How smart are you?
Genius!
21.4% (234)
21.4% (234)
Slightly above average
46.8% (511)
46.8% (511)
Average
19.8% (216)
19.8% (216)
Slightly below average
3.6% (39)
3.6% (39)
Well below average
1.8% (20)
1.8% (20)
I can count to potato!
6.2% (68)
6.2% (68)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: Rate your Intelligence! (UPDATED: NOW WITH I.Q. TEST TO PROVE YOUR BRAVDO!)

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT
 

I would place myself slightly above average compared to most of the population. I have a great understanding for politics, language, rhetoric, sociology, science, marketing and some lesser understanding in economy and math. I have a Mensa certificate stating I have an IQ of 148 (though there's probably a fair bit of luck involved) so I think I can rank myself as a bit above average. I'm nowhere near being a genius though.

Comparing to those I am around most of the time and to members of this site I would say I am average. I have seen a lot of smart people around here and there's a lot of smart people in my life.

JeffBergGold:
Genius.

Please note I believe intelligence is an all encompassing thing a full package. To me literacy does not equal intellectual capacity or even high levels of intelligence. Retaining knowledge is a low level cognitive skill that does not deserve the attribution of intellectual exceptionalism. Retention of data does not equal intellect.

In short GPA/school performance/educational achievement is not indicative of high intellect or intellectual capacity. It is indicative of literacy.

Kinisthetic intelligence: Ability to make the body perform functions such as dance, locomotion, expression of emotion, cns manipulation and other things. I believe people who can't dance well or perform well physically are a bit dumb.

Social intelligence: Ability to interact in groups without coming off as strange involuntarily. The ability to be charming and engaging. I believe awkward people are a bit dumb.

Emotional intelligence: Empathy and the ability to accurately identify other peoples motives, intentions, and whether they are genuine or disingenuous. I believe people who get duped or used as tools are a bit dumb.

Reasoning ability: The ability to formulate and present ideals logically and draw correct conclusions. I believe people who fail in logic are a bit dumb.

Resilience: The ability to maintain a positive self image and emotional state during adversity or negative appraisal. I believe extremely insecure people are a bit dumb.

Discriminating mind: The ability to discriminate between false or detrimental information in favor of facts. I believe people who blindly adhere to things are a bit dumb.

If someone is not in possession of all of the above characteristics I believe them to be of average or below average intelligence.

I fucking love how you call yourself a genius, and say that you adhere to all those arbitrary rules of intelligence - but someone like Neil Armstrong (and other socially awkward men) wouldn't even qualify. What about Stephen Hawking? He is a bit dumb because he can't dance, yo!

Secondly, I don't believe for a second that you tick all those boxes. I certainly believe that you think you do, but a real "genius" would never:

A - be that arrogant.

and

B - act like intelligence is a checklist.

JeffBergGold:
In short GPA/school performance/educational achievement is not indicative of high intellect or intellectual capacity. It is indicative of literacy.

Ah, let me guess - you never got great school results?

You're acting like doing well in university is all due to "retaining data". That's absurd. For a few reasons:

1. Being able to retain information is an intellectual skill that can show a level of intellect. Remembering the symptoms and being able to diagnose every type of known illness in the world would be an incredible intellectual ability. Technically all that would be is "data retention" but the intellectual process behind that knowledge is incredible.

The retention of data is also an aspect of intelligence from an evolutionary sense. Being able to remember what things are dangerous and what things are not is incredibly important.

Why do you call being able to dance part of intelligence but being able to remember and recite vital information isn't? How fucking arbitrary is that list of yours?

2. No university on Earth just tests data retention. You try doing a final year medical school exam and only "retain information". It is just as much about the application of knowledge as the knowledge itself.

mrdude2010:
It's pretty incredible how 45% of the escapist community has above average intelligence.

Precisely what I thought once I saw the poll results. Ah, what pretentious people we hang around.

I read somewhere that about 70% of people think they're a better than average driver. This is a similar sort of thing, I think. But hey, self confidence is good :)

I won't say the exact number but I took an IQ test and at least according to Terman I am a genius.

SillyBear:

JeffBergGold:
Genius.

Please note I believe intelligence is an all encompassing thing a full package. To me literacy does not equal intellectual capacity or even high levels of intelligence. Retaining knowledge is a low level cognitive skill that does not deserve the attribution of intellectual exceptionalism. Retention of data does not equal intellect.

In short GPA/school performance/educational achievement is not indicative of high intellect or intellectual capacity. It is indicative of literacy.

Kinisthetic intelligence: Ability to make the body perform functions such as dance, locomotion, expression of emotion, cns manipulation and other things. I believe people who can't dance well or perform well physically are a bit dumb.

Social intelligence: Ability to interact in groups without coming off as strange involuntarily. The ability to be charming and engaging. I believe awkward people are a bit dumb.

Emotional intelligence: Empathy and the ability to accurately identify other peoples motives, intentions, and whether they are genuine or disingenuous. I believe people who get duped or used as tools are a bit dumb.

Reasoning ability: The ability to formulate and present ideals logically and draw correct conclusions. I believe people who fail in logic are a bit dumb.

Resilience: The ability to maintain a positive self image and emotional state during adversity or negative appraisal. I believe extremely insecure people are a bit dumb.

Discriminating mind: The ability to discriminate between false or detrimental information in favor of facts. I believe people who blindly adhere to things are a bit dumb.

If someone is not in possession of all of the above characteristics I believe them to be of average or below average intelligence.

SillyBear:

I fucking love how you call yourself a genius, and say that you adhere to all those arbitrary rules of intelligence - but someone like Neil Armstrong (and other socially awkward men) wouldn't even qualify. What about Stephen Hawking? He is a bit dumb because he can't dance, yo!

Pretty much. If Stephen Hawking is so smart why can't he figure out how to walk?

If a guy does poorly with the opposite sex or is socially awkward he is not intelligent.

SillyBear:

Secondly, I don't believe for a second that you tick all those boxes. I certainly believe that you think you do, but a real "genius" would never:

A - be that arrogant.

and

B - act like intelligence is a checklist.

A: Genius and arrogance are strongly correlated actually. (Humility is pride)
http://www.managementpsychology.com/articles/the-intersection-of-intelligence-and-arrogance/

B: Intellect is a series of markers that gauge abilities and can be quantified into a checklist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_multiple_intelligences

JeffBergGold:
In short GPA/school performance/educational achievement is not indicative of high intellect or intellectual capacity. It is indicative of literacy.

SillyBear:

Ah, let me guess - you never got great school results?

Your guess would be incorrect.

SillyBear:

You're acting like doing well in university is all due to "retaining data". That's absurd.

No it's not absurd. Many college professors have drawn the same conclusion.

SillyBear:

For a few reasons:

1. Being able to retain information is an intellectual skill that can show a level of intellect. Remembering the symptoms and being able to diagnose every type of known illness in the world would be an incredible intellectual ability. Technically all that would be is "data retention" but the intellectual process behind that knowledge is incredible.

I never stated that it wasn't an intellectual ability. I stated that it is a low level cognitive skill that with enough effort anyone can achieve. Intellect cannot be obtained it is inherent. One can become more literate, not more intelligent.

SillyBear:

The retention of data is also an aspect of intelligence from an evolutionary sense. Being able to remember what things are dangerous and what things are not is incredibly important.

Low level cognitive skill that everyone on the planet other than those with severe mental disabilities are capable of.

SillyBear:

Why do you call being able to dance part of intelligence but being able to remember and recite vital information isn't? How fucking arbitrary is that list of yours?

I never said data retention isn't an intellectual ability. I just stated that it is a low level cognitive skill. Being able to retain data is not indicative of exceptional intellect.

[quote="SillyBear" post="18.386501.15415113"]
2. No university on Earth just tests data retention. You try doing a final year medical school exam and only "retain information". It is just as much about the application of knowledge, i.e: using your data and information to determine, diagnose and decipher things.

Intellect is not one dimensional. With enough effort anyone can pass a medical test. Not everyone can be charming or socially savvy though.

JeffBergGold:

Intellect is not one dimensional.

Never said it was. You're the only one who has been limiting it.

JeffBergGold:
With enough effort anyone can pass a medical test.

I never said just a "medical test" I said a final year medical exam, implying that someone has gone through university too. And no, not anyone can get a medical degree. Some people don't have the capacity to do it.

JeffBergGold:
Not everyone can be charming or socially savvy though.

So you are just basing your criteria on things that "not everyone can do"?

Well in that case, not everyone can retain the same amounts of information. The amount of knowledge someone like Albert Einstein was able to retain in regard to mathematics was certainly not achievable for 99% of the population.

So even using your own logic that falls down.

According to these numbers I was given when I took my MENSA IQ test six years ago:
140+: genius
111-139: above average (130: lower limit to join MENSA)
90-110: average
<90: below average
I was considered high above average with 132. Not that it actually helped me in any aspect of life, since I was never a top student (too lazy to study) and now I'm a university drop out (just like my supposedly genius brother; we make our parents proud, eh?). Goes to show that hard work can be (and often is) more important than inborn smarts.

I don't like the term "intelligence quotient" anyway, 'cause the only thing it show for sure is ones ability so say which picture completes the pattern. And it's not like the knowledge of that number helps much. You can either not care about it, get arrogant because of it or get frustrated because you could do so much better with your potential. So fuck intelligence, I wanna be a panda!

SillyBear:

JeffBergGold:

Intellect is not one dimensional.

SillyBear:

Never said it was. You're the only one who has been limiting it.

Yes, you did.

SillyBear:

I never said just a "medical test" I said a final year medical exam, implying that someone has gone through university too. And no, not anyone can get a medical degree. Some people don't have the capacity to do it.

Barring severe mental disabilities anyone can if they invest enough effort into it.

JeffBergGold:
Not everyone can be charming or socially savvy though.

SillyBear:

So you are just basing your criteria on things that "not everyone can do"?

Nope.

SillyBear:

Well in that case, not everyone can retain the same amounts of information. The amount of knowledge someone like Albert Einstein was able to retain in regard to mathematics was certainly not achievable for 99% of the population.

Sure they can, just different with different types of information. You're pigeonholing intelligence into one dimension again.

[quote="SillyBear" post="18.386501.15415199"]
So even using your own logic that falls down.

You're confusing my logic with yours.
http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs16/f/2007/154/7/d/The_Strawman_Fallacy_by_Elabeth.jpg

JeffBergGold:

Yes, you did.

Please quote the part where I said intelligence is one dimensional.

JeffBergGold:
Barring severe mental disabilities anyone can if they invest enough effort into it.

Barring severe physical deformities, anyone can learn to dance or play a sport if they invest enough effort into it.

Same is true for half of the other shit you listed.

What's your point?

SillyBear:

Sure they can, just different with different types of information. You're pigeonholing intelligence into one dimension again.

No I'm not. All I'm saying is that retaining information is a form of intelligence. I never even half implied that it is only kind. Come on - you're a genius, you should know this. Clearly your "emotional intelligence" isn't quite up to scratch here.

You came out guns blazing saying that retaining information isn't a form of intelligence. I'm saying it certainly is.

It's sorta hard for me to decide. Sure I got into a sophomore class my freshman year, and sure Im in all available advanced classes, but I'm as lazy as they come, and I forget a lot of stuff during summer break. My guess would be slightly above average, as I'm book smart and can have a conversation without making a sex joke, which no one else in my school could do, but I'm too forgetful to be a genius.

There can never be one list to measure someone's intelligence, different people have different learning styles and different ways of thinking

that being said, I am by no means smarter than normal, but i always did get straight A's because i put in hard work, not because of intelligence

If almost everyone is average or above, isn't 'slightly above average' the new average? Or does the Escapists have an inflated view of themselves? Yeeeeaaaah...

It would be nice if there was a rating between genius and slightly above average. I consider myself more intelligent than slightly above average but not a genius.

I am very smart in some areas. I don't find many people that understand science like I do.
But I make up for it by being an idiot in other areas such as general locations, history, socializing, names, dates, etc.

MatsVS:
If almost everyone is average or above, isn't 'slightly above average' the new average? Or does the Escapists have an inflated view of themselves? Yeeeeaaaah...

both are true in this case

100 being the average across the entire population, it would be higher here as you would need a minimum amount of intel to operate a computer. though i dont beleive for a second people saying they have 140+ those being in the 99.99999999999999999999999%

i was tested on iq a couple of times. the results were between 8X-14X
so yeah, i dont trust IQ tests, because according to this i am somewhere between dumb and a genius.

i am lazy as all hells but I did (and still do) very well at school, so i guess above average.
and i most certainly wont call myself a genius because i believe a genius would realise how stupid i am for being so lazy o.O

I'm going with average just to be modest. Sure I know some stuff that some people don't know but likewise they would know something that I don't know!

I'm dumb and that's a fact.Knowledge and wisdom are two seperate things so if i am lacking means to use my knowledge in more practickal uses i dont count as being smart!

i took an IQ test once, came out 117, dragged down from 144 for taking too long

the caveat here? i was so horribly stressed out and insecure that i did the entire test, every question, at least 3 times in my head before accepting the answer

and now years later i have learned that my first idea is usually correct, and i have a huge tendency to correct things WRONG

i dont think that a number on a test is what makes me intelligent

what makes me intelligent is that i use it at every opportunity

i visited my friends friend recently, and noticed his toilet was broken, i examined it closely, and found that a bit was broken, and part A had to be a certain distance from part B, easily fixed with a ziptie

apparently the guy had been unable to flush for over a month

the guy though, he's unemployed, for years, his work, business deals with used things
can i do THAT? no chance i hell

similarly, when me and my friends watch a tv show and a something scientific comes up, we stop debate the theory behind it, yay theoretical physics!

so i believe that intelligence, is much more of an attitude then a number

the people i count as truly stupid, are quite few, and it's all people who never TRY to understand things

the guy who didnt fix his toilet, may not be mechanically minded, like i am, plus one encounter, one example, does not give enough base for a conclusion

some people though, like one friends parents, pay others to take care of little things

clogged toilet, pay someone to do it
car makes a noise, dont look if you can see what's wrong, pay someone to do it
chair is wonky, dont even check, just pay the nearest person to do it for you, or dump it and buy a new one

many of those things take much less time then making the phonecall to have someone else do it.
inspecting a chair for damage takes seconds, and can save both money and TIME, the most common reason is a screw needs tightening

some things are hard, but it's aversion to thought like this, just using money to avoid lifes little challenges that i personally, call stupidity

that dosnt mean those people are not good at their jobs, and in many cases these people have skills i could never match

captcha: narrow minded
uh? this personal captcha? details would help :P

Well I never get lower than a B grade for anything so I guess (very) slightly above average.

Duke University recognized me in the top 1% in the nation for science and mathematical comprehension. So I guess that's cool. Didn't get me anywhere.

I get to rate myself? Oh man! Genius. Obviously. I knew from a young age that standing in fire wasn't good for my health.

really? no friggen Idea, I don't think so really.....

everyone thinks they are smarter than what they really are and its an incredibly hard thing to measure...

an IQ test isnt everything

The last time I took one of the Wechsler tests a few years back my IQ was 150 even (Stanford-Binet was 147). So, I'm technically a genius. I'm the part of the Gauss curve that's waaaaay over to the right all by its lonesome.

...of course, it's a mostly useless genius since I have no savant-like talents and the unfortunate inherent limitations and acquired scarring of a young adult with Asperger's disorder (yes, I have a diagnosis), but I major in Pipe Organ at the third-most competitive music school in the US so I'd like to think that I'm getting some use out of my apparently overdeveloped brain.

Kragg:

MatsVS:
If almost everyone is average or above, isn't 'slightly above average' the new average? Or does the Escapists have an inflated view of themselves? Yeeeeaaaah...

both are true in this case

100 being the average across the entire population, it would be higher here as you would need a minimum amount of intel to operate a computer. though i dont beleive for a second people saying they have 140+ those being in the 99.99999999999999999999999%

Snip a few nines off of there, but technically I [/i]am[/i] in the 99.9th percentile the last time they updated the Gauss curve. Normal Distribution governs the whole '99th percentile' thing. It's definitely overrated as an absolute measure of intelligence but it's not invalid.

Meh, brighter then most people I know.

I'm probably average. Better than many in some areas, worse than many in others. It all balances out, I suppose.

Oh wait, this is The Escapist.

I have an IQ of 2,000,000 AND I can count to firetruck.

Bow before my smert.

Honestly, I have no fucking idea. People have said that I am smart but honestly, I don't think I'm any smarter than anyone else.
I did amazingly well in high school but am struggling in Uni. I have never done an IQ test because I do not trust them and just couldn't be bothered.

If anything, I will say that I am more perceptive than average due to my utter obsession with music and martial arts so I've trained my ear to pick up tiny subtleties in sound and tone, and my eyes to read body language respectively.
Maybe I'll just say average?

Based on testing, I score within the top 2 percent. But FUCK. THAT. Intelligence is such a broad and meaningless term that there isn't any way to measure it. Sure there are specific things that you can measure, but it's rarely accurate. Personally, I put myself at above average because as far as I'm concerned, I'm a moron. A creative moron, but a moron none the less.

Average. Although that might be my depression talking. *shrug*

I've got an IQ of 158; not that IQ ever amounts to anything.

I don't have any doubts that I'm the most intelligent person I know. My problem is that I'm not smart.

I say "I can count to potato". I know I'm an idiot, but not sure how to rank it. I say aim low and avoid disappointment.

Everyone thinks they are above average, it is just Illusory superiority coming into play, and cognitive bias. I'd say I'm average, I've got areas where I'm extremely knowledgeable and will stop 99% of people but I'm just skilled in some areas not particularly smart.

Maybe, just maybe, slightly above average. Ever so slightly. Those logical puzzles fuck with my brain, but give me a speech on morality, equal rights and all that and I'll feel like a kid in a candy store.

I rate my intelligence 9 graphics out of 11.

Vault101:
really? no friggen Idea, I don't think so really.....

everyone thinks they are smarter than what they really are and its an incredibly hard thing to measure...

an IQ test isnt everything

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Normal folk and stupid folk rate themselves as smarter, smart folk rate themselves as lower.

So basically, reverse those results entirely to find the actual results.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked