Yet, in most job circumstances, solution speed isn't all that relevant. A professor who takes ten years to solve a major problem will go down in history as much as one who does so in five years.
Yet, in most job circumstances, solution speed isn't all that relevant. A professor who takes ten years to solve a major problem will go down in history as much as one who does so in five years.
Interesting choice of a typical job, however if one prof can advise 10 students on their thesis in a day and the other just one, which one is going to please their superiors more?
I think that standardized test scores correlate roughly with IQ except for some edge cases. For instance, some people study many hours for the test and learn to recognize patterns in questions, leading to scoring above their true IQ. On the other hand, some people are simply bad at test taking or have test anxiety and score below their IQ.
hand raise. wrote:
I fit this. I was always a slow test taker because of a learning disability when I was young, but I never requested extra time for school tests in elementary school or the ACT/SAT. I recall the IQ test being untimed so I could finish it, scored high, and was put in the gifted program. I was always a very good student, on the academic and math teams, academic contests, etc. I think because of my disability my brain thinks and processes information differently and in a good way (albeit slower).
The ability to think quickly is an integral part of intelligence.
writingonthawall wrote:
I think that standardized test scores correlate roughly with IQ except for some edge cases. For instance, some people study many hours for the test and learn to recognize patterns in questions, leading to scoring above their true IQ. On the other hand, some people are simply bad at test taking or have test anxiety and score below their IQ.
"Bad at test taking" = bad at the expression of underlying intelligence. It is the oldest and poorest excuse used by people to feel better about themselves.
hand raise. wrote:
Don’t be proud. wrote:
Being a slow thinker isn’t good. You shouldn’t be proud of it. There are tons of people out there who can do as well as you but faster.
Actually I consider it a blessing. Let’s say the normal way the brain thinks is A to B. Repetively that connection gets stronger and faster. Well my brain developed and compensated by going from A, to C, to B. Because it goes to C, a part of the brain not everyone can go to, I have like a 6th sense of genius. It’s paid off in a big way throughout life.
This response makes it patently clear that you weren't lying about being a 'slow thinker.'
You took the spam IQ test on the internet where every answer is correct and everyone is a genius.
I could be the fastest man in the world over 100 metres if I wasn't bad at races.
California Joe wrote:
lklklklk wrote:
I think most people will understand the analogy as intended. I don't give 2 sh*ts if you do or don't. You're right, MPH doesn't measure power transfer. In your example, the skis are Forrest Gump. You can probably figure out the rest.
I don’t think other people just being able to figure out what you say indicates genius. We can understand gibberish from toddlers, but we aren’t putting them in Mensa.
reading miscomprehension seems to be an epidemic.
lklklklk wrote:
California Joe wrote:
I don’t think other people just being able to figure out what you say indicates genius. We can understand gibberish from toddlers, but we aren’t putting them in Mensa.
reading miscomprehension seems to be an epidemic.
Exactly. Except you don't understand who has the problem.
If a kid points at a cow and says I want cow juice we all know he means milk and we'd say that's appropriate communication for a two year old. If a thirty year old did it we'd know he also wants milk but we'd think he's an idiot.
So your original point was understood, but was garbled and not indicative of someone who has a high IQ. The only data points on your IQ are your claim of it and what you wrote. You wrote like an idiot, which is verifiable, then made a nonsensical reply to another poster calling you out on it. So we could blindly trust what you claimed or just read what you wrote a draw a conclusion .
But to your original point, HP doesn't cause speed. At best it's correlated in some instances. 1200 HP is good in a car, it's nothing in a passenger jet.
nonsensical reply? wtf are you talking about?
"IQ is Horsepower, SAT is MPH.
Who cares if you have 1200 HP if you can't transfer that power to the wheels."
you consider that garbled?
California Joe
just out of curiosity, are you employed in a field related to finance?
or an unimagintive role in tech? that actualy seems more likely
IQ is VDOT, SAT is TullyRunners speed rating (or PR but I wanted to pick something where a higher score is better)
I got 162 in kindergarten. Probably couldn't break 100 today. What can I run for a 5,000 meter run on the roads?
SAT ACT GRE EAT ME wrote:
lklklklk wrote:
I think most people will understand the analogy as intended. I don't give 2 sh*ts if you do or don't. You're right, MPH doesn't measure power transfer. In your example, the skis are Forrest Gump. You can probably figure out the rest.
Yea we got it. We also saw someone trying to be too clever by half and looking like an idiot after they preposterously claimed a 150 IQ.
And actually I don't understand the Forrest Gump thing. The skis are Forrest Gump? Who's using them, me? And I'm super fast? Where does the tractor fit?
Speaking of Forrest Gump, how many mpw did he run?
lklklk wrote:
or an unimagintive role in tech? that actualy seems more likely
Someone is a mad genius!
Dr Weisenheimer MD wrote:
lklklk wrote:
or an unimagintive role in tech? that actualy seems more likely
Someone is a mad genius!
was it the first misspelling or the second that convinced you?