I can pinpoint someone's IQ +/- 5 after reading a few paragraphs of their writing

What is heavier: 1000 pounds of rocks or 1000 pounds of feathers?

I can pinpoint a coach in a small east coast state just by looking at his thread.

Can you tell the difference between, say, a spergy engineer-automata and an enlightened psued like myself?

This thread was created solely for the OP to get someone to ask him/her what their IQ is.

From this thread it appears IQ and wit don't go together. Or maybe they do..

Wendell found himself sitting in the back seat of a two door low rider, a black '49 Merc, shoulder to shoulder with the toughest looking thug of the bunch. He suddenly realized that he was, in fact, actually trapped! He rued his rash decision to go for a ride. Fear began to rear its ugly head. He felt a sudden surge of adrenaline, his breathing became labored and his heart started racing. He could 'hear' it pounding in his chest. He feared that the greasers would hear it too. He was struggling to sit perfectly still, trying not to make a sound, when the driver turned up the radio and Bob Dylan's unearthly voice took possession of the cramped interior of the low rider. He seemed to be singing to Wendell. "Ain't it just like the night to play tricks when you're trying to be so quiet?"

lease wrote:

Had two psychologist-administered IQ tests (audition for Mensa, back in the day): 148 and 150.

But you really weren't *that* far off, so credit where it's due.

Lol. You're trying WAY too hard. Why so many commas where you don't need them?

Bra-ket wrote:

Can you tell the difference between, say, a spergy engineer-automata and an enlightened psued like myself?

Absolutely yes

dude, your writing is, seriously, painful to read, with all the, unnecessary offsets of information, and, over-saturation--of punctuation.

Maybe find something better to do than being hyper aware of eloquence, and to a point where it achieves the opposite. Your writing sounds awkward. no one speaks like that.

The quotation below was copied from

https://www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/gre_guide_table1a.pdf

"Although each GRE General Test measures assesses different developed abilities, scores on the measures are moderately related. The correlation between Verbal Reasoning and Quantitative Reasoning is .34, the correlation between Verbal Reasoning and Analytical Writing is .67, and the correlation between Quantitative Reasoning and Analytical Writing is .14."

This is from an analysis of about 1.7 million applicants to graduate programs, and while GRE scores don't measure IQ, this concept is applicable to the current discussion board topic. From a brief writing passage, a skilled analyst can decipher writing skills and verbal ability fairly well, but not quantitative reasoning. Furthermore, this assessment assumes there are no learning disabilities, a lack of educational opportunity to develop writing skills, and that the writers made a concerted effort to do their best. Gauging IQ based on a brief written passage or any written passage will tend to overestimate IQ for skilled writers or those with high verbal ability and underestimate IQ for others.

Frankly, all this is common sense. The logical fallacy is so blaring, I would venture to suggest that the people claiming they can accurately gauge IQ from a brief written passage likely overestimate their own IQ substantially or estimate it to be below 100.

There are at least two problems with your argument. You are assuming IQ is estimated only based on writing ability. That is part of it, but the content and quality of their logical arguments is also taken into account. Secondly, your sample is only people who take the GRE, not the entire population. That is a narrower range of IQs to begin with. The correlation between math and writing on the SAT for instance would be higher.

I don't "assume that IQ is estimated only based on writing ability", as you suggest. The analytical writing part of the GRE is designed to test analysis skills and argumentation along with written expression. Furthermore, the "graders" are highly trained for the task and typically are college or high school English teachers with at least an MA. The point is, the grading is much more reliable and the task more valid than when a typical person ventures to assess someone's IQ from a brief written passage.

You are correct, however, that when the range of values on a variable is attenuated the correlation tends to go down (but not necessarily). In this case, I would argue the correlation is more valid b/c most people taking the GRE have had extensive opportunity to learn to write analytically, whereas in the general population many people have not, and therefore, their writing is less reflective of their intelligence.

Of course, my arguments can be refined further, but as they stand, they strongly refute the notion that IQ can be reliably gauged and with high precision (+/- 5 pts) from a brief written passage. I understand that this is a Lets Run Discussion Board parlor game, but in case anyone takes this notion seriously, I wanted to make sure it is understood to be an absurd premise.