[Alanas]

Okay, give the reference so we could dissect its correctness and all.

Let me remind you, though, that IQ is not the only type of intelligence/smartness there is. There also is EQ. Unless the OP clarifies what he meant exactly, IQ/academic intelligence will not be the only denominator.

[JC22]

	Originally Posted by Aboni To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Me, an INTJ

How dare you?

[teraczy]

1-Personality Type and Student Performance in Upper-Level Economics Courses
The Journal of Economic Education , Vol. 33, No. 1 (Winter, 2002), pp. 3-14
Article Stable URL:
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

2-Analysis of MBTI type patterns in college scholars.
Affiliation
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
1)Central Michigan University, Mt Pleasant, MI, US
Source: College Student Journal. Vol 37(4), Dec 2003, pp. 598-603
3- The relationship of GPA to personality factors of students as measured by the MBTI
Source: Dissertation Abstracts International Vol 49(10-A), Apr 1989, pp. 3006
4 -A Preliminary Study of the Relationships of Myers Briggs Types with Academic Aptitude and Grades.
(1)Department of Psychology, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China
Source: Psychological Science (China). Vol 27(1), Jan 2004, pp. 34-38

Sorry, I thought I had these articles saved somewhere on my computer and now I can't find the last one on the internet (which is the one that found INTJ, INTP, and INFP with highest IQs and GPAs) But all of these are empirical studies that found that the largest indicator of people with higher IQs was introversion, with iNtuition being second, and that they didn't necessarily have thinking as dom or aux. The sample sizes ranged from 160-600 between each of the studies, there are more articles that I've read that have similar findings. As you can see these studies were done internationally as well.

I am aware that EQ is important, I've been working hard at mine over the years
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
But I usually tend to think, and it seems this goes for most other people as well, when someone says smart they are generally referring to academic intelligence. And I think that there are definitely some NTs that aren't quite as smart as they think they are..

[anticlimatic]

	Originally Posted by Tactical Panda To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Depends on what area of life is in question and the individual. Assuming J effectively means they will jump to erroneous conclusions and that Ps are not doing it. If the "seriously" wasn't there I'd be tempted to honestly think this was an obvious attempt at irony. But alas.

What fun is irony when it's obvious?
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Really, I'm just trying to fit in here...I thought patting one's self on the back was how it's done.

[vampyroteuthis]

	Originally Posted by anticlimatic To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Really, I'm just trying to fit in here...I thought patting one's self on the back was how it's done.

No, you have to pat yourself on the disembodied head.

[Antares]

My ISFJ mom is a genius. She won't ace any IQ test, but her street smarts meter is off the charts.

[darynthe]

	Originally Posted by ascii To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	No... there is just no such thing as a smart or stupid person.

So why some people get high or low IQs??? What do you consider that IQ measures?
I am assuming we are using here smart as similar to intelligent.

	I do believe that certain people are inherently evil (though their's often a good reason why).

Eh, what does the word inherently means to you?? Why would someone be inherently evil?

	INTPs aren't the smartest, and ESFJs aren't the stupidest (which you ironically misspelled). inherently

Why ironically?? I don't understand. I never said anything about myself being smart or stupid. So why ironic?

I have no problem understanding everybody's arguments on this thread except for yours, btw.

And just to let you know, it is normal my making mistakes in spelling as English is just one of the three languages I speak into and are not my mother tongue.

	As has been said above, INTPs tend to be socially retarded, while ESFJs could be said to be "social geniuses."

So what?

[ascii]

	So why some people get high or low IQs??? What do you consider that IQ measures? I am assuming we are using here smart as similar to intelligent.

Intelligence is defined as "The ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills." This could mean you're great at astrophysics, or at helping people emotionally. IQ tests check problem-solving and logic, not emotional skills, or street smarts, or any other form of intelligence. So having a high IQ test can still mean you could still get conned, or be socially retarded. You clearly define intelligence in your subjective sense of "knowing a lot of stuff about sciences and maths and other things nerds do." I'm saying look at the broader, objective view of intelligence. Think of it as exceptional ability in one particular field (which to reiterate can be anything from math to street-smarts).

	Eh, what does the word inherently means to you?? Why would someone be inherently evil?

Inherently as in, it's in their very nature. I believe that some people are evil because it's "who they are." In the future save everyone around you the trouble and use a dictionary if you don't understand a word.

	Why ironically?? I don't understand. I never said anything about myself being smart or stupid. So why ironic?

The irony was that you misspelled the word stupidest as stupiediest. I thought this was ironic because it could be seen as a "stupid" mistake.

	I have no problem understanding everybody's arguments on this thread except for yours, btw.

Great. You've clearly demonstrated that you can't understand my argument, but I don't see why you needed to explicitly state the fact. Moreover, I don't see how you cannot understand my argument but still get everyone else's, considering what I'm saying is in line with what most other people are saying here too.

	And just to let you know, it is normal my making mistakes in spelling as English is just one of the three languages I speak into and are not my mother tongue.

Fair enough, maybe I shouldn't have held the fact that you misspelled some things and made some grammatical errors over you.

	So what?

Are you serious? Have you not payed any attention to this thread? The point is there are different kinds of genius, and you clearly think there is only one. No one type is a genius at everything. Every type could be said to be genius in their own way.

[voyvoy]

Motivation steers intelligence towards personal interests and shapes it according to the individual.

Motivation is more often than not shaped by the prevailing conditions of one's surroundings. For example, if you're poor and live in a third world country, how interested would you be in quantum mechanics, despite of your high IQ...let alone to take a test that measures it?

When comparing the intelligence of individuals, the test subjects need to be categorized based on their motivation.

So...Which of the MBTI -types is the smartest?

-divide into 16 groups (the types)
-divide each type into groups based on their
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

-make a distinction between subjects with satisfied basic needs and subjects with unsatisfied basic needs.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

-run a series of tests measuring intelligence with in the sub-groups and compare

EDIT: Although I'm just a low-minded sensor, so what do I know
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Bub166]

I'm under the impression that INTJs are generally "smarter," though as someone pointed out, intelligence can not be quantified. INTJs seem to be able to reason with extreme ease, and often contemplate on higher levels, such as existence, origin, etc. Though this seems to be the case with any introvert. And as others have pointed out, there are completely moronic INTJs out there. In my experience, though, INTJs definitely seem to think on a higher level and are much better at anything involving logic. And no, my own MBTI is completely ignored in this observation. I like to think of myself as intelligent, but for truly accurate results, bias must be eliminated. Still, my post could contain elements of bias, and you should not take what I say as fact, but rather a possible supporting source for other posts.

[teraczy]

	Originally Posted by voyvoy To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Motivation steers intelligence towards personal interests and shapes it according to the individual.

Yes, introverted intuitive types are SELF driven to seek knowledge and find meaning within themselves and the world around them, and are often found to be interested in developing theories in the world of the abstract. Extroverted feelers are driven and motivated to seek stimuli in company and social activities, to develop deep relationships and understand people. Thus, EQ v. IQ.

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

So...Which of the MBTI -types is the smartest? -divide into 16 groups (the types) -divide each type into groups based on their To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. -make a distinction between subjects with satisfied basic needs and subjects with unsatisfied basic needs. To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. -run a series of tests measuring intelligence with in the sub-groups and compare

I already posted examples of experiments such as this, and the results. It seems a lot of people want to ignore evidence and argue as though they are coming up with innovative ideas, when there already have been studies done. I'm just wondering, why are we talking about this? Of course I'm always open to more data, just wondering why you are bringing up an idea for a study, it isn't particularly novel.

	Originally Posted by voyvoy To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	EDIT: Although I'm just a low-minded sensor, so what do I know To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Sensors are not all "low minded" but it is far more typical than for an INTJ to be labeled that...wait..what are we called? Masterminds and Innovators (look at forum logo..) Analysts. BUT often socially inept.

Also, the ESFP uses the exact same functions as an INTJ just in a different order, so there are some striking similarities, but very very different drives. You don't represent all ESFPs, though. And I don't represent all INTJs. And not a single INTP on this forum represents all other INTPs. On average these two types have been found to have the highest IQ, however, this does not mean you are unintelligent based on your type. And it doesn't mean all NTs are geniuses.

[Chameleon]

Cannot compute; system error.

[Owfin]

	Originally Posted by teraczy To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Yes, introverted intuitive types are SELF driven to seek knowledge and find meaning within themselves and the world around them, and are often found to be interested in developing theories in the world of the abstract. Extroverted feelers are driven and motivated to seek stimuli in company and social activities, to develop deep relationships and understand people. Thus, EQ v. IQ.

Going by this, there isn't really any type inherently disinclined towards investigation and inquiry.

For example, introverted sensing types are SELF driven to seek greater understanding of what they already have some familiarity with.

[Seablue]

Well I definitely know at least two Ss who got their IQs tested and had very high scores. One was my ISTJ mother, the other my ISFP friend. Don't know the exact numbers but somewhere around 130 in one case, more than 140 in the other. Which doesn't change the fact that they come from types who have, on average, lower IQs than INTJs, INTPs or INFPs... *shrugs* So what ? If I recall correctly, women "on average" have a (infinitesimally) lower IQ than males, but "average" doesn't mean anything when talking about a particular individual.

[teraczy]

	Originally Posted by Seablue To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Which doesn't change the fact that they come from types who have, on average, lower IQs than INTJs, INTPs or INFPs... *shrugs* So what ? If I recall correctly, women "on average" have a (infinitesimally) lower IQ than males, but "average" doesn't mean anything when talking about a particular individual.

Precisely what I was saying.

	Originally Posted by Owfin To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Going by this, there isn't really any type inherently disinclined towards investigation and inquiry. For example, introverted sensing types are SELF driven to seek greater understanding of what they already have some familiarity with.

The studies I have read did find that introverts were tested having highest IQ and GPA on average, and that this was the greatest weight as far as the types being divided between lower and higher IQs. Though, it was also found that iNtuition was also a marker. Which to me is logical, because the ability to intuit information seems to be a more complicated and sophisticated means to discovery, and leaning more towards a gift simply by definition, but of course I am biased
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
and am aware I'm throwing myself to the sensor wolves with that one...

By the way, my brother is an ISTJ and he is definitely more intelligent and capable in certain areas than I am.

[voyvoy]

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

I already posted examples of experiments such as this, and the results. It seems a lot of people want to ignore evidence and argue as though they are coming up with innovative ideas, when there already have been studies done. I'm just wondering, why are we talking about this? Of course I'm always open to more data, just wondering why you are bringing up an idea for a study, it isn't particularly novel.

I'm sorry. I have no idea how I missed your post. Now that I read it, it seems efficient, but not novel in any sense. Neither is mine though...never intended it to be that way though.

[thod]

The studies I have read did find that introverts were tested having highest IQ and GPA on average, and that this was the greatest weight as far as the types being divided between lower and higher IQs. Though, it was also found that iNtuition was also a marker. Which to me is logical, because the ability to intuit information seems to be a more complicated and sophisticated means to discovery, and leaning more towards a gift simply by definition, but of course I am biased To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. and am aware I'm throwing myself to the sensor wolves with that one...

Did they manage to decide if introversion is due to higher IQ or IQ is due to introversion? It seems to me that the activities enjoyed by introverts could well increase IQ test taking ability in the same way that crossword puzzles increase crossword puzzle ability.

The axis chosen by MBTI are arbitrary. One could choose braveness or cowardliness as an axis too. It would be very useful to a military recruiter. Another axis could be slow thinking v fast thinking. The introvert may be able to muse on a concept for a long time giving great clarity yet still lack the rapid wit of the stand-up comedian. This sort of fast thinking is likely more developed in the extrovert.

[darynthe]

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

Intelligence is defined as "The ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills." This could mean you're great at astrophysics, or at helping people emotionally. IQ tests check problem-solving and logic, not emotional skills, or street smarts, or any other form of intelligence. So having a high IQ test can still mean you could still get conned, or be socially retarded. You clearly define intelligence in your subjective sense of "knowing a lot of stuff about sciences and maths and other things nerds do." I'm saying look at the broader, objective view of intelligence. Think of it as exceptional ability in one particular field (which to reiterate can be anything from math to street-smarts).

I clearly defined what? Where did I? Here is where I define:

Intelligence (as in factor G) is the ability to learn and adapt to new situations. By definition it has not to do with acquired knowledge or emotions. IQ test are indeed generally proofed against bias by knowledge ex. progressive matrix of raven. Binet's test test memory, invention, attention, comprehension.

When you talk about emotional skills this is related not with intelligence but with emotional intelligence which is not the object of this thread. If this thread asked which type was more emotionally intelligent my answer would have been totally different.

Still all your paragraph does not explain why you think there are no smart or stupid people. You rather claim the contrary, that there are exceptional abilities. Since you are contradicting yourself, I think I will leave this here.

	Inherently as in, it's in their very nature. I believe that some people are evil because it's "who they are." In the future save everyone around you the trouble and use a dictionary if you don't understand a word.

I understood the definition when I wrote. But I thought you didn't, because you said that there are good reasons why people can be inherently evil.

I will be clearer: I was asking why you think people can be inherently evil. You think there are good reasons why people are born evil?

I would really want to hear what these reasons are. Unless you come up with some genetic brain problem or you think some races are evil I don't see how you think people are born evil.

	The irony was that you misspelled the word stupidest as stupiediest. I thought this was ironic because it could be seen as a "stupid" mistake.

And I explained this is not ironic as I never said I was the smartest person or even an INTP or that English was my mother tongue or that I cared enough to run a spell checker.

	Are you serious? Have you not payed any attention to this thread? The point is there are different kinds of genius, and you clearly think there is only one. No one type is a genius at everything. Every type could be said to be genius in their own way.

Uh? I thought this thread was about intelligence bell curves.
I never mentioned the word genius as indeed it has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion.
Maybe I am being too logic for this subforum.

---------- Post added 01-31-2012 at 10:43 AM ----------

	Originally Posted by thod To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Did they manage to decide if introversion is due to higher IQ or IQ is due to introversion?

It may not be causation but just correlation. However I would rather gravitate towards IQ causing introvertion if I had to choose. The reason is that introverts have more frontal lobe activity than extroverts, ie a lot happens inside their heads and the stimulus come from inside and tend to override the external ones.

[TheStranger]

	Originally Posted by Alanas To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Okay, give the reference so we could dissect its correctness and all. Let me remind you, though, that IQ is not the only type of intelligence/smartness there is. There also is EQ. Unless the OP clarifies what he meant exactly, IQ/academic intelligence will not be the only denominator.

I'm not saying the tests are flawless, but there is more literature on IQ than any other psychological construct, as far as the study of intelligence is concerned.

[reckful]

	Originally Posted by thod To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	The axis chosen by MBTI are arbitrary.

I disagree. It appears that the four MBTI dimensions tap into four of the five "factors" of human temperament in the Big Five model — albeit with variations from theorist to theorist about the exact nature of each dimension — and at this point there have been decades of studies (including twin studies) that suggest that these "axes" (to use your word) of human temperament are relatively fundamental, substantially genetic and tend to be stable over time.

Any personality psychologist is free to come up with more abitrary axes (including axes involving more specific behaviors), and those can be useful for various purposes, but they're not the same as temperament.

[thod]

	It appears that the four MBTI dimensions tap into four of the five "factors" of human temperament in the Big Five model

A derivative work cannot be used to justify it's antecedent. The Harry Potter sorting hat chooses a different set of criteria. Would all INTJ's be Slytherin? How about the greco-roman humors? Would they be sanguine? I am not an INTP, I am a 5w6, so are many INTJ's. To me it's like saying "All Aquarius are this and all Sagittarius are that". Way too simplified.

[reckful]

	Originally Posted by thod To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	A derivative work cannot be used to justify it's antecedent.

I don't understand your post. What's the derivative and what's the antecedent? Both the MBTI and the leading Big Five typologies now date back decades, many studies have been done using both, and data continues to be gathered using both. And it appears that they're tapping into the same real, underlying dimensions of human temperament, which the existing studies (using both typologies) suggest are not (as you claim) "arbitrary."

[Philanthropist]

	Originally Posted by Alanas To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Let me remind you, though, that IQ is not the only type of intelligence/smartness there is. There also is EQ.

Given that
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
, and Fe leads to a higher EQ, I'd say that xNFJ's are probably the smartest.

[teraczy]

	Originally Posted by thod To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Did they manage to decide if introversion is due to higher IQ or IQ is due to introversion? It seems to me that the activities enjoyed by introverts could well increase IQ test taking ability in the same way that crossword puzzles increase crossword puzzle ability.

Yeah, exactly...and nope, no causality, just correlation.

	Originally Posted by Philanthropist To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Given that To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. , and Fe leads to a higher EQ, I'd say that xNFJ's are probably the smartest.

How did you come to that conclusion? Perhaps Fi also leads to higher EQ as well and INFP ranked as high as INTJ and INTP in IQ (just not in GPA) in these studies I researched and so thus they are the smartest?

What I find very funny about this thread is that people are getting offended. As if a statistic means certainty, when averages simply represent probability.

---------- Post added 01-31-2012 at 05:38 PM ----------

	Originally Posted by voyvoy To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I'm sorry. I have no idea how I missed your post. Now that I read it, it seems efficient, but not novel in any sense. Neither is mine though...never intended it to be that way though.

No need to apologize, I was curious.

[ascii]

	When you talk about emotional skills this is related not with intelligence but with emotional intelligence which is not the object of this thread. If this thread asked which type was more emotionally intelligent my answer would have been totally different.

Emotional intelligence is a form of intelligence. Therefore you could describe someone with a lot of emotional intelligence as intelligent.

	Still all your paragraph does not explain why you think there are no smart or stupid people. You rather claim the contrary, that there are exceptional abilities. Since you are contradicting yourself, I think I will leave this here.

My paragraph clearly explains why I don't think anyone is smart or stupid. I pointed out that intelligence is so abstract and comes in so many forms that it is impossible to quantify. What's more, everyone has something to offer. And yes, I say people can have exceptional abilities, but EVERYONE does. Therefore everyone is smart. And if everyone is smart, everyone is also stupid, and the words have no meaning. I have yet to meet a person who is not good at something, but if you can find someone who TRULY is bad at everything, I guess I'll say you're right.

I understood the definition when I wrote. But I thought you didn't, because you said that there are good reasons why people can be inherently evil. I will be clearer: I was asking why you think people can be inherently evil. You think there are good reasons why people are born evil? I would really want to hear what these reasons are. Unless you come up with some genetic brain problem or you think some races are evil I don't see how you think people are born evil.

I don't have a scientific explanation for it. It's just that some people have done such terrible things I don't believe they were brought into doing it, but they were just "evil" by nature.

	And I explained this is not ironic as I never said I was the smartest person or even an INTP or that English was my mother tongue or that I cared enough to run a spell checker.

Your personal intelligence has nothing to do with the irony. It would be like misspelling the world misspelled.

What is interesting however, is that you compare being "the smartest person" to being an INTP. INTPs are almost always talented mathematicians and scientists, and hear you're proving that you think "smart" and "good at math/science" are synonymous. This proves my earlier statement about your definition of intelligence, and answers your question above of "I clearly defined what? Where did I?"

	Uh? I thought this thread was about intelligence bell curves. I never mentioned the word genius as indeed it has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion.

Excuse me, perhaps I should have replaced the word genius with smart or intelligence.

	Maybe I am being too logic for this subforum.

HA! Your argument is incredibly illogical, and however you managed to arrive at this conclusion must have been ridiculous.

So for the second time, I ask you to look at the more global and objective view of intelligence.
It was put well by Alanas here:

	Let me remind you, though, that IQ is not the only type of intelligence/smartness there is. There also is EQ. Unless the OP clarifies what he meant exactly, IQ/academic intelligence will not be the only denominator.

Get it?