No shame here, I took the ecma one here (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) and got a 104 then a 106 the second time. The trivia questions though, WTF, they are like shot in the dark questions to determine your book smarts. Still, I thought I did much better. I would love to see the answer sheet and my answers side by side.

[mielikki]

Mine is between 155 and 160.
It's not that I have ever done anything with it.

IQ is like a measuring cup, I believe. I haven't filled mine up much. Someone else with a lower IQ may be "filling their cup" more. I am missing some of the skills necessary to utilize it. I process faster, is all.

[Intrawebs]

Hmm, thats a high score, what part do you think you did the WORST at?

[Splittet]

My IQ is 125-ish.

It is absolutely bullshit that 37 % of INTJs is in the 98th IQ percentile. You should rather take a look on this article: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

IQ has its uses, and is good at determining intellectual capability. Personally I prefer to use both IQ theory and multiple intelligences theory. I like both.

[ShaiGar]

ENTP Between 126 - 132. I've been tested 4 times, highest was 132, lowest was 126

[ps646566]

It is often said nowadays that so-called emotional intelligence is more important than IQ in terms of achieving success (presumably meaning, as usual, wealth and status).

I think that is probably true, but it's a pity. People with high 'EQ' are not likely to move the world forward -- they will however prioritise moving themselves forward.

For example in the UK we have recently got rid of a Prime Minister who was high on the EQ stakes, and harped on about it. He did a fantastic job of promoting himself, but little of benefit for the country. He is almost certainly ENTP.

I'm still trying to work out whether his successor is INTJ or ENTJ.

[Doppelbock]

No shame here, I took the ecma one here (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) and got a 104 then a 106 the second time. The trivia questions though, WTF, they are like shot in the dark questions to determine your book smarts. Still, I thought I did much better. I would love to see the answer sheet and my answers side by side.

Methinks that test is a crock o' shite. The trivia questions measure trivial knowledge, not inherent intelligence, and the opening pattern-matching questions are poorly conceived and could be interpreted in many different valid ways.

DB

[Intrawebs]

Methinks that test is a crock o' shite. The trivia questions measure trivial knowledge, not inherent intelligence, and the opening pattern-matching questions are poorly conceived and could be interpreted in many different valid ways.

DB


Seems that way, I really need to see the answers though. Theres no reason why they couldnt give the answers. Also, I wonder if they figure the amount of time spent on each answer as a factor in the scoring.

[BlackHawk]

I have no idea what my IQ is. I was tested once . . .
I thought IQ measured one's capacity for learning, so it shouldn't matter what sunjects the test covers. And retention of concepts, too . . .

Is this an outdated view? or just plain wrong?
Would someone knowledgeable in this area please explain?

[elsdfr]

*unzips* so what are we using to measure it with fellas? :rolleyes:

[Question Everything]

I was tested using the Weschler Intelligence Scale for Children-III, and scored a 144.

I'm undeniably INTJ.

[Intrawebs]

*unzips* so what are we using to measure it with fellas? :rolleyes:

I posted a link to the one I used up above this one....

[elsdfr]

Err, sorry but I was taking a swipe at the "I scored..." mentality and equating it to a Male penis measuring contest.

[Hypomanic]

If I can remember that far back I would say my IQ was in the range of about 130-135...It's not like the numbers matter anyways, it's how you use your "Genius", that makes you the intellectual that you are, I love writing and playing guitar...To me these 2 things are quite opposite from each other, and it was realized that this came natural for me in early adolescence.(I am self-taught in alot of meaningless things)I can't stand thinking of myself as a statistic, So!...Individuality is more important to me.

As for the % of INTJ's, ENTP's are also considered as 2% as well, I tend to sway between these two types.

So being INTJ and tendencies of ENTP with an IQ of 130-35, with the importance of trying to be myself, where does that put me "Statistically" as an individual?

I'm an ENTP and my IQ is 120.
My mom is an ENTJ and hers is 140.

[mielikki]

Hmm, thats a high score, what part do you think you did the WORST at?

My numeracy is only 75th percentile.
(which really bothers me, truth to tell)

[Question Everything]

My numeracy is only 75th percentile.
(which really bothers me, truth to tell)

If your IQ is between 155 and 160 (noting your earlier post) as reported by a standardized test like WISC or WAIS, that's in the 99.9 percentile. The tests are supposed to be normalized so that the average score is 100, with a standard deviation of 15.

I don't know what test you took, but I've never had an online test given me a score close to what I know my IQ to be (scored on WISC and administered by a psychologist, so I trust this more).

[mielikki]

If your IQ is between 155 and 160 (noting your earlier post) as reported by a standardized test like WISC or WAIS, that's in the 99.9 percentile. The tests are supposed to be normalized so that the average score is 100, with a standard deviation of 15.

I don't know what test you took, but I've never had an online test given me a score close to what I know my IQ to be (scored on WISC and administered by a psychologist, so I trust this more).

I haven't taken any online tests, so I wouldn't know. All IQ tests I have taken have been delivered by a psychologist. The last one was about 10 years ago, when I was in my mid-thirties. According to my mother (who was a teacher in our district, and therefore saw my school results), the results were the same as when I was a child. I had always wondered whether your measured IQ would change over time, and in my case it didn't. Interesting.

And 99th percentile or not, I am hardly a world-beater at much of anything.

[Intrawebs]

And 99th percentile or not, I am hardly a world-beater at much of anything.

Out of all of this, this is the interesting fact. "Anything" really? You must be paying the bills with something, hopefully a passion of yours that you have excelled in? Or if you aren't paying the bills yet, then maybe a passion that you have excelled at? Or maybe a jack of all trades who could make some dough with 99 consecutive wins on Jeopardy?

[Rick]

My scores on IQ tests have ranged from 132 to 155. Standardized intelligence tests only measure one aspect of what I consider intelligence...one aspect of potential. The question then becomes...what are we actually measuring? Ability or effectiveness? Perhaps another test that measures tenacity and dedication (belief) in tandem would be appropriate. Ability coupled with dedication produces results - not ability alone.

Some would say that it is about "self realization". In other words, an extremely strong understanding of who you are and tools you personally have to work with, then using them effectively to attain unusual achievement. So, most of the arguments vis-a-vis IQ tests, seem to be geared toward potential versus achievement.

[mielikki]

Out of all of this, this is the interesting fact. "Anything" really? You must be paying the bills with something, hopefully a passion of yours that you have excelled in? Or if you aren't paying the bills yet, then maybe a passion that you have excelled at? Or maybe a jack of all trades who could make some dough with 99 consecutive wins on Jeopardy?

I make reasonable money as a Supervisor in a pulp and paper mill.
However, I did not finish an undergraduate degree. Got bored; quit.

I'm not sure I really excel in anything. I do several things *well*, and I tend to learn new tasks very quickly. I have a reputation for being able to be dumped in a completely new field, and hit the ground running.

Other than that... not much. I really didn't do much with what was given me, you know?

[Intrawebs]

I really didn't do much with what was given me, you know?


Gotcha! What made me end up at this site was the fact that I was tired of my current path and need to take advantage of me being an INTJ. Time for me to change I say.

[danalaina]

In short, I do think that INTJs are smarter on average than most just because of the way our brains are wired. I'm not sure if there is a type out there that thinks more than we do. However, our type also gives us a big advantage in taking common IQ tests making them a little biased.

this may be a fine distinction (read "duh"), but i didn't notice it being said. i think INTJs are INTJs because of their intellect. meaning, i think the type follows the biology rather than the other way around. i just don't think we'll find many dumb ones.

[Draffut]

137 IQ
76 EQ

[Lucid]

IQ tests measure how good a person is at taking IQ tests. How much of a connection can be drawn between that ability and actual intelligence is debatable. Personally, I think it's worth taking into consideration, but not worth fixating on too much. Your intelligence doesn't measure what you'll do with your life or what kind of person you'll be or if you'll contribute anything worthwhile to society. It is the measure of a potential, not the measure of a person.

I liked the measuring cup analogy.

I was tested as a child by a psychologist. Possibly using the Weschler Intelligence Scale for Children-III (as mentioned by someone else), but I don't know for sure.

[INTJoe]

I'm an ENTP and my IQ is 120.
My mom is an ENTJ and hers is 140.


Whoa...didn't you score 1400+ on the SAT? I'm sure your IQ is above 120.

Mine is ~130 and I only got 1160. Surely there isn't a direct relationship between the SAT test and your IQ but I honestly don't think it's possible for a 120 to score in the 1400's on teh SAT...no amount of studying would allow that. IMO.

THose people stating their IQ above 150...at such a level it begins to get difficult to measure because there aren't a whole lot of people to compare to, so anything higher than 150 should be taken with a grain of salt. One would need a much further in-depth test to differentiate betwen a 150 and 155. Suffice it to say, you are "genius", though.

I think Marilyn vos Savant's IQ is listed as 228, but even she said that hers could be as "low" as 180 or so. It's too difficult to quantify such level of genius.

[SMKN LS1]

So, for those who don't want to read the previous four pages, I'll help summarize it as follows:

Everyone who posted in this thread, belongs to this website, or is reading these messages - IS EXTREMELY SMART AND LIKELY HAS A SERIOUSLY HIGH IQ!!! :thumbsup: Awesome thread.



I wish the world was filled with people like us. Unfortunately, if the world didn't have people doing dumb things, what would everyone talk about?

[INTJoe]

Yeah, I kind of laugh at everyone posting their IQ score. I mean I posted mine, too. But society takes all types.

It takes the seriously introverted, high IQ types and the extroverted sensor-feeler types too. IQ is not the end-all, be-all.

There are all kinds of things which society values:

Intelligence
Athleticism
Social normalcy
etc.

It takes all types. A society full of a billion theoretical ingenius types would not prosper, nor would that of a bunch of ESFP-ish folk. I don't mind the braggarts in this thread. There are many smarter than myself, but what I do like about this site is that many of us come here looking for further clarification of why we act/are the way we are. I'm here to learn. And that is independent of my natural-born IQ score.

[Lucid]

It takes all types. A society full of a billion theoretical ingenius types would not prosper, nor would that of a bunch of ESFP-ish folk. I don't mind the braggarts in this thread. There are many smarter than myself, but what I do like about this site is that many of us come here looking for further clarification of why we act/are the way we are. I'm here to learn. And that is independent of my natural-born IQ score.

Yes I agree. If the world was limited only to extremely intelligent NT types we'd be missing out on a lot. :)

[Hypomanic]

Whoa...didn't you score 1400+ on the SAT? I'm sure your IQ is above 120.

Mine is ~130 and I only got 1160. Surely there isn't a direct relationship between the SAT test and your IQ but I honestly don't think it's possible for a 120 to score in the 1400's on teh SAT...no amount of studying would allow that. IMO.

THose people stating their IQ above 150...at such a level it begins to get difficult to measure because there aren't a whole lot of people to compare to, so anything higher than 150 should be taken with a grain of salt. One would need a much further in-depth test to differentiate betwen a 150 and 155. Suffice it to say, you are "genius", though.

I think Marilyn vos Savant's IQ is listed as 228, but even she said that hers could be as "low" as 180 or so. It's too difficult to quantify such level of genius.

Yeah I did (with no studying), the thing is I was stupid enough to do drugs. I consider myself above average, but I've no clue how much above. I seem to be inconsistent (at least in my mind). I remember testing for gate and missing it by one point.

I think that the SAT and high IQ could explain your score. Maybe you're so smart or creative that you over thought the answers? I seem to do this a lot on 'intuitive' college tests. :rolleyes:

[Lucid]

Yeah I did (with no studying), the thing is I was stupid enough to do drugs. I consider myself above average, but I've no clue how much above. I seem to be inconsistent (at least in my mind). I remember testing for gate and missing it by one point.

I think that the SAT and high IQ could explain your score. Maybe you're so smart or creative that you over thought the answers? I seem to do this a lot on 'intuitive' college tests. :rolleyes:

I don't think intelligence and good grades are necessarily connected.

[mielikki]

I don't think intelligence and good grades are necessarily connected.

That's for sure.
You need to have more than a high IQ to succeed. It is only one piece of the puzzle. I have worked in the school system, and with many a "gifted" child that had plenty of other issues that got in the way of high marks. It's the well-rounded ones with the high IQ's that are the world beaters.

[Hypomanic]

Yeah. It doesn't matter what your IQ is when you have no street smarts and walk into the projects.

[vkut79]

I've never actually taken the time to take an IQ test. Is there really a point? All it does is give you a number that will tempt you to compare to other people, without guranteeing anything substantial.

Also I don't even know if I could focus/try hard on a test that doesn't matter for anything.

[Question Everything]

Several people mentioned that it's hard to judge what IQ tests are actually measuring.

I thought this article might be interesting:
Neural transmission and general mental ability

Margaret McRorie and Colin Cooper
School of Psychology, Queen's University of Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland BT7 1NN, UK; accepted 6 February 2003. ; Available online 22 March 2003.

Abstract:

Galton (1883, Inquiries into Human Faculty. London: Dent) hypothesized that higher intelligence (IQ) is a consequence of greater mental speed, which is reflected by shorter reaction times (RT). Contemporary interest in such proposals has relied on very few experimental paradigms, and these have been criticized on methodological grounds. In aiming to address these problems, this study examines correlations between mental ability and speed of nerve conduction in the patellar reflex arc. Preliminary results of a pilot study (gathered to test the equipment) are reported.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

In the study they claim that there is a correlation (not very strong, but statistically significant) between IQ and reflex time, which measures nerve conduction velocity. Of course, correlation does not imply causation, and there are significant criticisms concerning the role of attention in reaction time. But it's an interesting new path that IQ research is taking. Whether or not such hypotheses have any merit remains to be seen.

[lessa]

Yeah, I feel like I've gotten dumber since the last time I took an IQ test. Is it possible to get more dumb? lol
I too feel like I've gotten dumber over time. Its almost like I don't have as much empty storage space as I used to have. When I was younger I was used to having my mom and my friends always telling me how smart I was. I've never felt as smart as my dad who tested at 160. He's definately INTJish although not tested. As I've gotten older (40s) I've found that I've surrounded myself with friends that are intelligent so perhaps that is part of it. And in the spirit of sharing - 138 and passed the Mensa test but didn't join, just seemed wrong. Although that last sentence sounds just wrong.

[Blacklustre King]

My most recent IQ test rated me at 186. I could even say myself these results might be questionable, but I did my best and this was my result.

Smarter then your av-er-age INTJ!

[errrzarrr]

I want to take a IQ EQ Test online. But anyway, IQ is not that important, effort and dedication and will are far more important than that. I have proved by myself watching friends.

edit: oh! I forgot to say there are many kinds of intelligence, so that IQ test only measures one kind, I guess.





errrzarrr added to this post, 10 minutes and 37 seconds later...

If I remember correctly, doesn't "Genius" level start at about 150?

Sorry, I don't know a lot about IQ's, but that's a reliable graphic? I mean, real normal distributions charts normally are "sesgadas" (slanted?), that means they are not perfectly centered on a round value (like 100) and they are moved to one side or another (like falling). Normally real graphs arent that "perfect and beautiful". That graphic looks like a Theorical one, not one made with values of real studies in real life. :)

[INTJoe]

The chart is basically correct. The numbers themselves are arbitrary, with 100 set as "average", or maybe "median", in reality.

As I understand it, "100" will always be average. Even if society gets a few points smarter (or dumber) over a 500-year period, 100 would still be average, not 103.

At the far ends (say...4 standard deviations from the norm...IQ's of 160+ or 40-), there will always be anomolies which don't really fit into the curve correctly.

That is why it is hard to accurately say what a realllllly high IQ actually is. I mean, there could be 12 people alive with an IQ of 180+, but maybe 0 with IQ of 20 or less. There is "supposed" to be an equal amount equal distances from the norm (100), but again...anomolies.

However, in the main chunk (IQ's of 85-115), I believe fall 69% of society, and so the curve there should be pretty accurate, as there are, what, about 4 billion people who fall in that range. Anomolies won't stick out much.

[Lucid]

The chart is basically correct. The numbers themselves are arbitrary, with 100 set as "average", or maybe "median", in reality.

As I understand it, "100" will always be average. Even if society gets a few points smarter (or dumber) over a 500-year period, 100 would still be average, not 103.

At the far ends (say...4 standard deviations from the norm...IQ's of 160+ or 40-), there will always be anomolies which don't really fit into the curve correctly.

That is why it is hard to accurately say what a realllllly high IQ actually is. I mean, there could be 12 people alive with an IQ of 180+, but maybe 0 with IQ of 20 or less. There is "supposed" to be an equal amount equal distances from the norm (100), but again...anomolies.

However, in the main chunk (IQ's of 85-115), I believe fall 69% of society, and so the curve there should be pretty accurate, as there are, what, about 4 billion people who fall in that range. Anomolies won't stick out much.

So people with IQs over 160 are anomalies, or are those just arbitrary numbers you're using? I know very little about what's normal for IQs.

[INTJoe]

So people with IQs over 160 are anomalies, or are those just arbitrary numbers you're using? I know very little about what's normal for IQs.

I wouldn't call them anomolies, but my point is that very high IQ's (and very low ones) are so rare, that the distribution won't exactly follow the "perfect" curve shown in the chart above. But 4 billion people fall between 85-115, so that curve probably looks almost completely exact. Anything too far to the right or left would be hard to "fit" into a nice, neat curve.

[Lucid]

I wouldn't call them anomolies, but my point is that very high IQ's (and very low ones) are so rare, that the distribution won't exactly follow the "perfect" curve shown in the chart above. But 4 billion people fall between 85-115, so that curve probably looks almost completely exact. Anything too far to the right or left would be hard to "fit" into a nice, neat curve.

I know several people with IQs of 160 or higher. Is it really that rare?

[jdc127]

136 (free online test taken while feeling tired and mentally slow. I just had a beer and watched a movie.)





jdc127 added to this post, 0 minutes and 52 seconds later...

Oh and 31 on the ACT back in high school. What about you folks???

[Capt57]

Anyone interested in race and IQ distribution or is that too controversial? If true, what are the ramifications in terms of fairness and the distribution of wealth? How much money should we spend on social programs if they have no overall impact on increasing IQ? Also, could genius be associated with rare genetic diseases or mental illness?

This subject would be hard to discuss intelligently without knowing more about the work of Arthur R. Jensen.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Provoker]

Pound for pound I think I was far more clever (in a different way) when I was young. I was extremely intuitive and had great organizational and contingency planning skills. I think as we get older this intuitive intelligence is replaced with sensory intelligence, and educational structure tends to facillitate this. Moreover, I encourage INTJs to be careful that the educational system doesn't ruin you. Don't let the sensors crush your intuitions which are often the very building blocks of our system, and therefore, must be preserved.

In grade school, I was accepted into the gifted program (based on the test) but was held back by my teacher due to behavioral issues (always in trouble). He didn't want me to make havoc in the gifted class. My mother protested at this. As it stands, I think you need about a 130+ to gain acceptance in gifted in Ontario, and I know I was marginally gifted (that's why bad behavior was the decisive factor). So I figure I was around 130 or 131.

I think the IQ tests that are administered when one is young are a more accurate measure of IQ as it weighs your mental age relative to your physical age. As far as my mental age, when I was around 13, I would discuss investment strategy and the stock market with my dad. My dad always tells friends a story about when I asked my History teacher in grade 9 "what about all the people who were short the market when it crashed in 1929? Did they profit?", good for a laugh. Now I am 22 and I find myself very compatible with the elderly and war vets, etc. I figure, by the time I am 30 I will physically be young lawyer with a look of youth ultimately betraying my 90 year old mind. Hopefully, there will be some interesting people around to give back.

[INTJoe]

I know several people with IQs of 160 or higher. Is it really that rare?

The Standard Deviation is 15. So 160 would be 4 standard deviations from the norm. So yeah, really rare.

~84.1% of people have an IQ of 115 or lower.
~97.7% of people have an IQ of 130 or lower.
~99.8% of people have an IQ of 145 or lower.
~99.99999??? (I don't recall this number) of people have an IQ of 160 or lower.

The IQ scores are set to the Gaussian curve seen here:
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

It looks like anything above 160 is almost impossible to assess with any kind of certainty. Also, unless you are a member of a very exclusive high IQ club, I would seriously doubt you have several friends with IQ's surpassing 160. You might, but I would seriously suspect they either don't know their actual score, or they are straight-up embellishing it.

[Lucid]

The Standard Deviation is 15. So 160 would be 4 standard deviations from the norm. So yeah, really rare.

~84.1% of people have an IQ of 115 or lower.
~97.7% of people have an IQ of 130 or lower.
~99.8% of people have an IQ of 145 or lower.
~99.99999??? (I don't recall this number) of people have an IQ of 160 or lower.

The IQ scores are set to the Gaussian curve seen here:
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

It looks like anything above 160 is almost impossible to assess with any kind of certainty. Also, unless you are a member of a very exclusive high IQ club, I would seriously doubt you have several friends with IQ's surpassing 160. You might, but I would seriously suspect they either don't know their actual score, or they are straight-up embellishing it.

Well, when I was tested it said I was 165-170. They weren't sure. My brother is 170+ and my mom is the same as me. Obviously you'd find a bunch of people with extremely high IQs in the same family. But I do know probably 2 or 3 people outside my family who have tested at 160 or higher. Most of my friends don't know their IQs. I guess most of them to be between 150 and 160. And maybe 4 or 5 to be 160+ Not exactly very scientific, but you can get kind of a general idea of someone's intelligence.
Also, the people in my family and the friends I have who tested at above 160 for sure aren't that different from the rest of the people I know. I think there's something to be said for smart people tending to hang out with other smart people, but really, I think I know too many smart people for it to be that rare.

(I have a feeling that I'm going to regret mentioning my IQ. I usually do.)

[ssfanatic]

IQ is really flawed, its more to give you a general perspecitve. The equation is mental age (your score on the test) / actual age X 100. So naturally your IQ will drop the older you get.
But yes, i think we are really that smart :)
139 DIQ





ssfanatic added to this post, 3 minutes and 37 seconds later...

Yeah, I feel like I've gotten dumber since the last time I took an IQ test. Is it possible to get more dumb? lol
Yes bec i dont think "dumber"s a word :D
Just messing around.

[Splittet]

For high IQ scores, you have to specify if you are talking about ratio IQ or deviation IQ. All the highest IQs posted here are ratio IQs. The ratio IQ of Lucid at 165-170 means a deviation IQ of 150-155. A ratio IQ of 185 means a deviation IQ of about 165. A ratio IQ of 200, means a deviation IQ of about 175. You get a feeling for it by looking at To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Lucid]

For high IQ scores, you have to specify if you are talking about ratio IQ or deviation IQ. All the highest IQs posted here are ratio IQs. The ratio IQ of Lucid at 165-170 means a deviation IQ of 150-155. A ratio IQ of 185 means a deviation IQ of about 165. A ratio IQ of 200, means a deviation IQ of about 175. You get a feeling for it by looking at To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I don't know if my IQ is in ratio or deviation terms. I took the IQ test in order to be accepted into a certain private school. In order to be accepted it had to be over 120. It was administered by a psychologist and the results had to be documented and sent to the school. Do psychologists deal in ratio or deviation IQs?

[INTJoe]

Well, when I was tested it said I was 165-170. They weren't sure. My brother is 170+ and my mom is the same as me. Obviously you'd find a bunch of people with extremely high IQs in the same family. But I do know probably 2 or 3 people outside my family who have tested at 160 or higher. Most of my friends don't know their IQs. I guess most of them to be between 150 and 160. And maybe 4 or 5 to be 160+ Not exactly very scientific, but you can get kind of a general idea of someone's intelligence.
Also, the people in my family and the friends I have who tested at above 160 for sure aren't that different from the rest of the people I know. I think there's something to be said for smart people tending to hang out with other smart people, but really, I think I know too many smart people for it to be that rare.


I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just saying that, looking at the Gaussian distribution curve, it would be almost impossible for everything I've quoted here to be accurate.

My IQ is 'only' around 130, and I find it rare that I know, in real life, on a friendly level, anyone smarter than myself. (Internet not included, obv.). THere are several reasons for this.

I would find it even more rare that supersmart folks with IQ's in the 160+ range would:

A) Find many other people that smart
B) Identify them as that smart
C) Retain friendship with them

Did you meet these people in college or something? I could understand being related, but it's amazing that you have a cluster of friends above 160, and presumably, are not a member of Sigma-4 (or whatever the super genius IQ clubs are called).

[Lucid]

I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just saying that, looking at the Gaussian distribution curve, it would be almost impossible for everything I've quoted here to be accurate.

My IQ is 'only' around 130, and I find it rare that I know, in real life, on a friendly level, anyone smarter than myself. (Internet not included, obv.). THere are several reasons for this.

I would find it even more rare that supersmart folks with IQ's in the 160+ range would:

A) Find many other people that smart
B) Identify them as that smart
C) Retain friendship with them

Did you meet these people in college or something? I could understand being related, but it's amazing that you have a cluster of friends above 160, and presumably, are not a member of Sigma-4 (or whatever the super genius IQ clubs are called).

I'm not saying that you're wrong in saying that IQs of that level are rare. I honestly have no idea, and was surprised to hear it.

It's rare for me to find people I think are smarter than myself as well. There are a few people that I think might be, but it's genuinely hard to tell who's smarter. If they are, it's not by much in terms of IQ scores. Of the two of them, one is much better at math and science than I am, and the other is much wittier.

I met most of my friends in high school. I went to an alternative school after attending regular public school. I found that most of the people I met in public school were not as intelligent as I, but the people I met at the alternative school were much smarter than those I met at public school. Other friends I've made since high school I know mostly through the friends I made in high school.

Also, I tend to socialize in one or two specific subcultures, so most of the people I meet, even through friends, aren't normal, mainstream people. Whether people of certain IQ levels tend to be more attracted to certain subcultures is something I don't know. I do have some friends that I think have lower IQs than the rest of my group of friends, but not many.

I think that it would be essential for someone with an extremely high IQ to find others of similar intelligence and stick with them, since I think interacting with people of average IQ would be difficult and unpleasant. Perhaps clusters of extremely intelligent people aren't unusual. Most of the smart people I know have had their set of friends for 10 years or longer (we're all in out mid to late 20s) and don't tend to do much socializing outside our group.

[Zilal]

I had a funny experience a few weeks ago... I was asked by a psychiatrist, "What are you, 180?" And I said, dumbly, "What?" He said, "IQ." I said, "Goodness, no, I always assumed I was 130 or so." Crazy. I eventually talked him down to 140, which is about what I got the one time I took an online test, and which, like everyone else here, I don't put much stock in.

I do think people tend to assume I'm smarter than I am because my greatest proficiency is verbal... which, of course, is what people encounter. I use big words without thinking about it and people assume I'm good at math too, for some reason. Which, okay, I guess I am, but nowhere near as good.

[ssfanatic]

For high IQ scores, you have to specify if you are talking about ratio IQ or deviation IQ. All the highest IQs posted here are ratio IQs. The ratio IQ of Lucid at 165-170 means a deviation IQ of 150-155. A ratio IQ of 185 means a deviation IQ of about 165. A ratio IQ of 200, means a deviation IQ of about 175. You get a feeling for it by looking at To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Not necessarily, Deviation IQ is based off the bell curve, or the intelligence of the society. So the difference can vary between ratio and deviation.





ssfanatic added to this post, 3 minutes and 34 seconds later...

I had a funny experience a few weeks ago... I was asked by a psychiatrist, "What are you, 180?" And I said, dumbly, "What?" He said, "IQ." I said, "Goodness, no, I always assumed I was 130 or so." Crazy. I eventually talked him down to 140, which is about what I got the one time I took an online test, and which, like everyone else here, I don't put much stock in.

I do think people tend to assume I'm smarter than I am because my greatest proficiency is verbal... which, of course, is what people encounter. I use big words without thinking about it and people assume I'm good at math too, for some reason. Which, okay, I guess I am, but nowhere near as good.
Ha, i have a high non-verbal iq, so i get overlooked, no that i mind it. I dont like the spotlight. But my average is under genius (140) so its really not that impressive. I guess i sacrificed intellect for athleticism, but i wouldnt change it.

[Antares]

I don't trust the IQ tests. I get scores that aren't even close to each other. My lowest score was, I believe, 113. My highest is 147. My average is around 129 - 138. How is this possible? I have a high verbal and logic IQ, an average mathematics and low spatial. I usually can't find people smarter than me also, but since coming here, and seeing a lot of people on this forum has IQ 130+, I'm truly humbled.

In my school, there are a few that I can truly appreciate, and one of them is my teacher (not my teacher, really. I met him in study hall and I'm astounded by his insight. He's shown more than a bunch of my other teachers put together), another is a boy who is quite nerdy but can lead highly intellectual conversations (We talked for an hour non-stop, but I had to get off the bus). There's this girl who is head-to-head with me when it comes to musical talents and we are the stars of our band class, less knowledgeable and doesn't like to think that much, but achieves academic scores that are slightly superior to mine. We are competitors, I guess, but we've always put on a friendly and supportive facade (when deep down we're telling ourselves: She must not beat me at this.). I guess some of the friendliness turned real and we have this half-friendship going on. We always have something to astound each other with and we've grown to admire each other.

[Splittet]

I don't know if my IQ is in ratio or deviation terms. I took the IQ test in order to be accepted into a certain private school. In order to be accepted it had to be over 120. It was administered by a psychologist and the results had to be documented and sent to the school. Do psychologists deal in ratio or deviation IQs?

Ratio IQs are more common.

[IgnoranceIsKind]

Recently I've been very concerned about just how intellectually capable I am. Of course being an INTJ, the given mastery of analysis and rationality often prevails in studying and such. But just how capable are you in getting those grades? Does your IQ have a role in the consequences that succeeds those examinations? I cannot say for sure.

I took two IQ tests today and found varying results. The first test I took recognised my IQ to be at 143, which in accordance to the statistical facts it showed, I belonged to the top 2.1% of the general population, flatteringly termed as 'superiorly intelligent'. Yet another test I took says I only had 125. A very demeaning 'above average'.

What is your take on this? And more importantly, how many of you have had low IQ results on those (suspiciously inaccurate) and still do well in school?

[AgentofGaming]

School for me and to some extent my brother was a pushover. We never studied and we would usually get higher than all those who did.
University is a different story for me though.

Despite how inaccurate they are, I have to say I have yet to find an IQ test that gave me lower than 110. I have seen some people get lower than 100 though but they weren't INTJ.

[INTJoe]

Your screen name is fitting, seeing as you posted about IQ when there are already like 19 threads about IQ and how all INTJ's are 190+.

But to answer your question, IQ isn't directly related to grades, and vice versa.

However, having a high IQ should make it easier.

My grades were always pretty sub-par, (C's and D's in Junior high) until I was in 10th grade and began taking studying/my grades seriously. My GPA was only 2.63 after freshman year, but by Junior year I received straight A's for the first time in my life. Ended high school with a 3.35 GPA, a far cry from 2.63 after 1 of the 4 years.

I don't think I ever saw school as a challenge until deep in high school. That is why my grades were always lagging behind my natural intelligence...boredom.

[terencec]

Recently I've been very concerned about just how intellectually capable I am. Of course being an INTJ, the given mastery of analysis and rationality often prevails in studying and such. But just how capable are you in getting those grades? Does your IQ have a role in the consequences that succeeds those examinations? I cannot say for sure.

I took two IQ tests today and found varying results. The first test I took recognised my IQ to be at 143, which in accordance to the statistical facts it showed, I belonged to the top 2.1% of the general population, flatteringly termed as 'superiorly intelligent'. Yet another test I took says I only had 125. A very demeaning 'above average'.

What is your take on this? And more importantly, how many of you have had low IQ results on those (suspiciously inaccurate) and still do well in school?

I really don't think IQ has good correlation with GPA or vice verse. You will do well if you work hard. I don't see any problem. If you got IQ 70, I would be a bit worried about it.

GPA does not mean much except your first/second job. Your experience, leadership, social skills, presentation skills etc will help you much more in the industrial than your GPA, IQ or intelligence.

[Paul V]

My most recent IQ test rated me at 186. I could even say myself these results might be questionable, but I did my best and this was my result.

Smarter then your av-er-age INTJ!

"than"

[ssfanatic]

"than"
HAHA, alright thats my laughter for the week. ;D

[dobbin]

Short term lurker, first time poster. I have completed IQ tests in the past, but I really don't buy into IQ being an accurate measure of 'intelligence'. To me it just means you're better at answering those types of questions.

I haven't had much exposure to multiple intelligence or other more encompassing tests, but to me they seem to currently have a better measure of 'intelligence' than IQ tests

[Paul V]

HAHA, alright thats my laughter for the week. ;D

Indeed, the very irony of my post paralyzed me for a few seconds when I typed it. :cheesy:

[TheUngoverned]

All I have to say about this is... wow! Here I used to think I was intelligent with a measily IQ of 133 and here I am surrounded by super-geniuses. It certainly puts everything in perspective.

What makes this worse is I was tested last when I was about six years old so that number really holds no relevance at all for me.

[DeadSpace]

159, and intj's have an unfair advantage regarding IQ tests...rational intuitives ;) deadly combination

[lancelot]

IQ, I have scored in the 99 percentile a few times. I like analogies, and words that connect ideas; for example Pizza plus machine gun equals "The god father" (pictionary)
I am the most dangerous when I am humbel, objective and unemotional.
The things that separates an intj from other types is the ability to be ojective, to construct a logical argument, to have natural insight, to think things through etc.
It's strange having such strong emotions and being able to supress them.
Yet strong emotions drive us towards excellence and perfection.

[Provoker]

I think society has became smarter in a narrower way. With a surge in technology advancements - especially in information technology - over the last few decades a different type of intelligence has also emerged. One I would define as instrumental, operational, and procedural. People can now store information on hard drives, cell phones, computers, palm pilots, etc, and as a result they are freeing their mind from storing information and I don't think this is necessarily a good thing. Because of this luxury people aren't storing as much information in the minds as before. Their mind only needs to know how to access the information they've saved on a storage device. As a result, in terms of substance people are becoming less intelligent. The mind is not infinite. Allocating all of one's resources in one area takes from another area. This is just basic economics: everything has a cost. If one is constantly thinking, they won't be feeling. You can't have the cake and eat it too.

My thesis is that while recent technology advances have coincided with an increase in procedural intelligence it has been at the cost of substantive intelligence. Because people now don't have to put in the mental labour to genuinely learn stuff they are left with superficial accounts of things or worse, no account at all except what so and so said who's ideas they've compiled in a computer. Personally, as an INTJ mastermind I try to rely as little as possible on external devices for storing information because I think it creates dependency. Right now, my mind compartmentalizes information naturally, but it's like a muscle I have to continue flex to keep in shape. First, I encourage other INTJs to organize things in your mind as much as possible. One practical reason is if there's a war and your country's infrastructure gets bombed that's one of the few things you'll have to store information. But if your not using this actively it's going to decay. Second, procedural intelligence is to calculator as substantive intelligence is to book. This is the problem, everyone making quick phone calls with nothing to say, people have sold their substance for procedure.

What is the deeper thing going on here? Capitalism. This emphasis on procedural intelligence embedded in consummer culture ultimately preserves the capitalist system. The reason is that procedural intelligence increases productivity, efficiency, and effectiveness. But there is infinitely more things to be produced. It allows you to produce more ABCs faster but there are still infinitely more to be produced. In short, it doesn't equip people with the skills to question the system - that would take substance. They don't want you to question the system because that decreases productivity. Just put your head down, stick to your procedures, and work.

Don't become a tool; a cog-wheel; a mere instrument because that's not intelligence, it's goat-herd behavior.

[Antares]

Do you guys think High IQ = Good grades? I certainly don't think so. My classmate who gets 3.91 GPA has an IQ of 128, which is inferior to mine. Someone who gets 3.70 + has an IQ of 103. My other friend, who has an IQ of around 115 - 120, gets 4.0 ever since middle school began and all through high school, since her school converted all her scores to GPA format since sixth grade. She is on the National Honor Society and has the third highest grades in her grade. One of my other friends has an IQ in the genius range, 140 + and he doesn't even get Honor Roll. Incidentally, I only get 3.57, barely scraping Honor Roll.

[Caramel]

Do you guys think High IQ = Good grades?

No, high grades come from 'getting' the material and then being able to reproduce it on a piece of paper in a certain amount of time. A 'high' IQ helps, but studying or practising (in case of math) helps more.

But with the school system as it is, most of us won't learn how to work/study hard.

[lancelot]

As an undergraduate in linguistics, I was a B- stududent over all . yet we did graduate level work our first semester. Some of my class mates could not handle the courses even with a study group and copies of the the exames. I could grasp some of the concepts yet only earned Cs and Bs. Those that earned an A were gifted, had copies of the exame, and had graduate degrees in another field.
The teacher liked to put the class a mile over our heads.

[Epicurus]

Not necessarily, Deviation IQ is based off the bell curve, or the intelligence of the society. So the difference can vary between ratio and deviation.
Then if I get it right I have a devation IQ slightly above 120, accordning to the tests I've been doing on the internet and what I have posted here earlier.

[JTG]

An ENFJ friend of mine is a little retarded when it comes to reasoning at times. And has neither my skills, nor my fathers. But there isn't anyone else I would go to for advice on social issues, as she too is one of the smartest people I know. I’m pretty sure that she thinks I think she’s dumb, which entertains me :DI have friends like that too, and i think they all either look up to me or bear hostility because of the difference in ease of grasping ideas. The funny part is, while they may feel dumb around me when technical topics come up, i feel dumb next to them in social situations. I can be quite inarticulate at the worst times, and i've never been the most empathetic person either.

As for the question of IQ, i think i score in the area of 145. My intelligence has never really come into question, even when i was very young. That is, assuming we mean the traditional definition of "intelligence" haha.

[Anon722]

Well mine has balanced between 127 and 155 depending on the test I took, that is quite a deviation.

I agree with montag in the other thing too, multiple intelligences gives a far better understanding of cognitive habilities.

And will add that the Theory of Emotional Intelligence by Daniel Goleman gived my a better understanding of intelligence too.

I have an ISFP friend that probably no one could think smart, and scored accordingly in IQ tests, but she absolutely kicks ass working with sensation and acting on other peoples senses. I know I couldn't ever possibly do it in such a way, and her attitude is genuinely generous. I cannot contain my gladness for her.

[pavman]

I really don't think IQ has good correlation with GPA or vice verse. You will do well if you work hard. I don't see any problem. If you got IQ 70, I would be a bit worried about it.

GPA does not mean much except your first/second job. Your experience, leadership, social skills, presentation skills etc will help you much more in the industrial than your GPA, IQ or intelligence.

Yeah, until they ask you your GPA on a job interview 10 years after having graduated from a major that was irrelevant to the position! This happened to me... I was kind of shocked. I mean, I'm used to being asked about my major when in school, but my GPA... and it was an internal job at my company too! Someone had to have broken out the crack pipe in that conference room...

[MixISTJandINTJ]

A large number of us could probably get pretty high IQ scores but that comes with pluses and minuses that arise with being I*TJs.

[coffeeloverfreak]

Agree with most of you that the usefulness of IQ is overrated. It doesn't prove much, really, except an aptitude for a certain kind of test-taking.

I'm around a 124, if that means anything. I doubt it means much, really.

[aok]

Did the topic get started as a result of information from the following link?

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Regardless of whether it did or not, I think the link explains it pretty well. I'm assuming they're implying fluid intelligence as opposed to crystallized which I think is somewhat irrelevant possibly because of my strong N tendency and lack of interest for memorization of arbitrary or personally irrelevant material.

[JTG]

This confused me though:

It's frightening to be surrounded by all those stupid people -- and most of them are liberals.

IMO being liberal is the most logical and intelligent way to be. Most conservatives i know are traditionalists, hardcore bible thumping christians, etc

[aok]

IMO being liberal is the most logical and intelligent way to be. Most conservatives i know are traditionalists, hardcore bible thumping christians, etc
I had a similar response. I wasn't intenting to incorporate the political aspects inherent in the link. But, I suppose its pretty inevitable.

[JTG]

Well yeah, i'm just saying that line confused me. Otherwise the stats make sense really. It's also not necessarily true that other types don't have the potential for high intelligence. It's just that the way their brains are wired, they are more suited (or find it to be more enjoyable) to getting to know people, making friends, etc... a lot of stuff that isn't reflected in IQ tests.

[jmoor4]

The only IQ test I took put me at 135 which was a bit of a surprise to me because I've never thought of myself as being very intelligent. I just feel like I've worked at learning more than most and it has paid off.

As for the comment about being conservative or liberal. I'm very conservative but that's probably because I'm a bible thumper. Truth is, I'm not sure how a thinking person can honestly look around and not at least believe in a God.

[Valentyne]

I took an IQ test and I got 136...and then I took an EQ test...and I got a 65. I am not emotional incompetent, I am emotional retarded. That is spectacular.

[blueeyedsusan]

Never had a formal IQ test here, tested online and was 149. I was tested as a scientific genius in school, surprised the hell out of the teachers, after all they didn't even believe a 4'th grader could read an adult book in two hours. Cannot understand "normal" math. I do my own math and it works. I can solve a scientific equation and not know exactly how I did it.
It used to be lonely being me, but now I know what I am and why and I don't care.

[wise]

This confused me though:



IMO being liberal is the most logical and intelligent way to be. Most conservatives i know are traditionalists, hardcore bible thumping christians, etc

Political persuasion has little to do with IQ. There are many highly intelligent people from liberal, conservative, and other political persuasions.

Most conservatives I know aren't hardcore bible thumping Christians, however most liberals I know aren't what I'd describe as bright either.

I'm conservative and my IQ is about 131. Not a genius, but not illogical or unintelligent either. ;)

[James Revell]

Political persuasion has little to do with IQ. There are many highly intelligent people from liberal, conservative, and other political persuasions.

Most conservatives I know aren't hardcore bible thumping Christians, however most liberals I know aren't what I'd describe as bright either.

I'm conservative and my IQ is about 131. Not a genius, but not illogical or unintelligent either. ;)

Agreed. Just as high IQ doesn't necessarily indicate ability to apply that variety of intelligence well, there's unlikely direct correlation between IQ and many personal decisions. At least in the case of political persuasion, it's more likely that our reaction to key environmental inputs (ie: life experience) shapes this without a lot of conscious thought. Higher IQ may just increase our ability to rationalize the choice later.

I'm in the DC area, and there's no shortage of high IQ types on boths ends of the political spectrum here. I've also seen hardcore Christians (and other religions) on both extremes as well, sort of fundamentalists vs peace corp missionaries.

Regarding the original message and JTG's respone, I believe generalizing about either set reveals more about bias of the author than useful info. As far as my own bias, while I'm ideologically more libertarian I tend act moderately conservative and unofficial IQ tests generally have put me around 138-142.

[JTG]

Maybe it's just that living in the south all my life, i associate conservatism with all those SJ types running around, telling everybody how they should act, what they should think, and that they know best in all matters... haha

[aok]

Maybe we should look at IQ differences in the north versus the south?

[Windmill]

I'd believe it- IQ tests seem to favour different thinking styles, thats what I see anyway.

But intelligence just seems to me, logically, something thats impossible to gauge- because the definition of intelligent, well, how does one judge it? What is the standard? Is there really a standard? People seem to associate intelligence with school mainly, so I consider that therefore its real definition as chosen by society (I hope that made sense) and IQ has nothing to do with that.

IQ is just a crazy thing that totally favors NT's, and doesn't seem to help much unless your IQ is about 150, then soon after that one starts having social issues often as they get out of touch with others.

My IQ is between 130-140 as tested when I was like 4 and 9 or something. So its above average.

[Splittet]

IQ is a crazy concept, because it totally favours smart people!

[wise]

IQ is just a crazy thing that totally favors NT's...

There are many people with high IQs who aren't NTs. As a member of the International High IQ Society, I can attest to that. There are many NF, SN, SF types with plenty of intelligence. Of course, membership in an IQ society doesn't necessarily mean anything beyond participation in forums and games; many with high IQs spend all their time in their heads and lack motivation to put their intelligence to practical application.

While I don't think that IQ testing is totally pointless, I do acknowledge its limitations. I personally believe that IQ reflects more accurately one's ability to learn more so than reflecting comprehensive intelligence.

Of course, these are my opinions. In the realm of opinion, we are all equal. :)

[Windmill]

There are many people with high IQs who aren't NTs. As a member of the International High IQ Society, I can attest to that. There are many NF, SN, SF types with plenty of intelligence. Of course, membership in an IQ society doesn't necessarily mean anything beyond participation in forums and games; many with high IQs spend all their time in their heads and lack motivation to put their intelligence to practical application.

While I don't think that IQ testing is totally pointless, I do acknowledge its limitations. I personally believe that IQ reflects more accurately one's ability to learn more so than reflecting comprehensive intelligence.

Of course, these are my opinions. In the realm of opinion, we are all equal. :)Yes thats actually a brilliant way to put it, IQ is the testing of ones ability to learn. High IQ = Fast learner.

We are never all "equal". We all excel in other areas. Some of us excel further, and in that area, they are above other people. But thats OK, we just must learn to deal with it :p

But come on- a lot of the questions are particularly driven towards NT's and just N in generals strengths. There are many things NT's couldn't do as well as SJ's, no matter how fast we can memorise the sequence of Pi :p

[wise]

Yes thats actually a brilliant way to put it, IQ is the testing of ones ability to learn. High IQ = Fast learner.

We are never all "equal". We all excel in other areas. Some of us excel further, and in that area, they are above other people. But thats OK, we just must learn to deal with it :p

But come on- a lot of the questions are particularly driven towards NT's and just N in generals strengths. There are many things NT's couldn't do as well as SJ's, no matter how fast we can memorise the sequence of Pi :p

"Equal" referenced opinions. You know...they're like butts...we all have them. ;D

I'm not arguing the test contents. I'm saying from my observation that IQ society membership is rather varied; many non NTs test at qualifying levels. One variable to consider is that some IQ testing is largely nonverbal and abstract, which would give NTs an advantage; others factor in reading comprehension and language skills. Some NTs can't spell well and are grammatically challenged. ;)

[Windmill]

I am one of those :(

It was the only thing I cheated on at school, grammar and spelling tests.

Its just so boring to learn! UGH.

[JTG]

I learned grammar and spelling really well. Once my teacher was taking the final along with the class, so she could have an answer key to use in grading the students' papers. I finished my test before she did, and i got an 88 too :D

I still failed the class though, and have flunked an attempt of every english since junior year of high school... because i don't have the patience for all the composition and research they require. It's just too hard to force myself to do that mind numbing busy work if i don't see a point to it all. I wish grades registered in my mind as a valid point for motivation >.>

[Octavianus Caesar]

I have noticed with myself, I am a polymath: I have interest in History, Politics, Economics, Philosophy, Biblical Scholarships, religion, Astronomy and Music.

What i have noticed with people who have this broad of interest tend to have an IQ of 160-180 range, even rarer of 180-200+.

I have not taken an official one but based on what i have read of other people and my own similiarties and with an INTJ personality, mine might be around 180, though that is a guess.

[meanlittlechimp]

What does that magic 142 number mean? I have no idea. I've always thought of intelligence being a vector with a very large number of elements that represent facets of different kinds of intelligences. (Go go linear algebra!) People who have a higher magnitude of this vector are smarter. IQ tests will only measure certain components of this vector. I found the test I wrote to measure my best components, such as my math calculation and my visualization abilities. However, someone 'smarter' than me could have done quite poorly while still having a total higher intelligence magnitude.



That's exactly how I always thought of it, but better. I never thought to make a vector analogy. Also, I had all kinds of other rationales for why my IQ was so low, but still thought I was the shit.

[Merle]

I've done a few I.Q. tests - in school, for a job profiler thing - the lowest was 136 and the highest was 158...that seems like a pretty enormous difference to me and makes me doubt the validity of the whole thing...it certainly measures something, but I'm not sure even it knows what that is.

[INTJoe]

I have interest in History, Politics, Economics, Philosophy, Biblical Scholarships, religion, Astronomy and Music.

What i have noticed with people who have this broad of interest tend to have an IQ of 160-180 range, even rarer of 180-200+.

I have not taken an official one but based on what i have read of other people and my own similiarties and with an INTJ personality, mine might be around 180, though that is a guess.

This is like saying people with an interest in monster truck magazines and hardcore porn have an IQ in the 80-100 range.

You have never taken an official IQ test, but you believe you are around 180. Over 5 standard deviations from norm. I'm gonna say no, and I feel pretty confident about it. If you can produce indisputable proof that your official IQ is 180, I will pay you $1,000.

I'll give you 130, +/- 30.

[Epicurus]

Multiple intelligences are worthless to me as I can't even correlate the question with the different anwsers, but I guess I could imagine my best traits there.

Its good to have a huge belief in yourself, IQ can boost you mentally even if a lot of us problably have much lower EQ and the sort. As I myself wouldn't let me turn into believing I am something Im not. So stop sending money to Mugabe for better rapeists in Africa, and starvation of yourself, because some of you don't dare to be better anywhere and want to be the doormat in all ways. Just saying.

[Friend]

Well, at 8 yrs old, my IQ was 180+ (I hit the ceiling of the test) and since being chronically sleep deprived for the past 5 years, it has ranged from 152 to 180, depending on the day, the test, and when I last slept.

I have no great achievements to verify the utility of such measurements, and I would posit that if there were a test that measured the quality of up-bringing and success relationship, I would score in the imbecile range. I am just happy that I made it out alive. In any case, my scores and my wide range of competencies serve me only in a hope for the future. A severe lack of resources has my life looking a lot more like a P than a J.

Booo.

Now off to measure EQ; I bet I'm an imbecile. I can't wait to find out!!! :blank:





Friend added to this post, 27 minutes and 34 seconds later...

Yup. EQ at queendom- 106 questions... a whopping 66! Nice. I answered honestly and really hadn't realised that I am nearly incapable of determining what someone is feeling based on body-language. Wow. I knew I wouldn't do well, but 66 is a bit of a shock.

[INTJoe]

Another 180. Sure.

I hope people realize, that, assuming about 6 Billion global population...an IQ that is 5 standard deviations from the norm (175) is so rare, that there are only 1,720 people on the planet with an IQ this high or above. That is one out of every 3.5 million people.

So if you move to my hometown, Houston, which has a metro pop. of roughly hinting at 7 million, you will either be the smartest person in the entire metro area, or the 2nd smartest.

Congratulations. :thumbsup:

[colmdubh]

Gardner's theory of multiple intellegences (I think there are 7 now) summed up says that people have varying kinds of intellegence, even "nature" is included, like someone who is good at telling one plant or bird from another

The average IQ is 100 for the general population

I think mine is around 130, I'm not sure, so many online say they are 'accurate' and I still have to take the Mensa test...also people can study for IQ tests I believe, I've found alot of the spatial sequences have similar patterns

[Friend]

Another 180. Sure.

I hope people realize, that, assuming about 6 Billion global population...an IQ that is 5 standard deviations from the norm (175) is so rare, that there are only 1,720 people on the planet with an IQ this high or above. That is one out of every 3.5 million people.

So if you move to my hometown, Houston, which has a metro pop. of roughly hinting at 7 million, you will either be the smartest person in the entire metro area, or the 2nd smartest.

Congratulations. :thumbsup:

Right, except that as you already know (I assume), the majority of individuals who populate the earth have not been tested, the scale/curve is normed only according to the scores of those who have been, and how they are distributed is completely immeasurable, rendering your reductio ad absurdum equally as inutile as IQ scores are valuable to the average person.

My posting of my IQ scores was to illustrate that while my score indicates that my crystallized knowledge and ability to synthesize/analyse/etc (fluid intelligence) is greater than the general population, my upbringing squelched my potential and I have achieved nothing of note thus far in my life; thereby I've illustrated that my IQ score (no matter how impressive or who might take it seriously) has little to no relevance.

What it does verify is that I am better able to examine and conclude on exactly why my life is such a wreck. That's nice. That, and as I suspected, I am a complete emotional imbecile, so fully half of what allows me to relate to other human beings is so deficient that my IQ couldn't bridge that gap even if I thought it mattered enough to do something about it.

INTJoe, maybe you didn't read my whole post? I don't think your 'congratulations' applies.

[coffeeloverfreak]

You guys do realize that taking the IQ test multiple times invalidates the results, right?

[INTJoe]

Friend,
I've previously laid down the gauntlet to Octavianus. Same can be applied for you.

Provide me with indisputable proof that your IQ is over 5 standard deviations from norm (or greater), and I'll facilitate your wallet with $1,000 cold hard cash.

Or are you that confident that in a random room of 3.5 million folks, you will, more times than not, be the smartest in the room?

You could be. I don't know. I'm just saying, in the internet era there are way too many 180+ IQed folks out there. I mean, where are all the 20 IQed chimpanzee-human hybrids to offset this??? Posting on ESFPforum.com!? :cool:

[coffeeloverfreak]

IQ tests aren't about intelligence. They're about test-taking abilities in very specific types of knowledge. And the more of them you take, the higher your score. I'm around a 123 but I just took a test that said I was 144 (total BS, of course). The only thing worse than a bogus IQ test is the person who goes around with an inflated head thinking it means they're hot shit.

[Vivid]

There seems to be a trend with Introverts scoring higher IQs. I find it interesting. If that is the case, it looks like the IQ tests are in favor of a more focussed mind.

[Jgib5328]

Lmao at the guy who thinks he has a 180 IQ because he has a wide variety of interests. That is the most rediculous thing I've ever heard. You are more likely to get struck by lightning 13 times, survive, and then win the lottery twice in a row than have an IQ of 180. If you have a 180 IQ, you'd be one of the smartest people on the planet, I'm not talking about top 1000, I'm talking like top 100 or top 50. Einstein had an IQ of 160, 20 IQ points is a HUGE difference, and look at what Einstein did.

My IQ is in the 125-134 range, I mean I'm gifted, but I know I'm not a 'omfg he's so smart' genius.

If you want to get educated about IQ deviations try reading this. I'm sure you and your 180 IQ will understand it.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[INTJoe]

I like knowing that in a room of 20-50 completely random people, I may be the most intelligent.

These guys like knowing that in a room with 3-4 planets, they are by far the smartest. ROFLMAO :cry:

[Jgib5328]

I like knowing that in a room of 20-50 completely random people, I may be the most intelligent.

These guys like knowing that in a room with 3-4 planets, they are by far the smartest. ROFLMAO :cry:

I know, if they had a 180, they'd be at Harvard right now, teaching.

[Merle]

You guys do realize that taking the IQ test multiple times invalidates the results, right?

meaning you're likely to get a higher score the more times you do it right?
This seems obvious... but I got 145 the first time, 136 the second time and 158 the third time. - was the second test just anomalous? - I don't know, I think the whole thing is totally suspect.

[Jgib5328]

meaning you're likely to get a higher score the more times you do it right?
This seems obvious... but I got 145 the first time, 136 the second time and 158 the third time. - was the second test just anomalous? - I don't know, I think the whole thing is totally suspect.

Official IQ tests or online ones?

Taking an IQ test like any test can be affected by your mood anyways. If you were tired or suffered from some other affliction during your second, that could've caused your lower score.

[Merle]

they were official ones... the forst one at school, the second at my first university and the third at my second university

[meanlittlechimp]

This thread has some good data on it. To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.************************/showthread.php?t=22940

[Epicurus]

The only thing worse than a bogus IQ test is the person who goes around with an inflated head thinking it means they're hot shit.I don't think anyone thats not a big lunatic would go around with anything more than some normal INTJ-confidence on his face. And more important I don't think those people are worth the effort to be spit at, they should be laughed at and enjoyed. (I might write this because I percieve you as a bitter (sweet) sensor taking things in my eyes to serious.)



Anyway, I've done the Swedish and Danish mensa online tests, and got between 120-130 on both, can't remember. Only done them once each. And one other test wich I can't trust due to it kind of taking things as vocabulary in to calculation. Atleast I don't think only being part of the top 9% or less (wich Im supposedly part of) IQed people is so big, thats a lot of people. Doing big evaluations or official tests among very scary people isn't worth it all of the times, if you got one or two feets on the ground wich I hope I have, I figure it might just be so I got it right +-10 on these horrible inaccurate tests I've done.

[lancelot]

came across the following statistics:
* Only 2% of the general population are INTJ's
* 37% of INTJ's have IQ's that place them in the top 2% of the general

............ I think you have said it all right there.

[integratedvelocity]

What do you all think about the correlation between IQ and other standardized tests (ACT, SAT, etc.)? Apparently it was fairly well documented for scores around 1300 or lower on the old SAT. The big question I have is whether these people are really smart or just good test-takers. I think I'm pretty intelligent, probably around 130-140, maybe higher, but I also know that I am an extremely good test-taker from my college entrance exams (SAT, APs, blah, blah, blah). For example, if a test is long enough and not free response, I will generally be able to learn the material from the test and apply it. That's the only way I passed my APs, lol.

Also, for the record, it is nearly statistically impossible to have this many 160+ IQ people on this forum.

[James Revell]

Yeah, I feel like I've gotten dumber since the last time I took an IQ test. Is it possible to get more dumb? lol

Definitely, since dumb usually refers to being slow or dense and mental acuity is generally reduces with age. We've all been getting dumber since we were toddlers since we learned fastest in that period (I can't avoid at least referring to the obvious density pun given constant volume and increasing data "mass").

More intelligent, or at least smarter, people eventually understand how pathetically ignorant they really are. There's just too much to know. That's why there's so many of us around though...

At least be happy you're only getting more dumb instead of more stupid!

-james

[coffeeloverfreak]

True wisdom begins by admitting you know nothing? Well, maybe. It's true that the arrogant usually are closed to learning and thus learn very little. But there can also be a sort of defeatism inherent in the attitude of "I'm too dumb to learn this" that prevents people from realising their true potential. People who come to believe that they're dumb or lacking in certain areas or fields have two choices: They can acknowledge that they are deficient and use it as an incentive to improve, or they can embrace their deficiency and let it define them, therefore never learning. "I'm not a technical person". "I don't understand art". "I've always been lousy at languages". These are defeatist attitudes that serve no purpose for learning. It's important to start with that initial confidence booster of "I can learn anything if I set my mind to it. There's a world of difference between believing yourself ignorant and believing yourself dumb, because dumb implies a lack of ability to learn, while ignorant implies knowledge that simply has yet to be acquired.

As for IQ going down over time, of course that happens. IQ often peaks when people are of university age, because that's when they're most accustomed to the type of learning and test-taking that IQ tests demand. For most people, even a few years out of school and in the workforce leads to brain laziness. Anyone who's ever worked at a desk job in a cubicle knows what I mean when I say there are days you can literally feel the IQ points bleeding away. Unless you keep up a rigorous routine of self-study and learning, you risk falling into the specialization trap, a la "I don't need to know this because it isn't relevant to my job or daily life". You get a job, a family, kids to take care of, groceries to buy, soccer practice, home repairs, the boss needed it yesterday, there are bills to pay, you have to complete this project by the end of the month. You narrow your focus to the tasks you perform each day, and knowledge for knowledge's sake is sacrificed.

[Friend]

Friend,
I've previously laid down the gauntlet to Octavianus. Same can be applied for you.

Provide me with indisputable proof that your IQ is over 5 standard deviations from norm (or greater), and I'll facilitate your wallet with $1,000 cold hard cash.

Do you mean retroactively? I think I was clear in my post that my IQ score has diminished significantly since childhood- when my IQ was 180 according to the tester, not me. What are you on about? I couldn't score 180 now, as I have already clarified, but I wonder if you might not benefit from some reading comprehension practice...

Or are you that confident that in a random room of 3.5 million folks, you will, more times than not, be the smartest in the room?

Whatever that means... I am not nine years old anymore and I'm sure that if I had that opportunity at nine years old, when I had a 180 score, my lack of life experience would have illustrated that 'smart' can have many definitions- ability to attain to high scores on IQ tests probably being among the least impressive. :rolleyes:

You could be. I don't know. I'm just saying, in the internet era there are way too many 180+ IQed folks out there.

I agree; however, this has no relevance to me or any other individual; it does point to a significant flaw in the scoring system/curve, which again, I already addressed. Sigh.

I mean, where are all the 20 IQed chimpanzee-human hybrids to offset this??? Posting on ESFPforum.com!? :cool:

This is offensive. Even *I* know that.


So, I intend here to simplify my position on this topic for your benefit, INTJoe.

a) I do not think a high IQ score expresses more than the content of the test taken and the individual's ability to navigate that content.

b) IQ scores have little to no relevance to the lives of the great majority of people and even to those who obtain high scores.

c) My personal experience with IQ scoring illustrates the very flaws in the system that render every score irrelevant and/or suspect.

d) It is possible that personality type may significantly affect IQ scoring (which is the topic, in case you didn't notice, and the reason why sharing scores and experiences related to personality type and life is relevant- and why locker-room challenges and bets seem rather out-of-place for this particular thread).

e) Anyone who thinks that an ability to comprehend exceedingly more and with greater depth and efficiency than the general population is something that those who do relish, is not one of them...

An unusually intelligent person knows that his/her intelligence is a gift- not something that elevates him/her, but that privileges him/her to serve others with greater understanding and ability than s/he could otherwise.

Are we done? :rolleyes: I think I may have lost a few IQ points in writing this...

[iamnotspock]

IQ only goes down over time b/c age is is a divisor in the formula. Bigger age = smaller IQ. At least for Stanford-Binet. But gross scores improve. B/c much of what's tested employs collected knowledge, e.g. vocabulary.

[Antares]

Well, at 8 yrs old, my IQ was 180+ (I hit the ceiling of the test) and since being chronically sleep deprived for the past 5 years, it has ranged from 152 to 180, depending on the day, the test, and when I last slept.

According to a study, a couple hundred of school-aged children from normal public schools scored somewhere between 180 and 220. There were a several 200's. Which says something about our ability to learn as we grow.

[lancelot]

180-200 IQ , that scary , remember Wiliam Sidis?

[Phosphorescent]

An IQ test only measures one form of intelligence... the type of intelligence that lets one take a test well. If I'm remembering correctly, there's something like 6 types of intelligence, most of which remain woefully underrepresented in both teaching styles and what's commonly thought of as being "smart."

[lordrrr]

I took an IQ test in 2nd grade (I think I still faintly remember it) and scored a 135.





lordrrr added to this post, 1 minutes and 2 seconds later...

An IQ test only measures one form of intelligence... the type of intelligence that lets one take a test well. If I'm remembering correctly, there's something like 6 types of intelligence, most of which remain woefully underrepresented in both teaching styles and what's commonly thought of as being "smart."

Reminds me of that one Ziggy cartoon where there's two trees: The tree of knowledge and The tree of trivia.

[vkut79]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I think this test is pretty good. The web site seems legitimate, and I assume that the test is pretty accurate. I got a 141 - the first time I've taken one of these.

[Nemesys]

One thing to consider about IQ tests, apptitude tests and their ilk is that most of them are constructed by academic-professor-types whose types are often - guess what - INTJ's.

Perhaps we score well on them because, well, these kinds of tests were made for us and made by us.

I've never seen data on how well INTJ's do on Emotional Intelligence Inventories, but I wouldn't be too hopeful.

[vkut79]

Emotional Intelligence Inventories? I'm pretty sure that's not something that is as useful as traditional, analytical intelligence.

[lancelot]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I think this test is pretty good. The web site seems legitimate, and I assume that the test is pretty accurate. I got a 141 - the first time I've taken one of these.

I am not sure how accurate this test is, someone close to me took it and
got 158 IQ. I would like to believe it's true, but don't know.

PS. That someone wasn't me

According to a study, a couple hundred of school-aged children from normal public schools scored somewhere between 180 and 220. There were a several 200's. Which says something about our ability to learn as we grow.

Honestly Antares, without listing the percentiles of the scores in relationship to the other test takers, these school children's IQ scores may only be in the top 1 or 2 percent. The numbers 180, 200 IQ are vague at best.

The norming of the tests and the percentiles clear up all doubt.

IQs in the 98th percentile, are rare, the top 2% of the tested population, IQs at the 99.9th percentile, the top 1/10% of the tested population, would represent one out of every one thousand(1/1000) people.
An IQ listed without a percentile is really meaningless.

What do you all think about the correlation between IQ and other standardized tests (ACT, SAT, etc.)? Apparently it was fairly well documented for scores around 1300 or lower on the old SAT. The big question I have is whether these people are really smart or just good test-takers. I think I'm pretty intelligent, probably around 130-140, maybe higher, but I also know that I am an extremely good test-taker from my college entrance exams (SAT, APs, blah, blah, blah). For example, if a test is long enough and not free response, I will generally be able to learn the material from the test and apply it. That's the only way I passed my APs, lol.

Also, for the record, it is nearly statistically impossible to have this many 160+ IQ people on this forum.

Many people, with IQs above 99.9th percentile and higher are Introverted Intuitive or full on INTJs . The super duper IQ clubs are full of INs and INTJs,there is a disproportionate amout of INs, INTJs in these IQ clubs.
The same is true for graduate school , and honors societies, the higher you go in academia, the more INs, and INTJs are found.

Since this is an international INTJ forum, many super duper(99.9th percentile or higher) IQ people are here.

[dissident]

I took one about 5 years ago.. I still have the printout from it somewhere, that scored me as a 145 or something like that. (I think it was on iqtest.com at the time) There were 10 to 15 catagories and it said that I had scored higher on all of them then something like 97-99% of everyone else who had taken the test on this site.

I don't really give it much thought really... does high IQ really help people in this physical dreamworld? Not as much as good interpersonal skills.

[Jgib5328]

I honestly don't think you can really say for sure you have an IQ of whatever, if it's from an online test.

[Sesquipedalian]

Online tests are garbage you all... If you want to know your IQ you have to be tested by psychologist or some other licensed personnel. My mom had me tested twice as a child. The first one was capped off at a certain number, so she had me tested with a different test later.

Just for the heck of it, I took an online test to see how close it would come to my official scores. They were way off. There was no time element... there was no spacial reasoning element... When I was tested officially, certain sections were timed. Also, I had to construct 3D blocks in certain ways as fast as I could.

Oh, and by the way, you will not always get an exact IQ in an IQ test. I was actually given a range (Above [said score], as high as around [said score])

While I believe that there are many different talents... and that IQ tests can only adequately measure certain skills and cognitive abilities, I do think they're much more indicative of intelligence than some people believe. They're not like SAT tests where one simply has to master the test. You can't "get good" at taking an official IQ test with practice. My mom told me how all of my moms wanted to have their kids in the gifted and talented program at school. They subjected their poor kids to IQ tests over and over and over because the parents saw it as some kind of a lame status symbol. If you could learn to master IQ tests, I suspect those children would have.

I'm not sure the "7 intelligences" thing holds water. I believe I read somewhere that it was highly suspected to be false.

There definitely seems to be an inversely proportional relationship between intelligence and social skills, however I also think most people with high IQs have such a broad range of skills and interests that allow them to be proficient in mathematics, fine art (painting, graphic design, music, poetry, prose), athletics (the ability to understand and control their bodies with precision) and most other endeavors that they choose to participate in. I think high IQ increases one's abilities in ALL areas, not just "standard intelligence". Like any great benefit it often comes with some social and emotional deficits, but if said high-IQ-person so chooses, he has the intelligence to learn social norms and emotional coping mechanisms through intentional effort.

[Sesquipedalian]

Well... let me clarify that you might have an improved score on one day or another due to various factors, but that there is no way to practice to become better, at least not in the way you can practice for an SAT, which is the example I was rebutting.

[eternaltriangle]

One thing to consider about IQ tests, apptitude tests and their ilk is that most of them are constructed by academic-professor-types whose types are often - guess what - INTJ's.

Perhaps we score well on them because, well, these kinds of tests were made for us and made by us.

I've never seen data on how well INTJ's do on Emotional Intelligence Inventories, but I wouldn't be too hopeful.

You are actually incorrect. The SAT and GRE, I know, are administered by ETS (Educational Testing Services), a private company. While some proportion of their employees have doctorates, they are not professors working in academia. IQ tests, similarly, are performed by a wide range of folks - but not professors.

Secondly, think about the kind of professor that would think constructing an IQ test would be fun. It is hardly a particularly creative way to spend your time - I mean IQ tests contain high school math questions, do you really need a doctorate for that?

Moreover, the GRE has a reading comprehension component that is usually a passage from English or History - fields unlikely to contain INTJ's. In fact, I would posit that in general, INTJ's are unlikely to be especially good at memorizing very specific definitions of words - a task required by the SAT and GRE.

So, I really don't buy your argument, I'm afraid.

PS: If anybody doesn't want to pay for an IQ test, here is a website that estimates your IQ based on your SAT or GRE score. Given that both are large-sample tests, and that it is based on percentiles at its core, this is probably not a bad estimation technique. It says I have an IQ of 145...

I may be converging in my math and reading skills, a test I took when I was 8 had me at the 99.9th percentile in reading comprehension and verbal type skills, and at the 78th in math. Actually that is probably worth commenting on here as well - one of the reasons IQ is a dumb measure is that there is little value in general intelligence (even if it were a good measure).

Somebody that is say, a genius in spatial intelligence, but horrid at other things is more useful than somebdoy who is above average in everything. In our everyday lives 1. we specialize in what we are good at and 2. we learn to do things with our best available strategy (eg. when I was in kindergarten I could never remember the words to the alphabet song. Then in grade our classroom had an alphabet chart on the wall. I can still see that chart in my mind).

[Hemingway]

Hi everyone; I'm new and British(?!)

I sat an IQ-style test at a large US multi-national about 5 years ago as part of a job interview. The result came back as 0.2% which meant that since the company's records began, only 0.2% of applicants had hit the same level. I remember feeling both proud and reassured.

The only other result that has ever given me the same sort of buzz was a sperm test that quoted 'exceptional forward motility'!;D

[Bluestocking]

Highly gifted kids are more likely to be introverted, so it probably is related to intelligence.

I'd classify myself as in the mildly gifted category, nowhere near the top 2 percent. My IQ as a kindergartener was somewhere in the 130 range. I don't know what it is now. It's probably within 10 or 15 points of that now, based on the educational studies I've seen about the stability of adult IQ.

[Rick]

What I see here is that we are all very intelligent and extremely good at abstract reasoning.

I've had official testing and scored 130+. That makes me both happy and sad. As others have said, above a particular IQ, there is a tendency to not be able to relate across the gap, and solitude ensues.

Getting beyond that fact, what do we collectively or individually do about it, if anything?

Are we able to contribute more as outsiders working in the mist? The whole aspect of mad scientists must have come from early INTJs. I do not favor the usual INTJ approach, which is mirroring conformism. The entire concept is belittling. I believe the whole concept of EQ was put together by SJ's, who more or less said, "In order to be useful to ME, here's how you need to adapt".

[Max T]

Recognise the interconnectedness of this thread subject.

INTJs are predisposed to excelling in IQ tests:
- IQ tests are often constructed by professors of an INT nature (as Nemesys says)
- therefore IQ tests match the way we think and
- INTJ personality descriptions state that we place great value on intelligence, so we strive for high scores on quantifiable measure of intellect.

And the psychological factors in this thread:
- ENTJ's are believed to be the most competitive of all MBTIs... surely INTJs are not far behind. And nothing is more important than IQ for us, so we compete in a restrained fashion on this thread and
- There's the persuasive effect of 'social proof' ("if other INTJs score this high... surely I do too") and 'herd mentality' ("I want to be part of this INTJ group").


... Add the two together and we have a thread with an incredible number of IQ 140+ scorers and dismissal of alternative measures:
Emotional Intelligence Inventories? I'm pretty sure that's not something that is as useful as traditional, analytical intelligence.
Well I've seen enough analytical grunts achieve zip in corporate land (different story perhaps in research and academia).
Genuine Fi obviously can be developed and then the world is ours.

[marcclarke]

I came across the following statistics:
* Only 2% of the general population are INTJ's
* 37% of INTJ's have IQ's that place them in the top 2% of the general population. (Next most is INTP, with a 20% chance.)

Thoughts/comments? Are we really that smart?

DB

What is the source of your data, please?

[Retz]

IQ tests test for only one form of intelligence and I must say I've never considered general knowledge to fall into an intelligence category other then maybe memory. What about artist intelligence and reasoning skills. I don't think any online tests really do test well enough for those things.

I mean half the questions I had not idea about purely because I don't know much about World Wars or some writers.

[Vivid]

INTJs generally have an easier time sitting down and putting their mind to work on a test. IQ tests are about as valid as MBTI.
It seems like 80% or more of the people I've talked to about IQs claim to have an above average score.

[schwartzie]

I qualified for Mensa in 1983 - just did the test for fun and never really thought too much about having an IQ score in the top 1%.
To me, it just means I am good at things called 'IQ tests' , nothing more.
Having said that, I could tell the time when I was 2 years old, had my first wrist watch at 3 and got through the first 3 years of infants school in about 12 months - only to be kept back while my peers caught up. I also remember, in those early years, getting into trouble for not doing my addition / sutraction sums using the beads in the plastic pots on the table - I could just look at the problem on the card and write the right answer down. Looking back, now 46, it has been downhill ever since ;)

Ian, this is so sad, man. Your statement that your giftedness "means nothing," to me, means that you have not had anyone in your life recognize and support you for who you are. Does your example mean that you are mathematically gifted?
High IQ is not some lame bragging point. It's closer to having, say, a club foot. How your mind functions has to do with a physiological attribute of your brain that you, the gifted person, has nothing to do with, (except you have the ability to damage it.) You just have a high IQ or not. period. What difference does it make? Well...

The principal characteristic of people that score over about 130 is that their development is "asynchronous." They do some stuff far earlier as a kid than their age mates, and other things not, or even behind the average kid. They do not develop in lock step with age mate average kids. They may tie their shoes and read or understand mathematical concepts long before going to kindergarten, for example. Unless the adults in their life recognize it, and give a damn, the bright kid is not going to be allowed to pursue his or her normal developmental path. Instead, he or she will be forced to do school work in a "age-mate-only" class, which is like putting the kid on an assembly line where he or she must do stupid repetitive crap while everybody else experiences challenges and gets to grow up. If a supportive adult does what's right, the bright kid gets to not be trapped with only age-mates, and is allowed to learn and grow at their own pace. If he or she is good with language and words, then the kid is given access to appropriate reading material, and is not forced to, say, "learn the alphabet" for the 8th time. (Gifted kids typically need only 2 repetitions of material in their area of giftedness, while kids with a 100 IQ need 8 reps to learn the same thing.)
The high-IQ attribute is "asynchronicity", not all-encompassing giftedness. The gifted mathematician may be only average in say, languages or history.
Albert Einstein was gifted mathematically, but was considered a bit "slow" in speaking as a young child. He hated school, turned into a class clown, and eventually dropped out. He was not a genius at everything. To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Those of you with high IQs would benefit by allowing yourself to grow and act in your areas of giftedness. Geez... what a joy it is to have a job that fits!

It does look like there's some correlation between INTJ-dom and higher than average IQs. If I had to guess, I'd guess that the tendency toward T and the high IQs are each a result of some physical attribute of our brains. Einstein's brain was preserved and studied, and reportedly has physical attributes that may have contributed to his mathematical ability. To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
So...IQ matters because it is who you are. Deal.

There are also a correlation between significant social behavior and IQ. For example, most people marry someone whose IQ is no more than 10 IQ points away from their own. It is likely that their kids will share that couple's IQ attributes, so knowing the parents' IQs provides a tool when thinking about their kids' education....

For myself, I'm average mathematically, but do well dealing w language-related stuff, so, for example, socially, I tend to be attracted to people whose sense of humor I share, who are voracious readers and/or writers, who like to play and work with language.... My work uses my strengths, and I find it incredibly fun and challenging, even tho most people would never imagine that someone would actually enjoy it, it's so arcane and complex and horrible, etc.
I love Mensa because people there are funny and charming, and think that I am, too (!!) ...which is amazing, given how quiet and reserved I am in almost every other setting.
So you are 46, and have about, maybe, another 46 to go... It might be interesting to see what you could do if you could let your strengths out to play...

[Aronnax]

All you people claiming an IQ over 100 are liars, I didn't see any extra credit on that test. I for one am proud of my 85% score, that's a solid B...

Seriously, IQ matters but not in the way many believe it does. A high IQ doesn't make you a better human, it makes you better in areas where you're gifted. It also can create a social disconnect and cause a lot of frustration when you're a child. Screening is a very useful tool, I wish I had been tested at an earlier age, it would have saved me (and my parents) a lot of grief.

[mkay]

I'm here to make you all feel superior. The only IQ test I've ever taken was online, goofing around, and I was relieved to score a 120. Scoring an 80 or something probably would've given me a complex. I totally suck at anything spatial, and I have attempted no math beyond algebra and geometry, both of which I passed by the skin of my teeth because I never studied or did homework. I know the online test I took was the equivalent of getting an IQ score from a fortune cookie, but I'm going to happily cling to it as "proof" that I'm not a retard.

[schwartzie]

I'm here to make you all feel superior. The only IQ test I've ever taken was online, goofing around, and I was relieved to score a 120. Scoring an 80 or something probably would've given me a complex. I totally suck at anything spatial, and I have attempted no math beyond algebra and geometry, both of which I passed by the skin of my teeth because I never studied or did homework. I know the online test I took was the equivalent of getting an IQ score from a fortune cookie, but I'm going to happily cling to it as "proof" that I'm not a retard.

Oh yeah? ...well... you can still have a spoon of superiority. I've never taken an IQ test, just the thing to get into Mensa, which is pass/fail. My highest math grade in high school was a D-, (not of an F, because the guy teaching it didn't want me back.) And Id 'v been a high school drop out except, after I left and started my highly rewarding career in "diner" operations, this other teacher took it upon himself to cheat and give me a missing credit (so I didn't "ruin my life....") Anyone who can do no homework but pass, in some places, could be an alt hero...

[Merendino]

I saw that stat the OP had listed and was interested in that as well.

I find it sort of fascinating that the majority of us are in the 140 range.

I also completely understand what most of you are saying about the tests being written by professors who are most likely NT rational's. I like many haven't put much stock into IQ tests based on understanding that there are different ways in which we can be intelligent. I don't read very fast, and because of that back when I was in high school my act scores and SAT scores were falsely low. Hell math and science were 98th percentile yet reading and comprehension were 45th percentile. Haha, I couldn't read the questions fast enough.

That being said I've taken 1 administered IQ test and scored 142. I've taken a whole bunch of different online tests (i like them, they are fun and challenging) and have gotten scores ranging from 120 to 170. While yes I feel vindicated by being quite a bit above the norm, I look at the scores and can't logically say I'm smarter than other people. Although I still kind of feel like I am. haha.

[hauteur]

Oh yeah? ...well... you can still have a spoon of superiority. I've never taken an IQ test, just the thing to get into Mensa, which is pass/fail. My highest math grade in high school was a D-, (not of an F, because the guy teaching it didn't want me back.) And Id 'v been a high school drop out except, after I left and started my highly rewarding career in "diner" operations, this other teacher took it upon himself to cheat and give me a missing credit (so I didn't "ruin my life....") Anyone who can do no homework but pass, in some places, could be an alt hero...

I have thought that I was kind of an exception in INTJness because I hated math - I never took anything above pre-algebra in high school (ok that's not exactly true - I did have Algebra I, but the teacher only cared if you did the work, not if it was right. Guess how much effort I put in?). My "giftedness" has always been around language as well (although I like to think of my self as a pretty darn good programmer, which seems kind of contradictory).

It makes me wonder how many more of us around here hated math.

[mkay]

Oh yeah? ...well... you can still have a spoon of superiority. I've never taken an IQ test, just the thing to get into Mensa, which is pass/fail. My highest math grade in high school was a D-, (not of an F, because the guy teaching it didn't want me back.) And Id 'v been a high school drop out except, after I left and started my highly rewarding career in "diner" operations, this other teacher took it upon himself to cheat and give me a missing credit (so I didn't "ruin my life....") Anyone who can do no homework but pass, in some places, could be an alt hero...

Thanks, schwartzie, but I don't feel superior to you. ... Nothing alt heroic about my lack of interest, I'm afraid. I just focused on stuff that mattered to me and ignored what didn't. I kind of felt sorry for some of my feeler teachers; that kind of student must be frustrating to them.

[azelismia]

I have thought that I was kind of an exception in INTJness because I hated math - I never took anything above pre-algebra in high school (ok that's not exactly true - I did have Algebra I, but the teacher only cared if you did the work, not if it was right. Guess how much effort I put in?). My "giftedness" has always been around language as well (although I like to think of my self as a pretty darn good programmer, which seems kind of contradictory).

It makes me wonder how many more of us around here hated math.

I never hated math. I am naturally good at it but not in a conventional sense. classes for math must be just me and a teacher or just me and some other bright people. I was always stymied in regular class room situations. I'd understand it in a flash but then before I could solidify it with practice people would start asking questions about the questions (this is in college not highschool) that were just totally random and off base and I'd lose it. It was highly frustrating for me. I need quiet and focus. I also tend to come up with short cuts which never gained me favour. In my current job at work I have to detail and assemble key components of international freight bills before I submit them to accting. the way it was done before was all by hand & calculator and was very time consuming. I created a spreadsheet with various formula's, because of the complexity I wasn't able to make it entirely automated for entry but mostly. It cut the time factor down from an hour for each bill to about 15 minutes. the person who was doing this job before me HATED this part of the job and I actually enjoy it. She has to do my job again while I am out with the broken ankle ( I go back to work on tuesday though) and I am sure she is doing the freight bills by hand again. I gave her the spreadsheet but for some reason she refuses to trust excel.

Anyway, I am not a super math genius, but I do enjoy it.

[Vivid]

Because people now don't have to put in the mental labour to genuinely learn stuff they are left with superficial accounts of things or worse, no account at all except what so and so said who's ideas they've compiled in a computer. Personally, as an INTJ mastermind I try to rely as little as possible on external devices for storing information because I think it creates dependency.

Your other choice would be to use that extra space to store other information. That's what many people do. Since I can store information on my computer, that leaves me with more time to focus on my education. Some don't do that, but keep that in mind as a fine possibility.

[mkay]

I never hated math. I am naturally good at it but not in a conventional sense. classes for math must be just me and a teacher or just me and some other bright people. I was always stymied in regular class room situations. I'd understand it in a flash but then before I could solidify it with practice people would start asking questions about the questions (this is in college not highschool) that were just totally random and off base and I'd lose it. It was highly frustrating for me. I need quiet and focus. I also tend to come up with short cuts which never gained me favour. In my current job at work I have to detail and assemble key components of international freight bills before I submit them to accting. the way it was done before was all by hand & calculator and was very time consuming. I created a spreadsheet with various formula's, because of the complexity I wasn't able to make it entirely automated for entry but mostly. It cut the time factor down from an hour for each bill to about 15 minutes. the person who was doing this job before me HATED this part of the job and I actually enjoy it. She has to do my job again while I am out with the broken ankle ( I go back to work on tuesday though) and I am sure she is doing the freight bills by hand again. I gave her the spreadsheet but for some reason she refuses to trust excel.

I don't hate math. It just doesn't interest me. If I had to do tedious math for work, I could quickly get interested in creating a shortcut spreadsheet, but only as a means to an end. I know enough math to comfortably function -- investments, personal finance, taxes and such. If I had to know more math, I would go learn it. Haven't found the need.





mkay added to this post, 12 minutes and 24 seconds later...

Emotional Intelligence Inventories? I'm pretty sure that's not something that is as useful as traditional, analytical intelligence.

I recommend checking out the book "Working With Emotional Intelligence," by Daniel Coleman. You might not agree with it, but he quantifies the value of emotional intelligence vs. analytical intelligence in the workplace.

Basically, he says, across the world, across industries (including hard sciences and technology), people need baseline technical / analytical ability, and the rest of success (usually more than half in his examples) is determined by emotional intelligence. He cites many examples of highly intelligent (IQ smart, sounds like) people who fail because they lack emotional intelligence.

[Uberfuhrer]

I have thought that I was kind of an exception in INTJness because I hated math - I never took anything above pre-algebra in high school (ok that's not exactly true - I did have Algebra I, but the teacher only cared if you did the work, not if it was right. Guess how much effort I put in?). My "giftedness" has always been around language as well (although I like to think of my self as a pretty darn good programmer, which seems kind of contradictory).

It makes me wonder how many more of us around here hated math.

I can tell you that I suck at math. I don't understand why anyone would think an N type is better at math. Math seems to be largely an ST pursuit to me -- remembering numbers and knowing the correct way to do things, pretty Si, if you ask me. I've only seen math as a collection of rules, and I never saw how these problems helped me out.

I, too, went only as high as Algebra 1. And in college, I kept failing College Algebra, and this was part of the reason I stopped going to school. I just think numbers are annoying.

And it's ironic, because I've always been interested in roller coaster designing, but I don't have the math skills to design them properly. And all these formulas used in roller coaster designing make absolutely no sense to me.

I am not interested in the logical part of life, I'm interested in the vision. The detail work and logic involved in math (amongst other things) just slows everything down and makes the dream seem much more impossible to realize. That makes life so much more depressing.

With that said, however, I don't mind working with shapes. But numbers just don't work for me.

A math person, I am not.

[Coraline]

I can tell you that I suck at math. I don't understand why anyone would think an N type is better at math. Math seems to be largely an ST pursuit to me -- remembering numbers and knowing the correct way to do things, pretty Si, if you ask me. I've only seen math as a collection of rules, and I never saw how these problems helped me out.

I, too, went only as high as Algebra 1. And in college, I kept failing College Algebra, and this was part of the reason I stopped going to school. I just think numbers are annoying.

And it's ironic, because I've always been interested in roller coaster designing, but I don't have the math skills to design them properly. And all these formulas used in roller coaster designing make absolutely no sense to me.

I am not interested in the logical part of life, I'm interested in the vision. The detail work and logic involved in math (amongst other things) just slows everything down and makes the dream seem much more impossible to realize. That makes life so much more depressing.

With that said, however, I don't mind working with shapes. But numbers just don't work for me.

A math person, I am not.

Amen to that. School maths for me was boring - learning things by rote, having to show the working out, teachers saying that "It just is," isn't right, even though the answer is. Maths is fascinating, though, once you get away from school. It has all these wonderful patterns - Fibonacci numbers, multiples of 9 etc. that schools don't bother to tell you about. I still prefer words, though.

I once did an on-line "IQ" test that left out all the verbal questions and only did the maths and spatial awareness ones. Can't remember where it was, but I felt cheated becasue the questions I'm best at were all left out.

[Aronnax]

My gifts are in mathematics but I'm a bit envious of people with strong language skills. I've been trying to learn Spanish for years, lived most of my life where Spanish is spoken as often as English but my grammar is still terrible. Almost everyone has something they're good at and being "superior" is overrated. If you're convinced you're above everyone else you'll miss lots of interesting people. It's hard to notice details from the top of an ivory tower.

IQ tests are good at isolating ability in a few areas, not overall potential. They can be used as an ego stroke but they're a very useful tool for determining educational needs. I wasn't tested until I was almost done with high school. By that time all it did was help explain why I was bored and irritated with school. Looking back it would have been nice if I'd been tested earlier in life so I could have had a chance to begin working towards what I love doing instead of being frustrated with the repetition of K-12.

As far as math goes I think a lot of people get turned off while learning the rules for math and never get far enough to see the interesting parts. The challenge later on is being able to visualize a system then describe it mathematically. The sequential logic that's necessary earlier in math starts to take a back seat to spatial-temporal reasoning.The number stuff is still important but it's primarily used as a way to flesh out your solution and as a medium for communication.

[Trym]

I scored 130 when i took an IQ test, it consisted of synonyms, matrixes and math.

I scored very well on the synonyms (Norwegian) and matrixes, but not very well on the math part.

The theoretical part of mathematics and especially physics do really interest me, but the school way of learning it was hard for me to follow..

[JasonM]

I love math. In university, I majored in computer science, but my highest marks were in math courses. In high school, I actually wanted to apply as a math major, but, at the time, I feared that the only job that would be available to me would be that of a math teacher. Now, my priorities have changed, and I think I would have been best off with a double major in math and philosophy.

[hauteur]

I never hated math. I am naturally good at it but not in a conventional sense. classes for math must be just me and a teacher or just me and some other bright people. I was always stymied in regular class room situations. I'd understand it in a flash but then before I could solidify it with practice people would start asking questions about the questions (this is in college not highschool) that were just totally random and off base and I'd lose it. It was highly frustrating for me. I need quiet and focus. I also tend to come up with short cuts which never gained me favour.

It's interesting to me that you say that you need quiet and focus but you're naturally good at it. I'm not doubting you, but that is one of the reasons I have felt like I'm not good at math. I need absolute quiet in order to focus when I'm doing math. And I am not good at all at doing math in my head with multiple steps. Too much crap to keep track of.

My wife (xSFP) can do math in her head at a party. Not me.

[Big Grizzle]

Hmmm....IQ scores make me think of this quote


“Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'Press On' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.”

-Calvin Coolidge

[azelismia]

It's interesting to me that you say that you need quiet and focus but you're naturally good at it. I'm not doubting you, but that is one of the reasons I have felt like I'm not good at math. I need absolute quiet in order to focus when I'm doing math. And I am not good at all at doing math in my head with multiple steps. Too much crap to keep track of.

My wife (xSFP) can do math in her head at a party. Not me.

I need quiet and focus to do ANYTHING well. I don't deal well with loud noisy environments. I can do complex math in my head quickly, but not if someone is yammering at me at the same time. Also teh other key element about my narrative was that I was talking about when learning. When a concept isn't solidified in my mind yet.

[malefide]

I've generally scored about 130-145 before. I don't know how much this means, or what it means to me. I think my success is more related to drive...but then my EQ is not particularly high. So, who knows...

[alone]

This confused me though:



IMO being liberal is the most logical and intelligent way to be. Most conservatives i know are traditionalists, hardcore bible thumping christians, etc

I think that when you deeply consider what is necessary for a society or culture to be successful in the long term, at least two things become clear. (1) charity and socialistic policies ignore incentive effects, and (2) although some traditional cultural norms or practices are probably useless, most are there for a reason - as rules, they are effective at promoting some beneficial feature for the society implementing them.





alone added to this post, 20 minutes and 24 seconds later...

Yeah, lots of 140s and 150s. I am about 148 based on tests from childhood, and borne out by later standardized tests that are IQ-related.

I have done a lot of math and like it, but have some trouble when it's explained in a stupid and stilted manner. See Gilbert Strang at MIT for a model as to how math should be taught, imho. awesome. His linear algebra lecture videos are on their ocw.mit.edu website.

I need a motivation for math, rather than having it seem like completely arbitrary machinations. Physics and EE/CS are good for that...

I think I'm probably better at languages though. I speak fluent Japanese and Chinese, and love memorizing characters and other orthographies. I can read/write the above, arabic, korean, hebrew, and some thai and hindi. Alas, time is limited.

My elementary school days sucked ass. Bored out of my skull. College was fun, but I slacked off too much. Managed to squeak through and pull together barely enough discipline to get into a successful position now, but am constantly fighting the urge to throw boring work out the window and read or study other things.

[JasonM]

I realized that I should also note what I think about IQ tests. I think that they are decent predictors of job/school success, so they should be given some credibility - but not total credibility, since even though they correlate with success, the correlation isn't high enough to be used as a decisive indicator of it. As for myself, my scores vary. I do well on tests that measure spatial, logical, and mathematical abilities, and not so well on tests that measure vocabulary, general knowledge, and short-term memory. In other words, I'm good at reasoning, but I have problems acquiring knowledge.

[cdbrow1]

My IQ was 143 when I was in my teens and "dropped" to 130 when I was in my late 20s. The theory of the Doc ont he second test was my brian "detuned" itself to deal with my learning disablity. In computer lingo my brain was overclocked and making mistakes so I compensated by working it slower....

I think I just killed brain cells with Beer, Grad School and listening to the Cure and "The The" (I don't know which did more damage).

I think IQ is meaningless anyway. I am sucessfull and fairly well paid - but very alone. I see a lot dumber, happier and better paid people out there. Personally I would rather be a happy idiot than a troubled genius.

[vad1981]

I could have written that cdbrow1, minus the learning disability... I think I shut myself from the world and keep people out...

[Motley]

my dad is an intj and his iq is, well, once he said 155 then years later he said 169. i am an intp and my intelect doesnt compare to his and i dont need to take an id test to know this... my ego is never going to stop bleeding because of him. although i do blame some of the miscommunication on my 'p' and his 'j' (imagine a devils adovacte in a debate with sherlock holmes).
i wonder does any one know how much dsylexia can affect iq test results?
i am very dyslexic and my dad is dyslexic too, but whos going to recognis eone of his mistakes, right? :thinking:
i think he has unoffically knighted me as the next intelligent in the family but it could jjust be his bias because our itnerest overlap so often and we both value intelligence.
no one else in my family apart from him is highly-intelligent, only above average, perhaps even around average.
as for intp's being likely to be intellectuals... i have serious trouble with second-guessing myself and to a much greater extent, concentration. im not sure if thats intp related or not but i suspect that it is atleast in part.

[Antares]

my dad is an intj and his iq is, well, once he said 155 then years later he said 169.

Some people delude themselves into thinking their IQ is higher than it is. Tell him to take a mensa test.

[errrzarrr]

why IQ is so important? I don't care much. I think is enough being INTJ.

[Linza]

Everyone wants to be special, I suppose- and special is a pretty loaded term.

I've taken a fair number of psychologist-administered and educator-administered IQ tests (in the States, which might have to do with the style of test). A lot of the time (read: before I turned 16), they wouldn't tell me what my score was. If my family hadn't moved around so damn much, I might still be able to get ahold of those records; unfortunately, moving sucks. I kinda wish I had the motivation to track the rest of those down, if records still exist.

In any case, the lowest score that ever made it back to me was 163, and the highest was 180. However, the 180 is inaccurate, since that was my final test score before I entered college, and that was after a dozen or so previous tests. It's easy to master the style of the common IQ test.

Curious-- other INTJs are probably identified as 'gifted' or 'advanced' by the school system. What are your experiences with the gifted and advanced education programs in your countries? Did such programs exist when you were kids? If so, what did they entail, and do you feel you benefitted from them?

[hongi]

I came across the following statistics:
* Only 2% of the general population are INTJ's
* 37% of INTJ's have IQ's that place them in the top 2% of the general population. (Next most is INTP, with a 20% chance.)

Thoughts/comments? Are we really that smart?

DB

Smart is a relative term . . . smarter than who/what and the situational context would need to be identified. In the context of an IQ test INTJ may score higher than most because of the test being more suited to their temperment style than others.

That being said it is always nice to be able to one up people when thay get snotty . . . 148 for me.

[alone]

Linza - I am about 148 and have enough trouble. I can't imagine what it would be like to be at 180. My cousin apparently had an IQ in that range, was a piano and french horn prodigy as a kid, etc. Now he's a born-again evangelist christian and works an ok job, living in the boonies. Very weird.

I was way ahead of the GT crap in elementary school. Due to my Mom's fears, I was put back in my grade after being allowed to skip ahead. Was still in GT, but it was crap. They had me doing all these stupid arts and crafts all the time. I pissed the hell out of my arch-liberal jewish female GT teacher. She was so close with the girlie suck-ups they probably had a sleep-over party and squealed about "Cats" all night or something.

Really, the only thing GT meant where I was was that we weren't stuck together with the black kids bussed in from the ghetto, except in homeroom. I suspect most of the kids had IQs only slightly above average.

My experience throughout elementary school was horrible.

[Linza]

My experience throughout elementary school was horrible.

That's harsh, but from what I've heard, it's not unusual. Which is unfortunate.

This is about to be a nostalgic rant about education. I'll let you know when it's over.

I don't have an IQ of 180-- that was after having taken the test many, many times. The IQ test was easy to master. However, being unusual has a horrible tendency to create an isolation born of... not an inability to communicate with people of a lower IQ... it's just difficult to want to. You know. And gifted or 'GT' programs in public schools have a tendency to attract anyone who is actually paying attention to their education, rather than people who are genuinely more intelligent than average. I had the great blessing to attend a magnet program run by a woman I cannot classify as anything but an educational visionary. And while a lot of the students were worrying over what would look good on their college applications (LD debate, mock UN, et cetera) the rest of us were taking six-week-long focus classes on everything from aviation to comparative religion to auto repair (those were my favorites, anyway). We actually had an instructor brave enough to teach a focus class on global overpopulation. When the instructors didn't have the expertise in the subject, the magnet program would bring in volunteer speakers from the subject of focus. We heard from a nuclear physicist, a commercial pilot, engineers from all sorts of fields, professors from the city's university... it was amazing. I wish every kid could attend a program like that, except with a class on how to deal with people who aren't as smart. :laugh:

The education rant is over. Commencing normal discourse.

Another question for everyone: is it more likely that conditions in 'the ghetto' and in neighborhoods / schools of severe poverty create less opportunity for the development of intellect, or less motivation for the students to show their potential?

[catd]

Another question for everyone: is it more likely that conditions in 'the ghetto' and in neighborhoods / schools of severe poverty create less opportunity for the development of intellect, or less motivation for the students to show their potential?

I have tested between 138-143. I grew up very poor. I started taking the bus to the library when I was nine. Always bored in school so I just didn't pay attention. Skipped school a lot. Left during the second half of 11th grade. Ended up taking a GED later to go to college but got bored there too - I just couldn't pick something. Too many options. Never knew my IQ until 10 years ago when I got a computer and bought a test on CD.

I think the biggest problem for me were my parents - or lack of. Alcoholic mother, absent father. If someone had been paying attention and actually raised me, I probably would have ended up being a physicist. I remember walking by a physics class in 11th grade and I was mesmerized. It was so exciting to finally see something interesting in school. Too many emotional issues at home though to even concentrate on school most of the time. Poor families usually have a lot of other issues besides lack of money that contribute to a bad situation for the children.

[volk]

IQ tests are so silly. They just test your ability to see simple patterns and your knowledge of discrete mathematics. Seriously, how hard is it to confirm that if you take first letter of every word in my last sentence and combine them, you will get TJTYATSSPAYKODM? :P

[Linza]

Too many emotional issues at home though to even concentrate on school most of the time. Poor families usually have a lot of other issues besides lack of money that contribute to a bad situation for the children.

It's never too late to go back to school. If you want it, go after it.

It would be interesting to find some numbers on the number of people who go to university later in life than the typical 18-25 range, and analyse them in the context of their family income and neighborhood. If it's more effective to encourage people from deprived economic families to go to school later than to beat people over the head with the idea of going straight from high school to college-- maybe that would be an effective strategy for improvement. In any case, it warrants a little examination. Stat majors?

[catd]

I agree. I have seriously considered going back to school a couple of times. I looked into doing genetic research five years ago. Everyone I spoke with told me it would be at least ten years before I was allowed to do any really interesting work. Didn't want to wait ten years. Decided to start my own business instead. I have been happy with what I have achieved. I will say that if weren't for the Internet, I would probably be slinging hash somewhere. At least you can educate yourself on the Internet. I if had it to do over, I would have definitely gotten a formal education.

Out of my neighborhood, I have to tell you honestly that I know of more people addicted to drugs now than people that went on to get a college degree.

[cncracer]

I have looked at IQ as a two edged blade. It is great to be able to process and have new ideas find a path in your head, but the cost seems to be in the lack of social ability (EQ). In a perfect world we would have both, but in reality those in our personality type seem to only have one, and without others to help us socially we will accomplish much less than our potential. This give me the view that regardless of how high our IQ we seem to have a natural handicap which limits our true abilities.

[Skatt]

A real IQ test is actually a battery of tests that cover a wide variety of areas. That being said two people with similar final IQ scores can be completely different when it comes to even school subjects. The point of an IQ test isn't really to figure out how smart you are so much as to determine your capacity for learning. The tests that they give you online are minuscule compared to a real one. When I got tested last it took like almost 12 different sessions and each session was completely different. They did ask questions that were 'like' the ones in the online versions, but there was a lot more substance to all of it. I don't think being an INTJ can effect a real IQ test score that much, but in certain areas an INTJ is bound to have a definite advantage. I can only assume that like me, that advantage is in comprehension.

[nat]

^
Agreed.
One proof that you can't really rely on every online test that's given to you : I was tested with a pretty complex IQ test in my 10th grade for at least 5 hours and the result said my IQ was 128. But one online test I did gave me the result of 98 (whoa).

The exciting difference can be caused by my linguistic disadvantage though, because the online test was done in English back then. And it's not my first language.