45 replies to this topic

[Brafarality]

The sole purpose of this thread is to degrade and discredit the value of IQ and IQ tests.

I just brainstormed a bunch of great geniuses whom that most pathetic of wretches, Marilyn Vos Savant, would beat on an IQ test:

Monet
Manet
Renoir
Cezanne
Seurat
Van Gogh
Gauguin
Toulosse-Lautrec
Matisse
Mondrian
Whitman
Wordsworth
Melville
Eliot
Pound
Williams
Socrates
Darwin
Pollock
Kandinsky
De Kooning
Magritte
Dali
Modigliani
Haring
Hodgkin
cummings
Frost
Baudelaire
Wagner
Debussey
Stravinsky
Delacroix
El Greco
Jonson
Marlowe
Donne
Tennyson
Milton
Keats
Shelley
Descartes
Rousseau
Pope
Swift
Dryden
Raphael
Michelangelo
David
Poussin
Arp
Kirchner
Varese
Warhol
Klee
Schubert
Schumann
Chopin
Strauss

Please add any names that you can think of.

I purposefully excluded geniuses in certain scientific fields, like physics and astronomy, since I want to play it safe, though, sadly, it is likely that Savant would also beat Newton, Kepler, Einstein, Planck, Aristotle, Euler and Gauss on any IQ test as well.
Again, this is not GOOD for repugnant Ms. Savant but, rather, it is BAD for IQ tests since they are obviously not measuring genius, but are measuring something far less in value.

Edited by Brafarality, 28 June 2012 - 04:37 AM.

[Guinevere]

Are you mad that you got a low IQ score? It's okay, love, that's why we have nootropics and dual-N-back.

[hooter]

Do your little logic exercises and short-term memory training while I flex my creative muscle and metaphysically ejaculate literary magnificence upon a piece of paper.

She'll be known as 'that lady who got a big number once because she rotated a cube in her head or some shit', while I will be sleeping in the midst of paperback textual mastery. Once I took an IQ test. The result was really high and they said 'woah your result is really high'. I slammed down my palm onto the oak desk and stated my position, " I don't believe in IQ test. and the paper dissolved before my very eyes. They were floored, literally. No, I know what literal means. I kicked them in the gut and they were floored. Who's the genius now???? Keep the change, kid.

Edited by hooter, 01 July 2012 - 10:02 PM.

[Guinevere]

What's with the corrosive, condescending attitude? I never said I was a genius. Nor did I say that I indulge in mental exercises for the sole purpose of increasing my IQ score (in fact, my IQ score is the least of my concerns - I'm doing dual-N-back with the hope that honing these mental skills will transfer such abilities to studies and the workplace).

An IQ test, like any other test, has flaws and is not perfect. It is surely not the ultimate measure of intelligence in an individual, as there are multiple intelligences you have to account for. But until you can devise a better measure of intelligence that will be widely accepted by the scientific community, the IQ test will remain the standard measure of intelligence whether you like it or not. Attempting to invalidate the IQ test on an online forum to make yourself feel better won't change a thing. You'd be better off in the silent serenity of your local library, with your blank parchments and ballpoint pen, putting your "creative muscle" to the test.

[protoject]

Lighten up I think this thread is just for fun

[platypus]

I don't think that genius-painters also had genius IQs. It's also interesting that some clear supergeniuses, like Richard Feynman, did not score very high in IQ tests.

Edited by platypus, 02 July 2012 - 08:34 AM.

[Brafarality]

Are you mad that you got a low IQ score? It's okay, love, that's why we have nootropics and dual-N-back.

No, the truth is much worse. Thought I mentioned it in another post.

I am one of those despicable wretches that can score high on an IQ test, but am extremely doubtful of my own originality.



I joined with maxxed out IQ test and GRE scores in the early 2000s, in a moment of self doubt and in desparate need of a boost. So, instead of doing the right thing, like I would have done in 1995 (paint and draw and write till I dropped), I did the vile, disgusting, base, ugly thing and joined one of those pathetic ultra high IQ societies.

It's one of those lowest of personal moments that will forever make me cringe and make my skin crawl when I think about it, so I redeem myself by trashing IQ scores any chance I get.

IQ tests are worthless, useless fragments of the feeble mind and mean absolutely nothing whatsoever and I will ridicule and lampoon them forever and ever.
Cheers!!

Edited by Brafarality, 02 July 2012 - 11:01 AM.

[Brafarality]

I don't think that genius-painters also had genius IQs. It's also interesting that some clear supergeniuses, like Richard Feynman, did not score very high in IQ tests.

Agreed, 1000%. Genius painters almost universally most certainly do NOT have 'genius' IQs, but are 1000x more genius than any high IQ person on the planet. Hope I didn't seem to be implying the opposite!!! I wasd going for exactly what you said.

[The Immortalist]

Any other examples of high IQ individuals who didn't accomplish anything great or lived mediocre lives like Marilyn Vos Savant?

Edited by The Immortalist, 02 July 2012 - 04:00 PM.

[platypus]

I don't think that genius-painters also had genius IQs. It's also interesting that some clear supergeniuses, like Richard Feynman, did not score very high in IQ tests.

Agreed, 1000%. Genius painters almost universally most certainly do NOT have 'genius' IQs, but are 1000x more genius than any high IQ person on the planet. Hope I didn't seem to be implying the opposite!!! I wasd going for exactly what you said.

Right, but I'd say that painting is a different kind of talent than raw IQ. I don't think great painters can (on average) acquire a PhD in physics, nor can smart physicists paint. It's a different skill-set. Feynman is an interesting case, he's clearly brighter than one in 10 million in physics, but still only scored moderately high in IQ-tests (under Mensa-level if I remember right).

[maxwatt]

Leonardo da Vinci. Painter, physicist, engineer, architect, mathematician.

"Genius" is derived from a Greek word meaning a spirit or daemon that haunts the blessed or afflicted individual who displays such abilities. It has nothing to do with "intelligence" or I.Q. Consider the idiot savant who can calculate cube roots in seconds, but has trouble dressing himself.

Edited by maxwatt, 02 July 2012 - 07:22 PM.

[Brafarality]

Any other examples of high IQ individuals who didn't accomplish anything great or lived mediocre lives like Marilyn Vos Savant?

Just about everyone who gets into MIT or CalTech with near perfect quantitative and very high verbal standardized test scores.
A full 0.1% of the populace can be said to have IQs in the 0.1 percentile, which amounts to 300,000 people in the USA and 6,000,000 in the world.
WAY more than the number of recognized true pioneering geniuses alive today.

[Brafarality]

Leonardo da Vinci. Painter, physicist, engineer, architect, mathematician.

"Genius" is derived from a Greek word meaning a spirit or daemon that haunts the blessed or afflicted individual who displays such abilities. It has nothing to do with "intelligence" or I.Q. Consider the idiot savant who can calculate cube roots in seconds, but has trouble dressing himself.

Agreed 100%. The root of the word genius is always a source of fascination and what the ancients were really at when the word was born.

[Brafarality]

It is slightly distressing to see so many on these forums thinking it desirable to be able to do the following party tricks. They bring me to the most useless and superficial of mental states. Not sure why anyone would want to be proficient in these quasi-skills short of impressing shallow-minded people at parties or in bars:

Sudoku
Rubiks Cube
Brain Age
Dual N Back
Simon
Chess
Number sequences
Pattern recognition
Anagrams
Toothpick counting
Tetris
Mental arithmetic with large numbers
Logic games

Aha! This will be a sublist within this thread: Semi-skills that are desired by people who probably have been too much influenced by modern depictions of 'genius' (using the term VERY loosely) on television and in film, such as Sheldon Cooper and others. Too many today want to impress others by counting matchsticks or adding in their heads without realizing how valueless such semi-skills are.

Replace each of the above wastes of time with a television program from this list, and sign up to Netflix, Hulu, Vudu or somewhere like that so you can watch the entire series of each in a few days:

True Blood
The Odd Couple
Friends
The Event
Misfits
The Vampire Diaries
Revenge
Once Upon a Time
Quincy, M.E.
American Dad
Home Movies
Terra Nova
Glee
Grey's Anatomy
The Tudors
Hot in Cleveland

Stick to fiction generally, but some non-fiction shows are also worth watching:

Ancient Aliens
Deadliest Warrior
Art 21
Monster Quest

And, finally, some mind games and puzzles are acceptable, provided they are nothing like those in the above list and do not impress anyone at bars or parties or require shallow mental exertion such as is required to solve a sudoku puzzle or rubiks cube. Then, you can be assured they are not false and a waste of your time. The key is that you have to be able to do them more with impulse and mindless forward motion than shallow mental exertion. Here are a few acceptable mental exercises:

Minesweeper
Peggle
Freecell
Zuma

Remember, in order for a game, puzzle or mental exercise to not be false, it must involve mindless forward motion and not shallow mental exertion. You improve far more mindlessly going through minesweeper games than by attempting to solve hard sudoku puzzles. It seems counterintuitive to those hung up on feeble mental skills like chess virtuosity, but it is very true.

Edited by Brafarality, 03 July 2012 - 05:26 PM.

[The Immortalist]

Remember, in order for a game, puzzle or mental exercise to not be false, it must involve mindless forward motion and not shallow mental exertion. You improve far more mindlessly going through minesweeper games than by attempting to solve hard sudoku puzzles. It seems counterintuitive to those hung up on feeble mental skills like chess virtuosity, but it is very true.

Why do you think this is so? Do you have any evidence for your claims?

[Brafarality]

Remember, in order for a game, puzzle or mental exercise to not be false, it must involve mindless forward motion and not shallow mental exertion. You improve far more mindlessly going through minesweeper games than by attempting to solve hard sudoku puzzles. It seems counterintuitive to those hung up on feeble mental skills like chess virtuosity, but it is very true.

Why do you think this is so? Do you have any evidence for your claims?

None at all, but, then again, I don't buy into the scientific method or the need to back up claims with evidence. It's a drag down to progress.

[Brafarality]

And for the record, I am not an anglerfish dangling the lure of semi-literate simple minded posts waiting for someone to call me stupid so that I can then give them a deserved IQ humiliation. The posts may seem that way: my GF pointed it out, since I occasionally read posts and replies out loud (though rarely, cause she thinks it kinda lame to read forum posts aloud!). She thought I was baiting people on, since she is fully aware that I can riff on IQ tests and mental exercises forever since I am lucky enough to be pretty effortless on them and so don't have to give them too much time or mind. She recently 'marveled' at my going through the Mensa Workout in 12 minutes (30 min time limit) and getting 28 of 30 right (the only 2 wrong were the anagrams, which I detest and dont even try to figure out, so I just submit gibberish), from not having even looked at an IQ test or something like it for at least 7-8 years. No, that would be very very crude and pathetic. I am just spouting from the heart of hearts at all times and have no ulterior motives and am speaking the truth the best I can grasp it of my own being. I have spent the last decade 'detuning' my intellect to enter a more primitive artistic state, but, as mentioned above, was able to breeze through a Mensa test 3 days ago with almost no effort, nothing, not even sitting up in my chair to focus, just breezy easy, so my efforts have been unsuccessful so far. Will try more to become less intelligent. It is my goal to look at a Mensa test in 5 years and have it look like gibberish. And, NOT TROLLING. Just speaking from the heart.

Edited by Brafarality, 05 July 2012 - 04:21 AM.

[hooter]

Lol, Ancient Aliens is a 'non-fiction' show 'worth watching'. I'm crying here.

[platypus]

High-IQ people can deal with higher level of abstraction than others. Therefore learning things like math, physics & programming is easier for them.

[Brafarality]

Lol, Ancient Aliens is a 'non-fiction' show 'worth watching'. I'm crying here.

It is indeed. To those who cannot see it, I wish them well and hope they find wisdom. Ancient Aliens will expand the mind as fast as ANYTHING spouted by vile huckster Michael Shermer will close it. Listed to 'skeptics' and ensure you will never ever EVER break any new ground.

If Newton was behind a screen, or a Turing machine or mechanical Turk or something where Michael Shermer could not see whom he was talking to, and if Newton explained his views on alchemy and mysticism, there is no doubt that Michael Shermer would come away feeling that Newton (the unidentified person he was talking to) was intellectually inferior to him!
Now that is an irony worth crying in laughter over:
Marilyn Vos Savant's twin brother in uselessness feeling in any way intellectually superior to the greatest scientific mind in history.

You have to open your mind to many things, much of which will be nonsense or dross, to have any hope of finding something new. It's called in post-modern:
You have to put yourself out there, and risk epic embarassment or failure.

Edited by Brafarality, 05 July 2012 - 02:29 PM.

[hooter]

Lol, Ancient Aliens is a 'non-fiction' show 'worth watching'. I'm crying here.

It is indeed. To those who cannot see it, I wish them well and hope they find wisdom. Ancient Aliens will expand the mind as fast as ANYTHING spouted by vile huckster Michael Shermer will close it. Listed to 'skeptics' and ensure you will never ever EVER break any new ground.

Ancient alien theorists believe this to be a Nice Troll.

Edited by hooter, 05 July 2012 - 02:39 PM.

[Brafarality]

Lol, Ancient Aliens is a 'non-fiction' show 'worth watching'. I'm crying here.

It is indeed. To those who cannot see it, I wish them well and hope they find wisdom. Ancient Aliens will expand the mind as fast as ANYTHING spouted by vile huckster Michael Shermer will close it. Listed to 'skeptics' and ensure you will never ever EVER break any new ground.

Ancient alien theorists believe this to be a Nice Troll.

Ha! Can tell you watch the show. "Ancient alien theorists believe...." is the narrators way of giving weight to wildly improbable explanations for often mundane events or artifacts.
And, why do people think I am trolling? Trolling is pathetic. I endeavor to write as impulsively and as spontaneously as possible, hopefully not allowing intellect to filter out the content of the deep heart's core.

[hooter]

[The Immortalist]

And for the record, I am not an anglerfish dangling the lure of semi-literate simple minded posts waiting for someone to call me stupid so that I can then give them a deserved IQ humiliation. The posts may seem that way: my GF pointed it out, since I occasionally read posts and replies out loud (though rarely, cause she thinks it kinda lame to read forum posts aloud!). She thought I was baiting people on, since she is fully aware that I can riff on IQ tests and mental exercises forever since I am lucky enough to be pretty effortless on them and so don't have to give them too much time or mind. She recently 'marveled' at my going through the Mensa Workout in 12 minutes (30 min time limit) and getting 28 of 30 right (the only 2 wrong were the anagrams, which I detest and dont even try to figure out, so I just submit gibberish), from not having even looked at an IQ test or something like it for at least 7-8 years. No, that would be very very crude and pathetic. I am just spouting from the heart of hearts at all times and have no ulterior motives and am speaking the truth the best I can grasp it of my own being. I have spent the last decade 'detuning' my intellect to enter a more primitive artistic state, but, as mentioned above, was able to breeze through a Mensa test 3 days ago with almost no effort, nothing, not even sitting up in my chair to focus, just breezy easy, so my efforts have been unsuccessful so far. Will try more to become less intelligent. It is my goal to look at a Mensa test in 5 years and have it look like gibberish. And, NOT TROLLING. Just speaking from the heart.

Do you work as an artist for a living?

[The Immortalist]

If Newton was behind a screen, or a Turing machine or mechanical Turk or something where Michael Shermer could not see whom he was talking to, and if Newton explained his views on alchemy and mysticism, there is no doubt that Michael Shermer would come away feeling that Newton (the unidentified person he was talking to) was intellectually inferior to him!
Now that is an irony worth crying in laughter over:
Marilyn Vos Savant's twin brother in uselessness feeling in any way intellectually superior to the greatest scientific mind in history.

If the young Issac Newton was alive today I'm sure he would have discarded his ideas of Alchemy. Also you have to remember that Newtons mind in his later years was really effected by mercury poisoning from his alchemy experiments.

[Brafarality]

If Newton was behind a screen, or a Turing machine or mechanical Turk or something where Michael Shermer could not see whom he was talking to, and if Newton explained his views on alchemy and mysticism, there is no doubt that Michael Shermer would come away feeling that Newton (the unidentified person he was talking to) was intellectually inferior to him!
Now that is an irony worth crying in laughter over:
Marilyn Vos Savant's twin brother in uselessness feeling in any way intellectually superior to the greatest scientific mind in history.

If the young Issac Newton was alive today I'm sure he would have discarded his ideas of Alchemy. Also you have to remember that Newtons mind in his later years was really effected by mercury poisoning from his alchemy experiments.

It is possible, but I don't know, cause the very structure of his mind, to Michael Shermer's chagrin, allows for a certain amount of gullibility. I cannot grasp the way his mind expands, but I am almost certain that it wasnothing whatsoever like 'scientific skepticism'. Maybe skeptics are needed to filter out the bad stuff, and maybe people who are skeptics at one point in their lives are not damned to be skeptics and uncreative forever, since I am sure the mind can go like a river from change to change. Maybe Newton would have sensed enough to deny alchemy, but I don't think he would have privately disavowed it. Kept it to himself more, maybe.

[DAMABO]

What's with the corrosive, condescending attitude? I never said I was a genius. Nor did I say that I indulge in mental exercises for the sole purpose of increasing my IQ score (in fact, my IQ score is the least of my concerns - I'm doing dual-N-back with the hope that honing these mental skills will transfer such abilities to studies and the workplace).

An IQ test, like any other test, has flaws and is not perfect. It is surely not the ultimate measure of intelligence in an individual, as there are multiple intelligences you have to account for. But until you can devise a better measure of intelligence that will be widely accepted by the scientific community, the IQ test will remain the standard measure of intelligence whether you like it or not. Attempting to invalidate the IQ test on an online forum to make yourself feel better won't change a thing. You'd be better off in the silent serenity of your local library, with your blank parchments and ballpoint pen, putting your "creative muscle" to the test.

I don't think the point here is 'to feel better about yourself', but rather, that worrying about your IQ and consequently do things only for the sake of boosting your IQ and not what you actually should be doing, or by reading books one can gain moral lessons or philosophical lessons, or practical lessons where one can actually aid humanity by applying those. By doing dual 'n back on the other hand, there is not really a lesson involved. I'm just saying, instead of worrying about IQ, it's better to worry about: why am I worrying about IQ? to achieve something would be the answer mainly. is it then useful to play these games, on the illusion that you will gain something in real life with it, instead of pursuing whatever it was that made you worry about IQ? that's an open question for everybody to fill in for themselves of course, and I can certainly believe it is a fun game for some.

about the IQ-thing, poincaré miserably failed one test, while he is considered to be +- the greatest mathematician of the 20th century

[DAMABO]

It is slightly distressing to see so many on these forums thinking it desirable to be able to do the following party tricks. They bring me to the most useless and superficial of mental states. Not sure why anyone would want to be proficient in these quasi-skills short of impressing shallow-minded people at parties or in bars:

Sudoku
Rubiks Cube
Brain Age
Dual N Back
Simon
Chess
Number sequences
Pattern recognition
Anagrams
Toothpick counting
Tetris
Mental arithmetic with large numbers
Logic games

I also tried to like these games. Although I like chess, because I can play this together with a friend - the others seem to be somewhat impossible to really enjoy. The whole idea of mensa is somewhat ridiculous as well, since all those people have in common is a number above 131 - no purpose attached to it, in general.
The whole thing to play these games is somewhat counterproductive if you actually want to achieve something in life - since these skills are irrelevant to any domain of work, which is the main domain people wanting to 'boost their IQ' are aiming for. I can see how some of these can be fun hobbies, however, thinking that you will gain something in life is only true if you actually enjoy so that it destresses you.

[Brafarality]

It is slightly distressing to see so many on these forums thinking it desirable to be able to do the following party tricks. They bring me to the most useless and superficial of mental states. Not sure why anyone would want to be proficient in these quasi-skills short of impressing shallow-minded people at parties or in bars:

Sudoku
Rubiks Cube
Brain Age
Dual N Back
Simon
Chess
Number sequences
Pattern recognition
Anagrams
Toothpick counting
Tetris
Mental arithmetic with large numbers
Logic games

I also tried to like these games. Although I like chess, because I can play this together with a friend - the others seem to be somewhat impossible to really enjoy. The whole idea of mensa is somewhat ridiculous as well, since all those people have in common is a number above 131 - no purpose attached to it, in general.
The whole thing to play these games is somewhat counterproductive if you actually want to achieve something in life - since these skills are irrelevant to any domain of work, which is the main domain people wanting to 'boost their IQ' are aiming for. I can see how some of these can be fun hobbies, however, thinking that you will gain something in life is only true if you actually enjoy so that it destresses you.

I could not agree more:
If you enjoy brain games, chess and sudoku, then have a blast! Never ever want to restrict or control other's actions.
But, if one thinks these games will improve their general intellect or IQ, then that is where there is a forked-tongue problem: i. Is it beneficial or useful to boost IQ if these games do work?, ii. Do they work or have any genuine effect?

Edited by Brafarality, 09 July 2012 - 11:57 AM.

[hooter]

I absolutely cannot take anything you say seriously since you watch Ancient Aliens and think it's an actual documentary just because it's on the "history" channel. This is really embarrassing, I'd rather debate a religious fundamentalist.