Poll: How intelligent do you think you are?

[Zyntoxic]

I dunno about whether I'm smart or not, I haven't done any "tests".
Only reason I see for doing the test is either so I have bragging material for later discussions or to crush my self image, since I, just like everybody else, like to believe I'm not dumb.
Btw, on and interesting note, everyone I've ever heard of that has taken an IQ test have always scored higher than average, doesn't that make for an interesting average?

What I do know about my self is that sometimes I'm smarter, sometimes I'm dumber.

What I know about others is that some of the dumbest people I know, have gone to a univerity, they manage, but they work very hard.
Some of the most brilliant people I know have gone nowhere with their life because of lack of energy or motivation.

In reality, whether you have high education or not, it is not the smarts that matter as much as the dedication. (by this I do not mean that all unemployed people are geniuses and all university students are potatoe heads, but there certainly is a mix of people in both areas)


intelligence is pretty diffuse anw, is it the ability to solve advanced mathematical problems, is it fast learning, is it the ability to draw or paint masterpieces, is it the questioning mind that stretches out in search of a bigger picture?

I would call all these intelligence in their own right, but I am by no means the right person to define intelligence.

 

[maninahat]

Fuck, practically everyone on here says they are above average. That doesn't even make sense.

Intelligence quotients are not a reliable means of discovering one's intelligence, especially when it isn't an official MENSA test. For one thing, the tests are automatically favourable to anyone who just happens to have a knack for tests (keeping cool and confident, etc.) and if your reading speed isn't up to scratch, that blurs the results further.

Actually, it makes perfect sense. You think these forums are a random sample of the full population? You're looking at a very, very narrowly constrained group of people.

Yes, but I find it unlikely that this group just so happens to consist of purely those with greater than average intelligence. Perhaps this particular forum might attract more intelligent people and discourage the stupid, but there is no verification whatsoever to suppose that is the case. Perhaps it is more reasonable to assume that bias is a big issue when it comes to judging one's intelligence.

Also, MENSA is an organization for people with high IQs. They're not a scientific source for information on intelligence testing - they're a social club of people who have tested high. I'm not sure what you mean by an "official MENSA test" either, since they primarily use existing tests designed by the psychological community (which, I should note, typically finds MENSA to be quite misguided in its interpretation of test results).

By "official MENSA test" I mean "test approved to get you into MENSA"; standardised, approved IQ tests, as opposed to random unverified ones that you can find on the internet. I've taken a number of unofficial internet tests and my IQ apparently measures either 67, 189 or somewhere in between. Naturally, MENSA would only accept applications from certain tests they can trust.

I agree that IQs use a very vague concept of intelligence, and that how you define intelligence is key. But I also think that the means of testing intelligence is of crucial consideration. Are the test subjects good at concentrating? Will they panic or act defeatist in the face of questions? I know a perfectly intelligent person who has an IQ of 75, according to state tests. I'm fairly certain she isn't borderline mentally retarded, so either the test failed to gauge her intelligence accurately, or IQ is just a lousy means to judge intelligence.

 

[giggetygooo]

I'm fucking amazing...do ur research before commenting on IQ, its a fairly stoopid construct.

 

[RaffB]

Intelligence is such a varied area that its hard to quantify if person X is smarter than person Y

Personally, the day I stop wanting to learn new things is the day I want to die.

 

[BanicRhys]

You see, most people think they're slightly above average because they excelled at an area of study or believe they know more than anyone in their limited circle of friends.

But I know that I'm pretty much the creme of the intellectual crop. But don't admire me, children, pity me. Hark! It is a lonely life up here among the Gods, you must forget me and cherish the lives you were given, for there is no bliss like stupidity.

 

[jacob97900]

I usually get high to very high scores in most subjects, but i'll readily admit that I'm the laziest person I know. It really makes me wonder what people do when they study for Math all the time, yet I study for an hour the night before and still score 40% better than they do in a test. Its hard to define what intelligence is, is the person who puts lots of effort into studying and works hard the smart one, or the lazy guy who breezes through life leaving everything to the last minute.

 

[Vidi Kitty]

I was in the advanced classes during school, so above average I suppose. My problem is that I'm far too apathetic to apply myself with most things, so whilst I may have a good base to work from, I can't use that because I just don't care to.

and this is why I haven't even touched college and why I almost failed my senior year. I'm pretty sure I made a teacher rethink her life and quit after I wrote an essay about how horrible her teaching methods were and how outwardly rude she was to her students. I then proceeded to explain to the higher up staff the problem I was having and dropped the class the next day. She was at the school for one more year after that.

I don't know more than other people, but I have a different way of looking at things that lets me figure stuff out differently/faster than other people. Sometimes that backfires and I over complicate things and end up taking the long way about solving the problem...

 

[Davey Woo]

Compared to most of the people I come across online, I'd say I'm of above-average intelligence. However, the Escapist community appears to consist almost entirely of people with "above-average" intelligence, so I guess collectively we bring the "average" up quite a bit...

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

I'm supposedly above average by a good bit...

But my ADD makes it so hard to focus that it balances out, and leaves me at the average mark.

In fact, for harder courses, I CAN'T just "get it" and do well. I need to do a lot of work to practice it first. And that's where I get screwed over. :s

 

[Custard_Angel]

As much as it pains me to join the crowd of people saying "im smarter than the average person", but I know I am.

As evidence I cite a bachelor in pharmaceutics, an honours degree in medical science and my current doctorate study in pharmacology.

But this pretty much means I only know more than average in the areas of chemistry, biology and health science.

As a counterpoint to myself I will also say that I know very little about music theory or art or philosophy or any of those other areas I find boring.

 

[similar.squirrel]

I'm attending the Irish equivalent of community college after getting around 50% in my high-school finals. Twice.
Whatever illusions I may have had about my intellectual prowess have been put in their place by that little fact.

I read and think a whole lot, but that's fucking pointless when it doesn't translate to real-life success.

 

[Pinkamena]

This exact same thread was made not even a week ago.

 

[CG]

extremely

 

[everythingbeeps]

I think I'm mostly just wasted potential. I know I have the capacity to be way smarter than I am, but I didn't try or pay attention in school, I never took hard classes, I never challenged myself. I always killed standardized tests, but I only did okay in high school and college.

Even today, I don't really try. I don't read difficult books, I don't even bother with non-fiction, and forget about technology. I'm just not interested in learning how new stuff works. I can get into spirited debates about a lot of stuff, and can generally hold my own, but that's hardly a challenge on the internet.

 

[Samurai Goomba]

I'm of average intelligence, which is pretty friggin' smart.

And most of those who think they're "above-average" are just plain wrong. Above-average is a meaningless term unless we define it. Almost nobody is "average" when defined by what most folks think it means (average seems to be the new "stupid" or "inferior" insult). If you don't have a 4.0 GPA and aren't an expert in your chosen field, you haven't earned the right to consider yourself above anyone else.

 

[efAston]

6

 

[Flailing Escapist]

How are you measuring "intelligence"? I can learn new things, well, most new things; you could beat me in the head with a big book of science until quantum equations drip from my ears and I still wouldn't be able to tell you what the speed of terminal velocity is. But give me a script to memorize and a week later I can tell you the damn thing backwards.

But what the fuck do I know, right? I'm sure all of us are stupid we just don't realize it yet.

 

[Jaime_Wolf]

Fuck, practically everyone on here says they are above average. That doesn't even make sense.

Intelligence quotients are not a reliable means of discovering one's intelligence, especially when it isn't an official MENSA test. For one thing, the tests are automatically favourable to anyone who just happens to have a knack for tests (keeping cool and confident, etc.) and if your reading speed isn't up to scratch, that blurs the results further.

Actually, it makes perfect sense. You think these forums are a random sample of the full population? You're looking at a very, very narrowly constrained group of people.

Yes, but I find it unlikely that this group just so happens to consist of purely those with greater than average intelligence. Perhaps this particular forum might attract more intelligent people and discourage the stupid, but there is no verification whatsoever to suppose that is the case. Perhaps it is more reasonable to assume that bias is a big issue when it comes to judging one's intelligence.

Also, MENSA is an organization for people with high IQs. They're not a scientific source for information on intelligence testing - they're a social club of people who have tested high. I'm not sure what you mean by an "official MENSA test" either, since they primarily use existing tests designed by the psychological community (which, I should note, typically finds MENSA to be quite misguided in its interpretation of test results).

By "official MENSA test" I mean "test approved to get you into MENSA"; standardised, approved IQ tests, as opposed to random unverified ones that you can find on the internet. I've taken a number of unofficial internet tests and my IQ apparently measures either 67, 189 or somewhere in between. Naturally, MENSA would only accept applications from certain tests they can trust.

I agree that IQs use a very vague concept of intelligence, and that how you define intelligence is key. But I also think that the means of testing intelligence is of crucial consideration. Are the test subjects good at concentrating? Will they panic or act defeatist in the face of questions? I know a perfectly intelligent person who has an IQ of 75, according to state tests. I'm fairly certain she isn't borderline mentally retarded, so either the test failed to gauge her intelligence accurately, or IQ is just a lousy means to judge intelligence.

Probably both. My point wasn't that test conditions don't matter, only that, even beyond how much influence they can have, there are even larger, more intrinsic problems in the whole business of testing intelligence. Like I said, there's a reason no one really works on general intelligence anymore.

Edit: Also, MENSA accepts some fairly old, really sketchy tests. The thing that should immediately call the whole enterprise into question is the realization that it can actually matter which test you take - people can and do score significantly differently on different tests. Additionally, they can score significantly differently depending on time of day, test setting, gender, ethnicity, age, etc. These are not even remotely stable measures for the most part.

 

[Sir Strange Of The House Lycan]

About as smart as people tell me I am. Which is, in age order; My age peers consider me really fucking intelligent, but weird and loathsome, people about 2 to 3 school years above me consider quite smart indeed, and most adult think I'm rather average, if a teensy bit above it.