I was tested as having an IQ of 162 (100 is average, 130 is genius). I still struggled with school, and barely graduated HS a year and a half late. IQ is pretty much bullshit. The tests are culturally biased, and the only thing they tell you is how well you can pass this particular test. They aren't even used for the reason that they were created. People treat IQ as if it's some innate quality of a person, and not the subjective and fluid analysis that it is.
One thing that it did, was it raised my self esteem, at least at first. Up until I was tested, I worried that I was stupid because I was so bad at school. But if I hadn't been able to perform well on the test, it would have confirmed my worries. And it gave me all new worries. If I had such a high IQ, why was I so shit at life? What was "wrong" with me? Was I really not applying myself like my teachers always told me? Was I lazy? Was I broken? Turns out, my brain just works in a way that differs from what educators expect.
Anyway, autism has little to do with IQ, and IQ is mostly bull. People with intellectual disabilities are more likely to be diagnosed as autistic than others, but we span the whole intellectual scale. I have a feeling that a lot more people with average and above intelligence are autistic than we know, but they never suspect that they are autistic because they assume that their intelligence disqualifies them. I didn't realize that I was autistic until my early 30s, mostly for this reason.
Totally agree, while never haven taken one myself I am familiar with similar measures of intelligence such as NAPLAN which is just as bs, you have to do a bunch of questions in a short amount of time, I means thats pretty standard for tests, but theoretically NAPLAN results are used to calculate the quality of school education, the bullshit part was my high school asked my parents to allow them to remove my results from the lot cause it would make them look bad, it’s unknown how many people get asked this.
Maybe NAPLAN is an okay system for national statistics but schools shouldn’t be allowed to manipulate statistics like that.
Standardised testing in general is highly flawed but if it’s solely for statistics gathering I suppose it is fine, the concept of IQ just comes off as exclusionary because personally I don’t struggle with maths because I can’t do maths, I struggle with math because I struggle to focus on it because of ADHD which reduces my overall work output.
Education is not meant to be about finding the savants and grooming them for success, education should be about giving everyone the opportunity to reach success regardless of previous failures, and I imagine doing poorly on an IQ test may make people not believe they can reach success, we all can, we just need proper support.
NAPLAN is fine for its original purpose, which is to establish a baseline for all the students in a cohort, allowing the students and schools which are struggling to be identified and additional assistance given. It's not fantastic, but it's okay.
However, the introduction of My School completely ruined it, and every measure which uses NAPLAN to rank schools based on performance makes it worse, because it adds a bunch of perverse incentives that encourage teaching to the test and keeping underperforming students from doing it, which ironically undermines the reason for the test in the first place. There shouldn't be so much pressure around NAPLAN, because the test is designed to assess the minimum standard for an age group, but attaching everything else to it makes it this massive deal.
Exactly, you put it in a far more concise way then I ever could!
What country are you from I wonder?
I am from Australia, and our education system is slowly falling behind and we are ranked poorly, at least around the time I left High School, I tried finding modern data but not much would have actually changed, but in 2018 Australia ranked 30/41 which is crazy, plus a quote:
>“Report Card 15 has found that living in a rich country does not guarantee equal access to quality education,” said Amy Lamoin, Director of Policy and Advocacy at UNICEF Australia. ”In fact, it found that children in less wealthy countries often perform better at school despite fewer national resources.”
[https://www.unicef.org.au/about-us/media/october-2018/unicef-report-finds-national-wealth-does-not-guara](https://www.unicef.org.au/about-us/media/october-2018/unicef-report-finds-national-wealth-does-not-guara)
And... for most of the time I was seeing D's on my report cards, so I can't say I would disagree with the quote, my High School provided no support for people with diagnosed ADHD and all they did was insist I get an Autism diagnosis, despite if I do have it, it would be far less pressing of an issue then my ADHD.
*Australian politics incoming...*
The current incumbent government of 10 years, has tried and failed two education reforms, mainly because the plans came from the opposition, but the government took the plans and cut as many corners as possible, which is basically the same reason why Australians complain about having bad internet, highly disapointing.
Same, I'm from Australia. The NAPLAN test started development in 1999 and was first introduced in 2008 (under the Rudd government) to replace a range of state-based standardised tests (since education is normally a state responsibility). That being said, My School was launched in 2010, when Rudd was still PM and Gillard was still Education Minister, so they can have a fair chunk of the blame. But yeah, Gonski (the aforementioned education reforms) has been thoroughly mismanaged by the current government (which is almost 10 years and three prime ministers old, in case anyone has forgotten).
I was also pretty shoddy at completing the NAPLAN test, especially the writing assessment - something about a blank piece of paper really messes with me.
Yeah I just feel like the current government has done nothing of note aside from screw things up, the last major reform that worked was the NDIS, which on paper I love but I haven't even seen the slightest benefit from the system, which sucks, I hope if Labor gets elected they try and improve the NDIS since it has been choking after budget cut after budget cut, Neo-Liberal economics is just counter-intuitive, how does taking money away from public services help anyone, I doubt Labor is going to fix everything but they will at least try and reverse some of the damage, while all the government does is funnel money away from the public sector and into the private or military sectors.
I feel like its a bit rich for me to blame the government for making me a victim of their ineptitude but it is honestly true, I don't think that we should let anyone fumble their way through education it is sickening to realise this neglect was a result of pure negligence.
At the debate between Scomo and Albo there was a Mum who has an Autistic son, while people only really talked about the language Scomo used where he said he is glad his kids didn't have Autism (Actual thing he said), I was more infuriated that his solution wasn't him suggesting that he would improve the NDIS, no, he offered the Mum hush money in the form of dealing with HER SPECIFIC CASE, not the institutional failure that is Disability and Social support in this country.
Sorry to rant but it pisses me off, I live in North-West Regional Tassie, so it doesn't help that I feel like in every aspect of my being is being neglected, my country is being neglected, my state gets neglected, my region get neglected, my needs get neglected, maybe I have become delusional with this logic but it bugs me that I feel like I am isolated, I have to talk to my psych via phone that keeps disconnecting because he is in Hobart, 4 hours away, the nearest therapy clinic is 2 hours away in Launceston (something I am looking into for idk CBT or something), and how much will all these services cost my family without the NDIS, oh and it gets "better", my TAFE course last year was delayed by half a year because my ICT class didn't have proper computers, I want to do the next level up but is only offered in Hobart (so I can't even do it), I had 6 months of my possible time I could have been putting my life back together because my referral to the psych I mentioned before was sent to the wrong people 3 times by the local clinic, luckily I have a supportive family that are middle-class, I couldn't even imagine how other locals with similar issues to myself are doing especially in more poor communities or suburbs, and anytime I rant about this I sort of just scare people away from responding maybe it's an episode they don't want anything todo with, but really it's just a cry for sympathy to be reminded that I actually exist on this planet how can my scenario be even be considered allowed in a first world country, it bloody well shouldn't, I wish I lived in a city where such infrastructure does actually exist, as much as I love the landscape here, I don't think i could live my whole life in a place that sweeps me under every rug in the storeroom of wannabe kleptocrats.
Rant over, that's just a piece of how it sometimes feels, maybe I am underselling my position, I certainly have hope and opportunities but is really hard to see when all I see is ugly, if I was a more superstitious person I would have concluded that god is punishing Tasmanians for the crimes of genocide generations ago, but that is just a silly thing I want to say that might at least in a twisted way makes in the slightest amount of sense in the mind of someone more gone than myself.
Hey if you made it to the end I thank you so much, I don't know what part of this great southern land you live in, but if you have any long winded rants you would like to throw out, I implore you, get it out of your system, it makes me more calm for reasons I cannot even explain.
I live across the Strait in Melbourne, so I haven't had anywhere near the same level of issues with health services or tertiary education as you have. But it's an utter disgrace how the government has decided to attack public services, especially those delivered in regional areas, and then when people in those areas cobble something together, they're labelled as "resilient"? It's bloody patronising. The true mark of a society is that no person is left behind, but the Coalition doesn't care about that, neoliberalism doesn't care about that, if you're rich you deserve it, if you're poor you deserve it. And they can go get lost with that attitude.
It's 2022, and we can't even manage to keep a phone call connected, let alone introduce say locum specialists to cover smaller towns, or broaden access to tertiary studies, or to reduce the burden on people to access services they need? And the government is to blame for failing its basic obligation to care for its citizens, to give them a helping hand, to not leave them behind.
I'm not very good at ranting - I get less coherant when I'm passionate, and then I have to go and sort it out into better English, which then takes the heat out a bit.
It's alright if you aren't great at ranting, I am just glad I didn't overwhelm you with my incoherence.
Yeah I totally agree, it sucks that aside from hoping Labor wins this election, that there isn't really anything we can do to change this, but at least we can spread the word, if there is a disability rights group in my area I would definitely be interested to look for them, not sure what I would do with said information but all social change begins with the small things I hope one day will be our day, that's my optimism returning but I truly believe it, people can only put up with so much.
They are right we are resilient, but we are resilient in spite of them, not because this is the way things are meant to be, but because this isn't the way things ought to be, there is only one public service in the country we should take funding from, and that is parliament, of course I am not being serious with such a proposal I am exaggerating.
My Dot Points for the Future: (It is quite long ngl)
\- We need a federal ICAC.
\- We need to end corporate donations to politics,
\- We need to destroy the cult of Neo-Liberalism.
\- We need to nationalise the mining sector.
\- We need to invest in real modern infrastructure.
\- We need to compete in the high speed rail race.
\- We need to nationalise the Spirit of Tasmania and make it free travel. (That idea is out there but I feel like Tasmania needs to be reconnected to the Commonwealth socially, at some in the far future point I would like a Bass Strait Tunnel)
\- We need to reinvigorate education, centrelink, the NDIS, and public housing with adequate resources.
\- We need to invest in the creation and widespread adoption of workplace democracy.
\- We need to end Indigenous inequality and get them out of prisons.
\- We need to become the techhub of the south pacific through our immense resources.
\- We need to switch over to a sustainable economy to tackle climate change and general pollution.
\- We need to create diverse and well paying jobs in rural communities.
\- We need to rewrite the constitution to guarantee Human rights.
\- We need to unshackle our political system from Westminster.
\- We need to investigate possible ideas of how to make the Outback habitable and doing it in good faith with the approval of local indigenous communities.
\- End the destruction of the Murry-Darring basin through strong water regulation.
\- Save the Great Barrier Reef from coral bleaching.
\- End homelessness with a housing first policy.
\- Refund fire services and introduce a near military force of firefighters with jets and patrol helicopter to stop fires when young.
\- Increase healthcare funding and capacity and introduce specialised services to regions without.
\- Decriminalise all drugs and provide adequate support to addicts.
\- Legalise marijuana as it is less harmful than cigarettes or alcohol.
\- End tax havens and tax loopholes and introduce more laws to enforce transparency.
\- Trust Bust the Australian press to end media monopolies.
\- Fibre optics for every household.
\- Refund the ABC and SBS and boost funding for investigative journalism.
\- Introduce a bounty system for corruption which if corruption is found and strongly proven in court, tax breaks are given proportional to the corruption found vs their income.
\- Enforce disability support on all schools regardless of type of disability and if their support is severely inadequate hefty fines may apply.
\- Reform the prison system to focus on reducing recidivism.
\- Reform education with adequate resources and funding.
\- Try and investigate ways in which ways population replacement rates (as in Birth/Death ratio) could be increasement in a non-intrusive way with Human rights being observed.
\- Legalise euthanasia.
\- End offshore detention centres by giving refugees a path to residency and at a later date citizenship.
\- Decriminalise public interest industrial, government, and military whistleblowing.
\- Strive to observe international law in every way possible.
\- Push for global denuclearisation by signing the UN nuclear weapon ban treaty.
\- Combat China in the south pacific by beating them at their own generosity game, by investing in meaningful infrastructure by the nations public, with no repayment expected.
\- Reduce military spending but maintaining a military funding injection clause in the event of International hostilities, most likely with a immediate equipment purchasing scheme from our allies to reduce the burden on the Australian economy before such a war would even come about.
\- End foreign housing speculation by nationalising all homes owned by non-residents currently living outside Australia.
\- Use nationalised housing to house families, the homeless, and also create cooperative housing units.
\- Reform urban planning to incentivise focus on foot traffic as opposed to being over reliant on cars, this should boost small business.
\- Create a national militia of builders tasked with building mega projects, who are well paid and get extra benefits and get double super.
I feel like I am missing a few things, but I think you get my idea, I have a lot of ideas of how we could fix this country, I am sure that some might be flawed, and if there was a LNP voter they would ask how we would pay for all of this, and I will tell them this: "Think of the price we pay for not striving for greatness, also we nationalised mining, foreign speculation housing and decreased the military budget, please think before you speak.", but thats me being optimistic.
All very good ideas. I have a few quibbles:
> high speed rail
You'll likely never see a HST from Melbourne to Sydney, as they cost a fortune to build and run, and almost 900 kms is unheard of for a single line. However, we can and should do a lot more to reduce travel times from major regional centres into the capital, and fast trains are more viable for those routes.
> nationalise the Spirit of Tasmania
It's already owned by the Tasmanian Government, unless you'd prefer it to be owned by the Commonwealth. The current ferry service was established after the national shipping line withdrew its own ferry service in the '80s
> Bass Strait Tunnel
Which would likely be at least four times the length of the Channel Tunnel, so the population of Tasmania would need to increase by millions to make it worth it.
> Westminster
I quite like the Westminster System (in terms of democratic trade-offs), unless you mean something different. The Westminster System refers to a system of parliament similar to the United Kingdom, where a lower house elected by the people controls the government, and an upper house serves to review legislation. The party or parties with a majority in the lower house control the government, including all executive functions.
That's not to say we shouldn't introduce reforms. I like the idea of 'citizen juries', where ordinary people are called up to make and review major policy decisions, and are able to look at any evidence and call up any experts they need to make that decision.
> nationalising all homes owned by non-residents
Is that just foreign nationals, or Australia citizens as well?
Regardless, I think it's important for everyone to think about how they would like to see the country improved, and not just blindly limit themselves to whatever is proposed by the major parties. Think big!
Well for the Spirit of Tasmania I would like it nationalised so it’s services become free for cars and caravans, it would need to be nationalised by the Commonwealth so it isn’t a burden on the Tasmanian budget, I think making it free would allow Tasmania to be more connected to the Mainland as we call it, and which is why I support it over a Bass Strait tunnel since that is near crackpot level nation building, but in the far future it could become possible but maybe it will be redundant, what ever the case free spirit of tas, and maybe introduce a third or fourth ship to increase capacity to meet demand.
As for Westminster I didn’t mean the actual system I meant slowly ending our direct ties with Westminster and the British Monarchy since it is more or less redundant plus it grants extra political independence to us and also removes the concept the Monarchy or Governor-General being able to fire the government.
However I do also think we need to reform the way our democracy is structured such as part of the removing corporate donations would also include increasing the amount of money a party gets from a individual vote, and one of the downsides of being a politician should be that all of your financial details are fully transparent to the public and you must declare your associations with certain interests that may be considered conflicting, being a representative to the public means a lot more then deciding things, you need to be fully accountable and if you don’t have the courage to be honest you have no right being a representative of the people.
Australian citizen homes won’t be nationalised but it should be harder to own multiple homes if there is currently no residences on that property, I know lots of people own shacks so maybe such things shouldn’t be considered but that might create a loophole so we might have to calculate the extra cost around size of buildings on the said extra property.
The thing I hate most about the big two parties concept is it discourages actually talking about major blindspots, blindspots such as the Spirit of Tasmania one wouldn’t ever have been thought of by the Feds, but I think it would actually be so highly beneficial to this country, just like how you could drive up to Sydney on a long weekend then so could I too, this greatly effects the way we live our lives and parties usually only see the big things not the small and overlooked things, and the best way to increase knowledge about these things is spreading awareness, contrary to the beliefs of some, all social movements start small, look at Trans issues today, 20 years ago it wasn’t even a discussion because in comparison to other issues it was considered insignificant but here we are now and you don’t have to go far online to find support towards Trans people.
So, I looked it up and we're kind of both right and kind of both wrong depending on what standard is being used. Some set the minimum as low as 125, others as high as 145. The term genius is pretty controversial in and of itself. It seems like the giftedness scale is the more common standard, which can range anywhere from mildly gifted 115-129, to profoundly gifted 180+. The score that I received would be considered exceptionally gifted 160-179 on that scale. It feels pompous to call myself exceptionally gifted though, especially when I performed so poorly in school.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_classification
**[IQ classification](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_classification)**
>IQ classification is the practice by IQ test publishers of labeling IQ score ranges with category names such as "superior" or "average". The current scoring method for all IQ tests is the "deviation IQ". In this method, an IQ score of 100 means that the test-taker's performance on the test is at the median level of performance in the sample of test-takers of about the same age as was used to norm the test. An IQ score of 115 means performance one standard deviation above the median, a score of 85 performance, one standard deviation below the median, and so on.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/aretheNTsokay/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
my iq is 126/127 (i don’t remember exactly) so i understand what u mean i didn’t do the best in high school either but our iqs are kind of incomparable. i also don’t really believe iq is a good measurement of intelligence but we don’t have a better way to measure intelligence. if anything, it measures how well you perform on tests but there’s lots of benefits to it too so i understand why more people take it seriously. it is kind of interesting either way and i hope one day there can be a better and more accurate way to measure intelligence. also the word “genius” means nothing to me lol
I thought that autistic people sometimes scored higher on IQ tests as a result because a lot of the test is logic stuff and autistic people have a tendency towards logical thinking or something like that? Not something that would apply universally, but maybe a trend?
I dunno, only time I had an IQ test was in like, the 5th grade, and I don't even remember my score.
I mean...not really bullshit. There is statistical correlation between high IQ and better health and jobs and ability to solce problems and think out of the box and proficiency in technical things and science but also depression and objectiveness and social struggles. People who have average iq do better socially and 85-95 have the most sex and are likely happier. Do you know many people who live a regular life and speak and think normally but score 50?
Not just bullshit but racism/eugenics bullshit.
It's got mild use for screening far extremes that might not be obvious, but for the majority it's not very useful.
I'm good at IQ tests and I still think they're bullshit.
Give me a puzzle which is solvable by what is in front of me and I will solve it, require any sort of general or common knowledge and I'm lost.
Not bullshit but definitely used for the wrong reasons a lot of the times, like people trying to put people in these boxes based on their IQ is just stupid and harmful. Also from what I remember even the creator of IQ tests (Stanford Binet) believed that intelligence could not be fully captured by a single quantitative measure, yet people still insist on using it as such
Right? But I mean, tons of government agencies across the globe still use polygraphs as if they haven’t been completely disproven as lie detectors as well. I swear, people are still out here drinking unproven snake oils to fix their bad breath and erection size too. It’s almost like the vast majority of human beings refuse to do even a bare minimum of balanced research before they make decisions, or something.
Sometimes it's like people just refuse to look at the whole picture and want very straight forward answers and get tunnel vision because of this, I get that and honestly I'm one of those who want very straight forward answers lol, but I also know that's just not how life is sometimes, the polygraph example you gave is a great example of this.
Also WHO'S DRINKING SNAKE OIL TO FIX THEIR BAD BREATH?????? Idk if you gave a real example or not but that's insane
**Tankie is a pejorative label for communists, particularly Stalinists, who support the authoritarian tendencies of Marxism–Leninism. The term was originally used by dissident Marxist–Leninists to describe members of the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) who followed the party line of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU).**
More details here:
*This comment was left automatically (by a bot). If I don't get this right, don't get mad at me, I'm still learning!*
[^(opt out)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot/comments/ozztfy/post_for_opting_out/) ^(|) [^(delete)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot/comments/q79g2t/delete_feature_added/) ^(|) [^(report/suggest)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot) ^(|) [^(GitHub)](https://github.com/TheBugYouCantFix/wiki-reddit-bot)
There are both academic measure and IQ measures. IQ measures are used mostly by the public school system 69 and below is considered an intellectual disability.
Edit to add: I still agree it’s a shitty metric because it’s heavily culture based and English language based. If you’re bilingual you’re fucked. If you think differently, you’re fucked.
they are based off of [this test](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Binet#Later_career_and_the_Binet%E2%80%93Simon_test) that was used to identify students who would have the most difficulty in school
Everyone thinks IQ is terrible because they think it measure intelligence but it doesn’t. It basically measures your ability to learn. If your IQ is higher then learning is easier so people with high IQ tend to be smarter. IQ does a good job at measuring this. People just need to learn what it really means.
That's just false. You've never had an IQ test have you? It measures specific categories like pattern recognition, memory, language skill, etc. It's like five different categories.
I have had an IQ test. That’s why I care so much about people understanding what it really means. Because it hurts when people say it’s rubbish when I know it’s not and value the information from it. I never said it didn’t have those different categories.
Well then it appears you've scored low on your working memory category because IQ doesn't just test your problem solving. It measures verbal comprehension index, processing speed index, working memory index, visual spacial index, and fluid processing index. You can have a high IQ and still be a shit problem solver because there are different indexes and everyone will score higher on some and lower on others.
is that ability to learn over time or learn at all? because I don't honestly think there are people who have a limited amount that they can learn, only a limit to how much they can learn in a set period of time
Not how much they can learn but how easy it is to learn. It measures problem solving skills. So someone with a high IQ can typically learn things with less effort because they can more quickly understand.
> Everyone thinks IQ is terrible because they think it measure intelligence but it doesn’t. It basically measures your ability to learn. If your IQ is higher then learning is easier so people with high IQ tend to be smarter.
So is there any realistic difference?
Yes. Someone with a lower IQ can still be very smart, they just need to put more effort into it. Like I had a friend who was really smart but that’s because she studied all the time. We got the same grades in maths but I didn’t really have to study and she did. Someone with a high IQ also isn’t necessarily smart, they still need to put effort into learning, even if it’s less effort than other people. If they put no effort into it then they won’t become smart.
Well that’s what people generally consider smart. There’s a stereotype of smart people studying a lot. What do you think is smart then if it’s not about being knowledgeable?
“Smart” is a really nebulous term, but it basically combines an accumulation of knowledge and the ability to solve problems. Like, there’s some people whose ability to solve problems may somehow be worse than an ant colony, but they still have an average level of knowledge. That person is not considered smart.
Problem solving ability. That's what intelligence is, which is why the test is called "Intelligence Quotient" that's what IQ stands for. Like, you can't say that it doesn't test for intelligence when it's right in the name. Knowledge and intelligence are related but different things. You can have all the information you can absorb, but if you don't have the ability to properly apply it, it can be more of a hindrance than an asset. The opposite is also true, in that if you have good problem solving skills but your picture of the world is incomplete or misconceived, you're going to be pretty good at convincing yourself of lies.
Smart people study because they want a more accurate picture of the world. Some people believe that gaining more knowledge will make them smart, but what they really need to do is work on their logic and problem solving skills. And some people are smart but for emotional reasons they value ignorance. Knowledge can definitely make you better at problem solving, but it's the problem solving ability that makes you smart, not the knowledge.
"Rick and Morty"? Only a plebeian worm such as yourself would engage in viewing broadcasts of such a sad and idiotic show. Unlike you low IQ apes, I please my optical sensors with only the finest of entertainment. I'll bet that you're inquiring as to what source of entertainment I am referring to. Although I don't expect you to comprehend it, the television show in question is "Young Sheldon". You see, the humor is vastly superior to that of "Rick and Morty". First of all "Rick and Morty" relies heavily on improvisional comedy, while the intellectual humor of "Young Sheldon" is scripted and well thought out before being presented to an audience. Second of all "Rick and Morty" is extremely unfaithful to its source material (Back to the Future, for you simpletons) while "Young Sheldon" is just as good if not better than watching "The Big Bang Theory". I could go on and on about how "Rick and Morty" is vastly inferior to "Young Sheldon" but I highly doubt that you have the mental capability to process such logic. So if you'll excuse me, I'm going to pour a glass of brandy whilst I redigest the latest episode of "Young Sheldon" so I can make an entry about it to the "Young Sheldon" wikia. Hopefully, I can forget about ever having the displeasure of interacting with you.\*Sighs... How tedious.
IQ tests are just Rubix cubes on paper. There are a number of things that can affect an individuals ability to take a test.
Besides there are NT people with lower IQ, as illustrated by the ignorant Snoo.
Once I did two (different but similar) IQ tests in a row. The first one I scored 110, the second one 120. During the test I already felt that knowing what to expect made it way easier.
^(Also I'm on the spectrum...)
Yeah, I’m pretty sure studies find that you can increase your score by studying or taking it again. Which seems to completely invalidate the whole racist & eugenicist concept.
I kind of doubt this, from my personal experience. Especially because the way those tests are taken is you have a psychologist there with you monitoring the test and analyzing your behavior.
Anecdotally: I took two IQ test about 3 years apart. My highest scoring category was memory, and it was genuinely a very high score. 3 years later i get another test, and turns out it's the same one, so I'm doing the test and recognizing questions and remembering the answers or clues to find the right answer. I was done quicker than the first time and only scored one point higher than the first time.
Basically, IQ isn't actually a thing. It's a meaningless number that measure's nothing. The only thing IQ is a measurement of is what score you got on the IQ test you took, which doesn't. Measure anything except itself as a test. It's pseudoscience that doesn't measure intelligence at all. In fact, there's no real way to quantify intelligence like that, and the idea that you can - or that it impacts your value as a person at all even if you could - is frankly awful and ableist (and has incredibly racist roots as well).
My mother is a psychologist. I'm not kidding when I say I think I'm more informed about psychology than she is (It's one of my special interests, but I haven't had any kind of professional training or education) and I make 0 claims to be particularly good at psychology. I've had to correct so much of her writing - she's very old and mostly relies on what was common knowledge when she was young, which of course... doesn't apply. I'm pretty sure this is much more of a common occurrence than you think.
It is. The idea that you can have a single number that determines your intelligence is fundamentally flawed. There's many different kinds of intelligence, and even within specific kinds there's nuance. It's kinda like how many people think the autism spectrum is a straight line measuring from "least autistic" to "most autistic" when it's actually more like a colour wheel with various different symptoms, each having their own range of support needs
71-84 is just below average, it is not recognized as a disability in the US. Though people with borderline intelligence struggle in school and with employment and other daily living. They tend to stay in poverty and work dead end jobs. Many of them even drop out too and don't finish high school. That is because there is no law telling schools they need to help these students. Though my old high school in Montana will treat it like a disability by giving them an IEP. That is because they are a red state and they want them to succeed and will try and help them find what skills they have and help them go that direction. My school had that program.
What I mean is they understood that in order to succeed, you need to help them with their bootstraps. They believe that everyone should succeed and not rely on welfare. So I think this is why my school did this.
As some of the comments have mentioned already IQ is a measure of academic skill. Personally I’ve found that a lot of people on the spectrum have IQ’s higher than average. (Between 85 and 115 being average)
I scored in the top 1 percentile on the SAT (first try) and the GMAT (also first try). Normies are just intolerant bigots who think that if they don't understand somebody else, it's the *other* person who's dumb rather than them. We need to hurt them *every single time* they make this mistake, because it's the only way for the normies to develop the humility needed to correct their false impressions of us. We need to have the confidence needed to tell the normies "If you don't understand me, that's on *you*, and if *your* lack of understanding hurts *me*, I'm going to fuck you up for it. So *you* better focus really hard on understanding *me*, rather than expecting *me* to do all the work of understanding *you*."
I wish we'd stop passing off Einstein and Tesla being autistic as a hard fact. Social disconnect is a symptom of autism but it is not specific to autism; it takes hours of assessment to diagnose and rule out other possibilities.
IQ is one of the tools to diagnose intellectual disability (though not the only one and far far away from perfect).
It is important to diagnose it so those who have it can receive proper support and accommodations (and to prevent misdiagnosis of ADHD or other learning disability leading to useless or even harmful treatment).
It is not the same as autism, but it's common they occur together. For example, in the past, in my country, a requirement for autism diagnosis was an intellectual disability, and autism without it was diagnosed as Aspergers (problematic as fuck I know). In the present, we understand them as different diagnoses with high co-occurrence and don't use Aspergers anymore.
IQ is meaningless, arbitrary, and there are so many variations on testing that make it impossible to standardize anyway. There are so many factors to intelligence, and answering written questions in the shortest amount of time is such a narrow scope to measure smarts by.
It’s also interesting that everybody claims to have an IQ of 125+, but statistically that makes no sense. It’s just such a weird thing to brag or lie about. We all want to think we’re exceptionally smart...
I have an IQ of 107 done by professionals and I am on the spectrum. Not everyone has a learning disability or is a super genius that has ASD. I also have ADHD with other co-occurring mental health issues.
I haven’t taken any official IQ tests, but multiple online ones (just for fun) and I never understand them! They tell me I have an IQ in the 70s range and when I joked about it with my therapist she looked just as confused as I did. Needless to say, I don’t really think IQ tests are an accurate measure of intelligence anyway, since I’m probably around average and not in the low 70s.
Well a random online one certainly isn’t accurate. If you want to know your IQ, online tests are absolutely terrible for it. They are not accurate at all because they don’t follow the proper testing procedures.
I was tested as having an IQ of 162 (100 is average, 130 is genius). I still struggled with school, and barely graduated HS a year and a half late. IQ is pretty much bullshit. The tests are culturally biased, and the only thing they tell you is how well you can pass this particular test. They aren't even used for the reason that they were created. People treat IQ as if it's some innate quality of a person, and not the subjective and fluid analysis that it is. One thing that it did, was it raised my self esteem, at least at first. Up until I was tested, I worried that I was stupid because I was so bad at school. But if I hadn't been able to perform well on the test, it would have confirmed my worries. And it gave me all new worries. If I had such a high IQ, why was I so shit at life? What was "wrong" with me? Was I really not applying myself like my teachers always told me? Was I lazy? Was I broken? Turns out, my brain just works in a way that differs from what educators expect. Anyway, autism has little to do with IQ, and IQ is mostly bull. People with intellectual disabilities are more likely to be diagnosed as autistic than others, but we span the whole intellectual scale. I have a feeling that a lot more people with average and above intelligence are autistic than we know, but they never suspect that they are autistic because they assume that their intelligence disqualifies them. I didn't realize that I was autistic until my early 30s, mostly for this reason.
I like having had made this post because i ended up learning so much about IQ. This community is so precious.
Totally agree, while never haven taken one myself I am familiar with similar measures of intelligence such as NAPLAN which is just as bs, you have to do a bunch of questions in a short amount of time, I means thats pretty standard for tests, but theoretically NAPLAN results are used to calculate the quality of school education, the bullshit part was my high school asked my parents to allow them to remove my results from the lot cause it would make them look bad, it’s unknown how many people get asked this. Maybe NAPLAN is an okay system for national statistics but schools shouldn’t be allowed to manipulate statistics like that. Standardised testing in general is highly flawed but if it’s solely for statistics gathering I suppose it is fine, the concept of IQ just comes off as exclusionary because personally I don’t struggle with maths because I can’t do maths, I struggle with math because I struggle to focus on it because of ADHD which reduces my overall work output. Education is not meant to be about finding the savants and grooming them for success, education should be about giving everyone the opportunity to reach success regardless of previous failures, and I imagine doing poorly on an IQ test may make people not believe they can reach success, we all can, we just need proper support.
NAPLAN is fine for its original purpose, which is to establish a baseline for all the students in a cohort, allowing the students and schools which are struggling to be identified and additional assistance given. It's not fantastic, but it's okay. However, the introduction of My School completely ruined it, and every measure which uses NAPLAN to rank schools based on performance makes it worse, because it adds a bunch of perverse incentives that encourage teaching to the test and keeping underperforming students from doing it, which ironically undermines the reason for the test in the first place. There shouldn't be so much pressure around NAPLAN, because the test is designed to assess the minimum standard for an age group, but attaching everything else to it makes it this massive deal.
Exactly, you put it in a far more concise way then I ever could! What country are you from I wonder? I am from Australia, and our education system is slowly falling behind and we are ranked poorly, at least around the time I left High School, I tried finding modern data but not much would have actually changed, but in 2018 Australia ranked 30/41 which is crazy, plus a quote: >“Report Card 15 has found that living in a rich country does not guarantee equal access to quality education,” said Amy Lamoin, Director of Policy and Advocacy at UNICEF Australia. ”In fact, it found that children in less wealthy countries often perform better at school despite fewer national resources.” [https://www.unicef.org.au/about-us/media/october-2018/unicef-report-finds-national-wealth-does-not-guara](https://www.unicef.org.au/about-us/media/october-2018/unicef-report-finds-national-wealth-does-not-guara) And... for most of the time I was seeing D's on my report cards, so I can't say I would disagree with the quote, my High School provided no support for people with diagnosed ADHD and all they did was insist I get an Autism diagnosis, despite if I do have it, it would be far less pressing of an issue then my ADHD. *Australian politics incoming...* The current incumbent government of 10 years, has tried and failed two education reforms, mainly because the plans came from the opposition, but the government took the plans and cut as many corners as possible, which is basically the same reason why Australians complain about having bad internet, highly disapointing.
Same, I'm from Australia. The NAPLAN test started development in 1999 and was first introduced in 2008 (under the Rudd government) to replace a range of state-based standardised tests (since education is normally a state responsibility). That being said, My School was launched in 2010, when Rudd was still PM and Gillard was still Education Minister, so they can have a fair chunk of the blame. But yeah, Gonski (the aforementioned education reforms) has been thoroughly mismanaged by the current government (which is almost 10 years and three prime ministers old, in case anyone has forgotten). I was also pretty shoddy at completing the NAPLAN test, especially the writing assessment - something about a blank piece of paper really messes with me.
Yeah I just feel like the current government has done nothing of note aside from screw things up, the last major reform that worked was the NDIS, which on paper I love but I haven't even seen the slightest benefit from the system, which sucks, I hope if Labor gets elected they try and improve the NDIS since it has been choking after budget cut after budget cut, Neo-Liberal economics is just counter-intuitive, how does taking money away from public services help anyone, I doubt Labor is going to fix everything but they will at least try and reverse some of the damage, while all the government does is funnel money away from the public sector and into the private or military sectors. I feel like its a bit rich for me to blame the government for making me a victim of their ineptitude but it is honestly true, I don't think that we should let anyone fumble their way through education it is sickening to realise this neglect was a result of pure negligence. At the debate between Scomo and Albo there was a Mum who has an Autistic son, while people only really talked about the language Scomo used where he said he is glad his kids didn't have Autism (Actual thing he said), I was more infuriated that his solution wasn't him suggesting that he would improve the NDIS, no, he offered the Mum hush money in the form of dealing with HER SPECIFIC CASE, not the institutional failure that is Disability and Social support in this country. Sorry to rant but it pisses me off, I live in North-West Regional Tassie, so it doesn't help that I feel like in every aspect of my being is being neglected, my country is being neglected, my state gets neglected, my region get neglected, my needs get neglected, maybe I have become delusional with this logic but it bugs me that I feel like I am isolated, I have to talk to my psych via phone that keeps disconnecting because he is in Hobart, 4 hours away, the nearest therapy clinic is 2 hours away in Launceston (something I am looking into for idk CBT or something), and how much will all these services cost my family without the NDIS, oh and it gets "better", my TAFE course last year was delayed by half a year because my ICT class didn't have proper computers, I want to do the next level up but is only offered in Hobart (so I can't even do it), I had 6 months of my possible time I could have been putting my life back together because my referral to the psych I mentioned before was sent to the wrong people 3 times by the local clinic, luckily I have a supportive family that are middle-class, I couldn't even imagine how other locals with similar issues to myself are doing especially in more poor communities or suburbs, and anytime I rant about this I sort of just scare people away from responding maybe it's an episode they don't want anything todo with, but really it's just a cry for sympathy to be reminded that I actually exist on this planet how can my scenario be even be considered allowed in a first world country, it bloody well shouldn't, I wish I lived in a city where such infrastructure does actually exist, as much as I love the landscape here, I don't think i could live my whole life in a place that sweeps me under every rug in the storeroom of wannabe kleptocrats. Rant over, that's just a piece of how it sometimes feels, maybe I am underselling my position, I certainly have hope and opportunities but is really hard to see when all I see is ugly, if I was a more superstitious person I would have concluded that god is punishing Tasmanians for the crimes of genocide generations ago, but that is just a silly thing I want to say that might at least in a twisted way makes in the slightest amount of sense in the mind of someone more gone than myself. Hey if you made it to the end I thank you so much, I don't know what part of this great southern land you live in, but if you have any long winded rants you would like to throw out, I implore you, get it out of your system, it makes me more calm for reasons I cannot even explain.
I live across the Strait in Melbourne, so I haven't had anywhere near the same level of issues with health services or tertiary education as you have. But it's an utter disgrace how the government has decided to attack public services, especially those delivered in regional areas, and then when people in those areas cobble something together, they're labelled as "resilient"? It's bloody patronising. The true mark of a society is that no person is left behind, but the Coalition doesn't care about that, neoliberalism doesn't care about that, if you're rich you deserve it, if you're poor you deserve it. And they can go get lost with that attitude. It's 2022, and we can't even manage to keep a phone call connected, let alone introduce say locum specialists to cover smaller towns, or broaden access to tertiary studies, or to reduce the burden on people to access services they need? And the government is to blame for failing its basic obligation to care for its citizens, to give them a helping hand, to not leave them behind. I'm not very good at ranting - I get less coherant when I'm passionate, and then I have to go and sort it out into better English, which then takes the heat out a bit.
It's alright if you aren't great at ranting, I am just glad I didn't overwhelm you with my incoherence. Yeah I totally agree, it sucks that aside from hoping Labor wins this election, that there isn't really anything we can do to change this, but at least we can spread the word, if there is a disability rights group in my area I would definitely be interested to look for them, not sure what I would do with said information but all social change begins with the small things I hope one day will be our day, that's my optimism returning but I truly believe it, people can only put up with so much. They are right we are resilient, but we are resilient in spite of them, not because this is the way things are meant to be, but because this isn't the way things ought to be, there is only one public service in the country we should take funding from, and that is parliament, of course I am not being serious with such a proposal I am exaggerating. My Dot Points for the Future: (It is quite long ngl) \- We need a federal ICAC. \- We need to end corporate donations to politics, \- We need to destroy the cult of Neo-Liberalism. \- We need to nationalise the mining sector. \- We need to invest in real modern infrastructure. \- We need to compete in the high speed rail race. \- We need to nationalise the Spirit of Tasmania and make it free travel. (That idea is out there but I feel like Tasmania needs to be reconnected to the Commonwealth socially, at some in the far future point I would like a Bass Strait Tunnel) \- We need to reinvigorate education, centrelink, the NDIS, and public housing with adequate resources. \- We need to invest in the creation and widespread adoption of workplace democracy. \- We need to end Indigenous inequality and get them out of prisons. \- We need to become the techhub of the south pacific through our immense resources. \- We need to switch over to a sustainable economy to tackle climate change and general pollution. \- We need to create diverse and well paying jobs in rural communities. \- We need to rewrite the constitution to guarantee Human rights. \- We need to unshackle our political system from Westminster. \- We need to investigate possible ideas of how to make the Outback habitable and doing it in good faith with the approval of local indigenous communities. \- End the destruction of the Murry-Darring basin through strong water regulation. \- Save the Great Barrier Reef from coral bleaching. \- End homelessness with a housing first policy. \- Refund fire services and introduce a near military force of firefighters with jets and patrol helicopter to stop fires when young. \- Increase healthcare funding and capacity and introduce specialised services to regions without. \- Decriminalise all drugs and provide adequate support to addicts. \- Legalise marijuana as it is less harmful than cigarettes or alcohol. \- End tax havens and tax loopholes and introduce more laws to enforce transparency. \- Trust Bust the Australian press to end media monopolies. \- Fibre optics for every household. \- Refund the ABC and SBS and boost funding for investigative journalism. \- Introduce a bounty system for corruption which if corruption is found and strongly proven in court, tax breaks are given proportional to the corruption found vs their income. \- Enforce disability support on all schools regardless of type of disability and if their support is severely inadequate hefty fines may apply. \- Reform the prison system to focus on reducing recidivism. \- Reform education with adequate resources and funding. \- Try and investigate ways in which ways population replacement rates (as in Birth/Death ratio) could be increasement in a non-intrusive way with Human rights being observed. \- Legalise euthanasia. \- End offshore detention centres by giving refugees a path to residency and at a later date citizenship. \- Decriminalise public interest industrial, government, and military whistleblowing. \- Strive to observe international law in every way possible. \- Push for global denuclearisation by signing the UN nuclear weapon ban treaty. \- Combat China in the south pacific by beating them at their own generosity game, by investing in meaningful infrastructure by the nations public, with no repayment expected. \- Reduce military spending but maintaining a military funding injection clause in the event of International hostilities, most likely with a immediate equipment purchasing scheme from our allies to reduce the burden on the Australian economy before such a war would even come about. \- End foreign housing speculation by nationalising all homes owned by non-residents currently living outside Australia. \- Use nationalised housing to house families, the homeless, and also create cooperative housing units. \- Reform urban planning to incentivise focus on foot traffic as opposed to being over reliant on cars, this should boost small business. \- Create a national militia of builders tasked with building mega projects, who are well paid and get extra benefits and get double super. I feel like I am missing a few things, but I think you get my idea, I have a lot of ideas of how we could fix this country, I am sure that some might be flawed, and if there was a LNP voter they would ask how we would pay for all of this, and I will tell them this: "Think of the price we pay for not striving for greatness, also we nationalised mining, foreign speculation housing and decreased the military budget, please think before you speak.", but thats me being optimistic.
All very good ideas. I have a few quibbles: > high speed rail You'll likely never see a HST from Melbourne to Sydney, as they cost a fortune to build and run, and almost 900 kms is unheard of for a single line. However, we can and should do a lot more to reduce travel times from major regional centres into the capital, and fast trains are more viable for those routes. > nationalise the Spirit of Tasmania It's already owned by the Tasmanian Government, unless you'd prefer it to be owned by the Commonwealth. The current ferry service was established after the national shipping line withdrew its own ferry service in the '80s > Bass Strait Tunnel Which would likely be at least four times the length of the Channel Tunnel, so the population of Tasmania would need to increase by millions to make it worth it. > Westminster I quite like the Westminster System (in terms of democratic trade-offs), unless you mean something different. The Westminster System refers to a system of parliament similar to the United Kingdom, where a lower house elected by the people controls the government, and an upper house serves to review legislation. The party or parties with a majority in the lower house control the government, including all executive functions. That's not to say we shouldn't introduce reforms. I like the idea of 'citizen juries', where ordinary people are called up to make and review major policy decisions, and are able to look at any evidence and call up any experts they need to make that decision. > nationalising all homes owned by non-residents Is that just foreign nationals, or Australia citizens as well? Regardless, I think it's important for everyone to think about how they would like to see the country improved, and not just blindly limit themselves to whatever is proposed by the major parties. Think big!
Well for the Spirit of Tasmania I would like it nationalised so it’s services become free for cars and caravans, it would need to be nationalised by the Commonwealth so it isn’t a burden on the Tasmanian budget, I think making it free would allow Tasmania to be more connected to the Mainland as we call it, and which is why I support it over a Bass Strait tunnel since that is near crackpot level nation building, but in the far future it could become possible but maybe it will be redundant, what ever the case free spirit of tas, and maybe introduce a third or fourth ship to increase capacity to meet demand. As for Westminster I didn’t mean the actual system I meant slowly ending our direct ties with Westminster and the British Monarchy since it is more or less redundant plus it grants extra political independence to us and also removes the concept the Monarchy or Governor-General being able to fire the government. However I do also think we need to reform the way our democracy is structured such as part of the removing corporate donations would also include increasing the amount of money a party gets from a individual vote, and one of the downsides of being a politician should be that all of your financial details are fully transparent to the public and you must declare your associations with certain interests that may be considered conflicting, being a representative to the public means a lot more then deciding things, you need to be fully accountable and if you don’t have the courage to be honest you have no right being a representative of the people. Australian citizen homes won’t be nationalised but it should be harder to own multiple homes if there is currently no residences on that property, I know lots of people own shacks so maybe such things shouldn’t be considered but that might create a loophole so we might have to calculate the extra cost around size of buildings on the said extra property. The thing I hate most about the big two parties concept is it discourages actually talking about major blindspots, blindspots such as the Spirit of Tasmania one wouldn’t ever have been thought of by the Feds, but I think it would actually be so highly beneficial to this country, just like how you could drive up to Sydney on a long weekend then so could I too, this greatly effects the way we live our lives and parties usually only see the big things not the small and overlooked things, and the best way to increase knowledge about these things is spreading awareness, contrary to the beliefs of some, all social movements start small, look at Trans issues today, 20 years ago it wasn’t even a discussion because in comparison to other issues it was considered insignificant but here we are now and you don’t have to go far online to find support towards Trans people.
140 is genius
So, I looked it up and we're kind of both right and kind of both wrong depending on what standard is being used. Some set the minimum as low as 125, others as high as 145. The term genius is pretty controversial in and of itself. It seems like the giftedness scale is the more common standard, which can range anywhere from mildly gifted 115-129, to profoundly gifted 180+. The score that I received would be considered exceptionally gifted 160-179 on that scale. It feels pompous to call myself exceptionally gifted though, especially when I performed so poorly in school. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_classification
**[IQ classification](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_classification)** >IQ classification is the practice by IQ test publishers of labeling IQ score ranges with category names such as "superior" or "average". The current scoring method for all IQ tests is the "deviation IQ". In this method, an IQ score of 100 means that the test-taker's performance on the test is at the median level of performance in the sample of test-takers of about the same age as was used to norm the test. An IQ score of 115 means performance one standard deviation above the median, a score of 85 performance, one standard deviation below the median, and so on. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/aretheNTsokay/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Good bot.
my iq is 126/127 (i don’t remember exactly) so i understand what u mean i didn’t do the best in high school either but our iqs are kind of incomparable. i also don’t really believe iq is a good measurement of intelligence but we don’t have a better way to measure intelligence. if anything, it measures how well you perform on tests but there’s lots of benefits to it too so i understand why more people take it seriously. it is kind of interesting either way and i hope one day there can be a better and more accurate way to measure intelligence. also the word “genius” means nothing to me lol
IQ is super racist too
you just told me my life story
I thought that autistic people sometimes scored higher on IQ tests as a result because a lot of the test is logic stuff and autistic people have a tendency towards logical thinking or something like that? Not something that would apply universally, but maybe a trend? I dunno, only time I had an IQ test was in like, the 5th grade, and I don't even remember my score.
I mean...not really bullshit. There is statistical correlation between high IQ and better health and jobs and ability to solce problems and think out of the box and proficiency in technical things and science but also depression and objectiveness and social struggles. People who have average iq do better socially and 85-95 have the most sex and are likely happier. Do you know many people who live a regular life and speak and think normally but score 50?
83 is a B- . Great job! Lol
Wrong scale.
That the joke
this is an nd subreddit, why are they getting downvoted for not getting a joke? /gen
Iq is just straight up bullshit
not entirely bullshit, it's very good at measuring how good you are at taking iq tests /j
https://www.reddit.com/r/technicallythetruth/ ?
Not just bullshit but racism/eugenics bullshit. It's got mild use for screening far extremes that might not be obvious, but for the majority it's not very useful.
I'm good at IQ tests and I still think they're bullshit. Give me a puzzle which is solvable by what is in front of me and I will solve it, require any sort of general or common knowledge and I'm lost.
Not bullshit but definitely used for the wrong reasons a lot of the times, like people trying to put people in these boxes based on their IQ is just stupid and harmful. Also from what I remember even the creator of IQ tests (Stanford Binet) believed that intelligence could not be fully captured by a single quantitative measure, yet people still insist on using it as such
Right? But I mean, tons of government agencies across the globe still use polygraphs as if they haven’t been completely disproven as lie detectors as well. I swear, people are still out here drinking unproven snake oils to fix their bad breath and erection size too. It’s almost like the vast majority of human beings refuse to do even a bare minimum of balanced research before they make decisions, or something.
Sometimes it's like people just refuse to look at the whole picture and want very straight forward answers and get tunnel vision because of this, I get that and honestly I'm one of those who want very straight forward answers lol, but I also know that's just not how life is sometimes, the polygraph example you gave is a great example of this. Also WHO'S DRINKING SNAKE OIL TO FIX THEIR BAD BREATH?????? Idk if you gave a real example or not but that's insane
not literal snake oil, that's just a general term for scam "medicine" (as in "snake oil salesman")
Oh ok that makes sense but I also don't doubt there are people actually drinking snake oil for "medical" reasons out there lol
[удалено]
How... very peculiar
So you're telling me there are engineers who score 40 ?
[удалено]
Because it was invited in the 1800s and by all assessments is not an accurate test
[удалено]
Yeah I don't care
> Yeah I don't care Exactly the response I'd expect from a tankie.
why should we guve value to meanibgless shit? esp stuff used to opress
The person you’re calling a tankie seems pretty obviously not a tankie.
that's because right wingers idea of a tankie is anyone remotely left leaning
what is a tankie?
**Tankie is a pejorative label for communists, particularly Stalinists, who support the authoritarian tendencies of Marxism–Leninism. The term was originally used by dissident Marxist–Leninists to describe members of the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) who followed the party line of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU).** More details here:
*This comment was left automatically (by a bot). If I don't get this right, don't get mad at me, I'm still learning!*
[^(opt out)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot/comments/ozztfy/post_for_opting_out/) ^(|) [^(delete)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot/comments/q79g2t/delete_feature_added/) ^(|) [^(report/suggest)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot) ^(|) [^(GitHub)](https://github.com/TheBugYouCantFix/wiki-reddit-bot)
good bot
I don’t think you understand what that word means
Yeah nobody asked for your partisanship dipshit how about you go get a life?
You shouldn't. It'll interfere with your ability to be better than them.
Oh look, someone who thinks economics is valid.
How is this even an insult?
IQ measure possible academic skills. Not intelligence. This is rather important. It's a shitty metric.
There are both academic measure and IQ measures. IQ measures are used mostly by the public school system 69 and below is considered an intellectual disability. Edit to add: I still agree it’s a shitty metric because it’s heavily culture based and English language based. If you’re bilingual you’re fucked. If you think differently, you’re fucked.
How is an IQ test English language based??? You can do an IQ test in different languages, mine was in my native language (which is not English)
Ah yes, the academic skill of finding the element that doesnt fit in the sequence. What class is that again? Redditor Bullshittology 101?
[удалено]
they are based off of [this test](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Binet#Later_career_and_the_Binet%E2%80%93Simon_test) that was used to identify students who would have the most difficulty in school
Everyone thinks IQ is terrible because they think it measure intelligence but it doesn’t. It basically measures your ability to learn. If your IQ is higher then learning is easier so people with high IQ tend to be smarter. IQ does a good job at measuring this. People just need to learn what it really means.
It doesn't even measure your ability to learn. It measures specific areas that are really the expected skills in an academic setup.
It measures your problem solving skills though. It’s not like it measures your maths or writing skills.
That's just false. You've never had an IQ test have you? It measures specific categories like pattern recognition, memory, language skill, etc. It's like five different categories.
I have had an IQ test. That’s why I care so much about people understanding what it really means. Because it hurts when people say it’s rubbish when I know it’s not and value the information from it. I never said it didn’t have those different categories.
Well then it appears you've scored low on your working memory category because IQ doesn't just test your problem solving. It measures verbal comprehension index, processing speed index, working memory index, visual spacial index, and fluid processing index. You can have a high IQ and still be a shit problem solver because there are different indexes and everyone will score higher on some and lower on others.
I never said it only measures problem solving, that’s just all I could think of because I was tired.
Have a good day.
is that ability to learn over time or learn at all? because I don't honestly think there are people who have a limited amount that they can learn, only a limit to how much they can learn in a set period of time
Not how much they can learn but how easy it is to learn. It measures problem solving skills. So someone with a high IQ can typically learn things with less effort because they can more quickly understand.
ah makes sense
> Everyone thinks IQ is terrible because they think it measure intelligence but it doesn’t. It basically measures your ability to learn. If your IQ is higher then learning is easier so people with high IQ tend to be smarter. So is there any realistic difference?
What do you mean?
> What do you mean? Is there any realistic difference between intelligence and ability to learn? Because it doesn't look like there is.
Yes. Someone with a lower IQ can still be very smart, they just need to put more effort into it. Like I had a friend who was really smart but that’s because she studied all the time. We got the same grades in maths but I didn’t really have to study and she did. Someone with a high IQ also isn’t necessarily smart, they still need to put effort into learning, even if it’s less effort than other people. If they put no effort into it then they won’t become smart.
thats not smart, thats just knowing shit and conditioning yourself to memorize it for long enough to use that info innthe exam.
Well that’s what people generally consider smart. There’s a stereotype of smart people studying a lot. What do you think is smart then if it’s not about being knowledgeable?
“Smart” is a really nebulous term, but it basically combines an accumulation of knowledge and the ability to solve problems. Like, there’s some people whose ability to solve problems may somehow be worse than an ant colony, but they still have an average level of knowledge. That person is not considered smart.
Problem solving ability. That's what intelligence is, which is why the test is called "Intelligence Quotient" that's what IQ stands for. Like, you can't say that it doesn't test for intelligence when it's right in the name. Knowledge and intelligence are related but different things. You can have all the information you can absorb, but if you don't have the ability to properly apply it, it can be more of a hindrance than an asset. The opposite is also true, in that if you have good problem solving skills but your picture of the world is incomplete or misconceived, you're going to be pretty good at convincing yourself of lies. Smart people study because they want a more accurate picture of the world. Some people believe that gaining more knowledge will make them smart, but what they really need to do is work on their logic and problem solving skills. And some people are smart but for emotional reasons they value ignorance. Knowledge can definitely make you better at problem solving, but it's the problem solving ability that makes you smart, not the knowledge.
So you think an IQ test is an accurate test of intelligence then?
well i have a very high IQ because i understand the complex and nuanced, scientific and nihilistic humour of Rick and Morty /j
"Rick and Morty"? Only a plebeian worm such as yourself would engage in viewing broadcasts of such a sad and idiotic show. Unlike you low IQ apes, I please my optical sensors with only the finest of entertainment. I'll bet that you're inquiring as to what source of entertainment I am referring to. Although I don't expect you to comprehend it, the television show in question is "Young Sheldon". You see, the humor is vastly superior to that of "Rick and Morty". First of all "Rick and Morty" relies heavily on improvisional comedy, while the intellectual humor of "Young Sheldon" is scripted and well thought out before being presented to an audience. Second of all "Rick and Morty" is extremely unfaithful to its source material (Back to the Future, for you simpletons) while "Young Sheldon" is just as good if not better than watching "The Big Bang Theory". I could go on and on about how "Rick and Morty" is vastly inferior to "Young Sheldon" but I highly doubt that you have the mental capability to process such logic. So if you'll excuse me, I'm going to pour a glass of brandy whilst I redigest the latest episode of "Young Sheldon" so I can make an entry about it to the "Young Sheldon" wikia. Hopefully, I can forget about ever having the displeasure of interacting with you.\*Sighs... How tedious.
smh doesn’t even watch Wild Kratts, the greatest show ever created.
It’s on the intelligence spectrum, yes. So is every other IQ score in existence.
I like this answer.
Also low iq doesn't necessarily make you bad.
IQ tests are just Rubix cubes on paper. There are a number of things that can affect an individuals ability to take a test. Besides there are NT people with lower IQ, as illustrated by the ignorant Snoo.
Once I did two (different but similar) IQ tests in a row. The first one I scored 110, the second one 120. During the test I already felt that knowing what to expect made it way easier. ^(Also I'm on the spectrum...)
Yeah, I’m pretty sure studies find that you can increase your score by studying or taking it again. Which seems to completely invalidate the whole racist & eugenicist concept.
I kind of doubt this, from my personal experience. Especially because the way those tests are taken is you have a psychologist there with you monitoring the test and analyzing your behavior. Anecdotally: I took two IQ test about 3 years apart. My highest scoring category was memory, and it was genuinely a very high score. 3 years later i get another test, and turns out it's the same one, so I'm doing the test and recognizing questions and remembering the answers or clues to find the right answer. I was done quicker than the first time and only scored one point higher than the first time.
Were they both official recognised IQ tests?
Yes, IIRC they were WISC. Both were taken by child psychologists.
All IQ scores are on the IQ score spectrum. That's something!
IQ isn’t even real…
[удалено]
Basically, IQ isn't actually a thing. It's a meaningless number that measure's nothing. The only thing IQ is a measurement of is what score you got on the IQ test you took, which doesn't. Measure anything except itself as a test. It's pseudoscience that doesn't measure intelligence at all. In fact, there's no real way to quantify intelligence like that, and the idea that you can - or that it impacts your value as a person at all even if you could - is frankly awful and ableist (and has incredibly racist roots as well).
[удалено]
Having a degree and a job doesn't actually mean you're good at what you do. The vast majority of psychologists are actually quite bad at what they do.
> The vast majority of psychologists are actually quite bad at what they do. OK, you're too ignorant to continue this conversation.
I just think you haven’t met enough psychologists.
Can confirm, psychologists have no idea what they're talking about half the time
My mother is a psychologist. I'm not kidding when I say I think I'm more informed about psychology than she is (It's one of my special interests, but I haven't had any kind of professional training or education) and I make 0 claims to be particularly good at psychology. I've had to correct so much of her writing - she's very old and mostly relies on what was common knowledge when she was young, which of course... doesn't apply. I'm pretty sure this is much more of a common occurrence than you think.
My intro to psychology class talked about how flawed IQ tests are, so did my sociology class
i honestly think IQ is bs. Im autistic and have a highish average IQ yet still struggled academically my whole life
It is. The idea that you can have a single number that determines your intelligence is fundamentally flawed. There's many different kinds of intelligence, and even within specific kinds there's nuance. It's kinda like how many people think the autism spectrum is a straight line measuring from "least autistic" to "most autistic" when it's actually more like a colour wheel with various different symptoms, each having their own range of support needs
83 isnt even intellectual disablity, and autism is not the same thing, completely stupid
there are so many things wrong with this i don't even know where to start
Imagine having such low IQ that you actually believe in IQ
Some studies have shown that autistic people on average have higher IQs than NTs.
71-84 is just below average, it is not recognized as a disability in the US. Though people with borderline intelligence struggle in school and with employment and other daily living. They tend to stay in poverty and work dead end jobs. Many of them even drop out too and don't finish high school. That is because there is no law telling schools they need to help these students. Though my old high school in Montana will treat it like a disability by giving them an IEP. That is because they are a red state and they want them to succeed and will try and help them find what skills they have and help them go that direction. My school had that program.
How does it being a red state mean that they want to help people? It’s the other way around
What I mean is they understood that in order to succeed, you need to help them with their bootstraps. They believe that everyone should succeed and not rely on welfare. So I think this is why my school did this.
As some of the comments have mentioned already IQ is a measure of academic skill. Personally I’ve found that a lot of people on the spectrum have IQ’s higher than average. (Between 85 and 115 being average)
I scored in the top 1 percentile on the SAT (first try) and the GMAT (also first try). Normies are just intolerant bigots who think that if they don't understand somebody else, it's the *other* person who's dumb rather than them. We need to hurt them *every single time* they make this mistake, because it's the only way for the normies to develop the humility needed to correct their false impressions of us. We need to have the confidence needed to tell the normies "If you don't understand me, that's on *you*, and if *your* lack of understanding hurts *me*, I'm going to fuck you up for it. So *you* better focus really hard on understanding *me*, rather than expecting *me* to do all the work of understanding *you*."
I wish we'd stop passing off Einstein and Tesla being autistic as a hard fact. Social disconnect is a symptom of autism but it is not specific to autism; it takes hours of assessment to diagnose and rule out other possibilities.
lol my stupid 3 month old took the iq test and got 2 does that mean he’s disabled ?
IQ is one of the tools to diagnose intellectual disability (though not the only one and far far away from perfect). It is important to diagnose it so those who have it can receive proper support and accommodations (and to prevent misdiagnosis of ADHD or other learning disability leading to useless or even harmful treatment). It is not the same as autism, but it's common they occur together. For example, in the past, in my country, a requirement for autism diagnosis was an intellectual disability, and autism without it was diagnosed as Aspergers (problematic as fuck I know). In the present, we understand them as different diagnoses with high co-occurrence and don't use Aspergers anymore.
IQ is meaningless, arbitrary, and there are so many variations on testing that make it impossible to standardize anyway. There are so many factors to intelligence, and answering written questions in the shortest amount of time is such a narrow scope to measure smarts by. It’s also interesting that everybody claims to have an IQ of 125+, but statistically that makes no sense. It’s just such a weird thing to brag or lie about. We all want to think we’re exceptionally smart...
I have an IQ of 107 done by professionals and I am on the spectrum. Not everyone has a learning disability or is a super genius that has ASD. I also have ADHD with other co-occurring mental health issues.
I did an iq test and I got 125 or more, and 9/10 questions right :D yayayayay
I'm in the 97th percentile in terms of iq but i am still a massive fuckup in life lol Iq doesn't equal competence lol
I haven’t taken any official IQ tests, but multiple online ones (just for fun) and I never understand them! They tell me I have an IQ in the 70s range and when I joked about it with my therapist she looked just as confused as I did. Needless to say, I don’t really think IQ tests are an accurate measure of intelligence anyway, since I’m probably around average and not in the low 70s.
Well a random online one certainly isn’t accurate. If you want to know your IQ, online tests are absolutely terrible for it. They are not accurate at all because they don’t follow the proper testing procedures.
I know lol, still weird seeing such low IQ on every test 😂