high IQ waste of life?

168 IQ here. Doing what many of my peers do, but just much better at it.

you made your point wrote:

if your point was that you have zero knowledge of the subject....then yeah you made it.

That wasn't my point. My point was that the vast majority have people have a much lower IQ score than they are lead to believe by either dishonest testers, or dishonest academic/professional organizations.

You’re asking this question to a bunch of runners. Practically all the US presidents are reported to have high IQs, as well as many Nobel laureates. People with high IQs have options to do what is meaningful to them, even if the pay is low. Two important traits for success is intelligence and conscientiousness. Low IQ and low morals correlate well with the cliché that ignorance is bliss. So one can live a wasted life and not even be conscious of it.

plus this wrote:

vertical j wrote:

These threads are guaranteed to get many responses, generally from people who have an inflated semse of their intelligence.

These threads are guaranteed to get many responses, generally from people who feel threatened by people who might be more intelligent than them.

It's funny that if someone started a thread for sub 14-min 5k runners, people wouldn't claim that the runners who have run sub 14:00 have an inflated sense of their own speed.

I don't get the sense that the people self-reporting ~150 IQs on these threads view a ~150 IQ score as anything more than what it is.

It's the haters that come across as the jerks most of the time.

IQ are tests are in no way as objective and a measurement of something real as a timed sub 14 minute 5K.

A better comparison would be with someone whose Garmin says they have a VO2 max of 60 not being able to break 21 minutes for the 5K in a race. I think we did have that thread recently.

TBH, if you had a high IQ test score when you were young, and you haven't achieved anything in life, it probably means you aren't as smart as you thought you were, rather than you 'wasted your potential'.

Coevett...low IQ?

naaaaahhhh....say it aint true!

who coulda guessed wrote:

Coevett...low IQ?

naaaaahhhh....say it aint true!

Actually I've sat two Mensa tests in the UK when I was younger and both times easily got into the first percentile of the population.

I was pleased at the time, but really it means nothing. You can also be too smart for IQ tests, because you can see an equally valid 'correct' answer in some questions that the tester wasn't able to see, and so get it 'wrong'.

Do I have low IQ? If I were to seriously ask myself that question, I would probably list the following accomplishments in order of ranking as evidence to the contrary :

1 - Completely self-made businessman able to work from pretty much anywhere.

2 - Going to one of the worst comprehensive schools in the UK and getting into one of the best universities where I left with an excellent degree despite missing much of my second year through illness.

3 - Being one of the founders of a political movement that has become massive..

4 - Being the most important anti-doper here.

5 - Scoring genius level IQ on official Mensa tests.

vertical j wrote:

These theeads are guaranteed to get many responses, generally from people who have an inflated semse of their intelligence.

You absolutely nailed it. Look at Coevett among others boasting of their IQ. So funny.

lol.......right.

The vast majority of people have never taken an IQ test, though. Very few schools administer them, and if they do, it is only to a small portion of students.

The closest most people get to an IQ test is the SAT or ACT, and neither of those tests have had significant score inflation in recent years (the ACT has had some, but that is mostly on the very top end and is a totally different discussion). The ACT and SAT are actually pretty good proxies for IQ, and some good analysis has been done on this. One study found the correlation coefficient between ACT and IQ to be somewhere between .61 and .77, depending on which IQ test was compared. For reference, the correlation coefficient between a father's height and a son's height is about .5.

So many things go into success that I don't know how you could say this. The correlation between IQ and income isn't as strong as one might think (each additional IQ point is worth about $400 per year, depending on the study), and the correlation between IQ and wealth accumulation is even weaker. In fact, if you control for things like occupation and education, IQ can actually become negatively correlated with wealth (

)

I'm not exactly sure how you're defining "success" here, but if it boils down to simply getting a good job and making a lot of money, your statement is going to be wrong quite often.

Many with high IQ have ADD/ADHD, learning disabilities and so on. Some research say as much as 50% with iq above 130. Many of them go untreated because their IQ compensate. So it can definently be a curse

Most people obsessed with their intelligence to the point of taking IQ tests or "joining MENSA" generally aren't gifted. Lo siento.

It strikes me as rather ironic that all those claiming to have a high IQ don't seem to understand it. IQ is a construct created to explain differences in learning but it doesn't really exist. The idea that total cognitive functioning can be represented by a single mathematical term (what used to be called g factor that is correlated with all cognitive functioning) was found to be faulty.

There are many types of cognitive functioning some reflective of fluid reasoning others of static knowledge. An IQ test samples some performances then tries to make a leap to infer general ability with a single number? That's nonsense.

Cognitive functioning is complex and varied. Yes certain people are much better at certain types of cognitive functions than others. But to reflect that in a unitary score is nonsense.

If you really are so smart, you should know this!

Effectiveness in life over time and through change is the only measure that matters, and it cannot be tested beforehand.

The scope of an IQ test may be limited, but I can assure you that I can out-math anyone on this planet with an IQ less than 100, and the vast majority of those individuals with an IQ less than 150.

old math professor wrote:

The scope of an IQ test may be limited, but I can assure you that I can out-math anyone on this planet with an IQ less than 100, and the vast majority of those individuals with an IQ less than 150.

And likely you can "out math" many of those with much higher "IQs" than you. Professor, you just proved my point.

Do not listen to killer mike. He has no clue. The ACT, for example, is testing a combination of learned information and problem solving. It is by no means an IQ test.

the golden retriever of letsrun wrote:

does anyone else have a high IQ as tested by MENSA or school and feel they have wasted it?

Only douchebags have actually taken a legitimate IQ test to see what their IQ is, and the douchiest of them have tried to get into Mensa. Mensa is top 2%. Big effin' deal. Nothing to brag about.

The tests uses in elementary school to determine if someone is "gifted" are all different, and typically just rank a student within that state, and so, due to different tests used, different testing environments, different awareness of the reason and magnitude of the tests, the scores aren't comparable.

These are the most common tests:

Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale

Universal Nonverbal Intelligence

Differential Ability Scales

Peabody Individual Achievement Test

Wechsler Individual Achievement Test

Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale

Woodcock Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Disabilities

Some test results will not even give an exact score, especially if it is over 140. We hear people say they have an IQ of 180 or some other such high number, and pretty much without fail that's just BS. They took an online test that means nothing or their parent told them a story long ago, or they are lying, etc.

Here is the scale used most often:

Over 140 - Genius or near genius

120 - 140 - Very superior intelligence

110 - 119 - Superior intelligence

90 - 109 - Normal or average intelligence

80 - 89 - Dullness

70 - 79 - Borderline deficiency

Under 70 - Definite feeble-mindedness

We are so jaded because people lie about their IQ test scores all the time, that most people wouldn't know that an IQ of 110 means "Superior intelligence".

Again though...people who talk about their IQ test scores, whether true or not = douchebags.

I tested at 154. I was told I could do anything I decided to do. But I've never really wanted to do anything aside from playing professional baseball and a 154 IQ really isn't much use there. Then I decided I never wanted to grow up. I have managed to do that fairly well. Part of not growing up is not getting into worrying about income or status. Part of it is not going to a job that you hate day after day.

I've done nothing that anyone would consider exceptional. But I've had a good life. Most of the jobs I've had have been reasonably interesting. I always managed to get my runs in. I'm reasonably happy. I'm financially secure despite not really thinking about how to get that way. My kids have done well. The Nobel Prize can wait for the next incarnation.