Post: #26

133.

Post: #27

I got 158 once back in college and refuse to take another one. It's like winning the first time you play a new board game with your friends and then permanently retiring as world champion.

Post: #28

(10-13-2015 07:34 PM)Dusty Wrote:  There are two RVF members I would guess have genius level IQs based on their posts here.

Thanks for thinkng of me. Who is the other guy?

Post: #29

30, which coincidentally is the number of white knights I was in a huge fight with at the club last night.

Post: #30

(10-13-2015 08:14 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  

(10-13-2015 07:34 PM)Dusty Wrote:  There are two RVF members I would guess have genius level IQs based on their posts here.

Thanks for thinkng of me. Who is the other guy?

Actually I was thinking LOZ and Nemencine.

Post: #31

I scored well on one I took in high school. From here on out I'll be Peggy Hilling it until I grow old and senile.

Post: #32

^^^didn't you ever learn that expression if you have nothing nice to say then don't say anything at all? I'm all butt hurt now.

Where is that report button

On a serious note there are a bunch of smart guys on here. Those two are good choices but there are some others.

Post: #33

Lots of boolean logic on that test.

Post: #34

(10-13-2015 07:34 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  Hopefully that makes more sense. Guys, no matter your number, it doesn't prove your worth. It's just an indication of potential horsepower. Some of most valued mateships were with guys in the 90-100 range. I had genuine friendship with them achieved by constantly-filtering my language to their intelligence range, and restructuring any higher abstract thought down to a level they could process. That being said, they could often consider problem just as successfully as me by not intellectually over-complicating things, so I'd often see their thought as more practical and efficient than mine.

Don't put too much value on a number.

I totally agree. IQ tests are in general a very weak indicator of your actual intelligence, and potential in life.

However, there's still enough research that shows a significant correlation between one's iq and income, making it difficult to ignore iq/sat scores entirely

For instance, I'd like to point you guys to this article:
http://lesswrong.com/lw/jw5/how_much_wea...iq_people/

I quote:

Quote:Bill Gates famously scored 1590 on the SAT, at a time when many fewer people scored 1600 than people did in subsequent years. He also solved a notable problem in combinatorics as a a college sophomore.
Jeff Bezos graduated summa cum laude from Princeton in computer science
Zuckerberg took a graduate course in computer science as a high school student.
Drew Houston (Dropbox founder) started programming at age 5 and scored 1600 on the SAT.
Steve Jobs tested at the 10th grade level in 4th grade.

Sure most of these tech billionaires dropped out of college, but they had amazingly high IQ's.

Also check out this article on rok that talks about how men's IQ are higher than women's on the higher end, which could be another reason why we have so much more millionaires that are men, as well as in management positions of big companies, despite all this push for "equality"

http://www.returnofkings.com/24612/diffe...be-ignored

Although some say a portion of our intelligence is genetic, research has proven it's possible to increase your iq significantly throughout your life.

This is just one of many reasons why I would recommend to every single one of you to continuously find ways to stimulate your brains. Learn a new language, attend a university course, read read read, set difficult goals that make you sweat and go for it.
When looking for a new career, look for something that will make you think, something you never can never truly become an expert at because there's so much to learn.
If you stop using your legs, it weakens.. If your're not doing anything challenging on a daily basis, well your potential stagnates.

Post: #35

Damn! I scored incredibly low.

Too embarrassed to post.

Post: #36

My graphic got wiped out....

/thread-8409-page-4.html

Was 148 IIRC... Never been diagnosed, yet I do have aspy tendencies now and then. The difference is I recognize it and can turn it off when need be.

Being smart is only a negative, when picking up broads, if you cannot recognize and control it.

Post: #37

108 after 5 standard drinks and finishing 15 mins early hah.

Will retry again properly over the weekend.

Post: #38

I generally score 140 to 150 in these tests, but then I did work for years in a lab as a Scientist ( a hard science, in a global industry). My colleagues also scored at a simmilar level in these tests.

Post: #39

I feel stupid compared to some of you guys, never scored over 140 (but never under 125).

In my experience, it's the a bit above average intelligence who are the biggest pains in the ass. Intelligent enough to know they're smarter than average, but not smart enough to realize they're not that smart. Which leads to intolerable status whoring through leftism.

Post: #40

(10-15-2015 04:53 AM)Guitarman Wrote:  I generally score 140 to 150 in these tests, but then I did work for years in a lab as a Scientist ( a hard science, in a global industry). My colleagues also scored at a simmilar level in these tests.

(10-15-2015 07:51 AM)nomadbrah Wrote:  I feel stupid compared to some of you guys, never scored over 140 (but never under 125).

In my experience, it's the a bit above average intelligence who are the biggest pains in the ass. Intelligent enough to know they're smarter than average, but not smart enough to realize they're not that smart. Which leads to intolerable status whoring through leftism.

Because of all the ambiguity around iq tests, When comparing IQ levels with someone else, I think it's very important to make sure you both took the same exact test.
An IQ level of 140 on one test, might be the equivalent of 110 on another.

Post: #41

(10-15-2015 10:49 AM)hervens Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 04:53 AM)Guitarman Wrote:  I generally score 140 to 150 in these tests, but then I did work for years in a lab as a Scientist ( a hard science, in a global industry). My colleagues also scored at a simmilar level in these tests.

(10-15-2015 07:51 AM)nomadbrah Wrote:  I feel stupid compared to some of you guys, never scored over 140 (but never under 125).

In my experience, it's the a bit above average intelligence who are the biggest pains in the ass. Intelligent enough to know they're smarter than average, but not smart enough to realize they're not that smart. Which leads to intolerable status whoring through leftism.

Because of all the ambiguity around iq tests, When comparing IQ levels with someone else, I think it's very important to make sure you both took the same exact test.
An IQ level of 140 on one test, might be the equivalent of 110 on another.

I doubt the discrepancy can be quite that large on properly constructed tests (which all online tests may not be).
Up to 15-20 points difference seem reasonable (the five or six different online IQ tests I've taken over the last roughly 16 years - some of the early ones more varied in their questions, including text questions, than the pure pattern based ones of late - have spanned a 17 points difference), 30 points would suggest that one of the tests was put together by people who had little idea what they were doing.

Post: #42

(10-13-2015 07:34 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(10-13-2015 06:23 PM)MikeS Wrote:  

(10-13-2015 05:59 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  ...

You'll know you're intelligent if you spent more time searching for the obvious trick behind the question than solving the question itself...

Those two are kind of one and the same in an IQ test, unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean by "trick".

Yeah, you are. My point was there isn't a trick, you're just imagining it.

Since you're in a formal testing situation, so you assume the test is supposed to be difficult, and when the answers are immediately-obvious, you pull up short. It has to be a trick. You then start searching for the hidden layer of thought you assume is the real test.

You're looking for more complex layers of thought that aren't there. You're overestimating general intelligence and underestimating your own.

It's a very common thread I've noticed in discussions with highly-intelligent men and women. It's only later in life you discover, no, they really don't expect that much from people.

Obviously, there's still questions that offer genuine challenge and ones you'll never solve, but the large chunk of them... "It's got to be harder than that!"

I wouldn't be able to do one now. There's simply no challenge and therefore, complete disinterest in either the testing or the resulting IQ number. Put an IQ question in front of me, and I have no interest in solving it to 'prove' anything.

If I'm analysing patterns I don't want them laid out in front of me. I want to observe without formal test conditions, mentally store, observe, recognise, compare, identify. By this stage in my life, the thrill is that it's now happening purely as abstract mental processes, without the prompt of a visually-comparative component. You can apply this juggling of abstract thought to music, to language, to psychology, to behaviour, to human social interaction.

Hell, this is Roosh, refining Game.

Hopefully that makes more sense. Guys, no matter your number, it doesn't prove your worth. It's just an indication of potential horsepower. Some of most valued mateships were with guys in the 90-100 range. I had genuine friendship with them achieved by constantly-filtering my language to their intelligence range, and restructuring any higher abstract thought down to a level they could process. That being said, they could often consider problem just as successfully as me by not intellectually over-complicating things, so I'd often see their thought as more practical and efficient than mine.

Don't put too much value on a number.

...two days ago

Don't get me wrong AB, I like the "I just fucked a girl who's engaged" type posts more, but this was some solid next level shit.

Post: #43

(10-15-2015 11:43 AM)heavy Wrote:  

(10-13-2015 07:34 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(10-13-2015 06:23 PM)MikeS Wrote:  

(10-13-2015 05:59 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  ...

You'll know you're intelligent if you spent more time searching for the obvious trick behind the question than solving the question itself...

Those two are kind of one and the same in an IQ test, unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean by "trick".

Yeah, you are. My point was there isn't a trick, you're just imagining it.

Since you're in a formal testing situation, so you assume the test is supposed to be difficult, and when the answers are immediately-obvious, you pull up short. It has to be a trick. You then start searching for the hidden layer of thought you assume is the real test.

You're looking for more complex layers of thought that aren't there. You're overestimating general intelligence and underestimating your own.

It's a very common thread I've noticed in discussions with highly-intelligent men and women. It's only later in life you discover, no, they really don't expect that much from people.

Obviously, there's still questions that offer genuine challenge and ones you'll never solve, but the large chunk of them... "It's got to be harder than that!"

I wouldn't be able to do one now. There's simply no challenge and therefore, complete disinterest in either the testing or the resulting IQ number. Put an IQ question in front of me, and I have no interest in solving it to 'prove' anything.

If I'm analysing patterns I don't want them laid out in front of me. I want to observe without formal test conditions, mentally store, observe, recognise, compare, identify. By this stage in my life, the thrill is that it's now happening purely as abstract mental processes, without the prompt of a visually-comparative component. You can apply this juggling of abstract thought to music, to language, to psychology, to behaviour, to human social interaction.

Hell, this is Roosh, refining Game.

Hopefully that makes more sense. Guys, no matter your number, it doesn't prove your worth. It's just an indication of potential horsepower. Some of most valued mateships were with guys in the 90-100 range. I had genuine friendship with them achieved by constantly-filtering my language to their intelligence range, and restructuring any higher abstract thought down to a level they could process. That being said, they could often consider problem just as successfully as me by not intellectually over-complicating things, so I'd often see their thought as more practical and efficient than mine.

Don't put too much value on a number.

...two days ago

Don't get me wrong AB, I like the "I just fucked a girl who's engaged" type posts more, but this was some solid next level shit.

Actually, I think this why I never had straight A's. If the answer was too easy, I started to doubt it.

An anecdote: I had oral exams in my Masters and had several with the same Professor in a short period of time. He asked me such trivial questions that I got confused and tried to find the hidden trap and meaning or didn't get it at all. I only had a B. They told me afterwards what they wanted to know, and that I should not hesitate that much.
"You seem like you know much more"

Next time I gatling-gunned facts and data and scored an A. Unfortunately this revelation was too late for most of my courses.

Post: #44

(10-13-2015 07:34 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(10-13-2015 06:23 PM)MikeS Wrote:  

(10-13-2015 05:59 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  ...

You'll know you're intelligent if you spent more time searching for the obvious trick behind the question than solving the question itself...

Those two are kind of one and the same in an IQ test, unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean by "trick".

Yeah, you are. My point was there isn't a trick, you're just imagining it.

Since you're in a formal testing situation, so you assume the test is supposed to be difficult, and when the answers are immediately-obvious, you pull up short. It has to be a trick. You then start searching for the hidden layer of thought you assume is the real test.

You're looking for more complex layers of thought that aren't there. You're overestimating general intelligence and underestimating your own.

It's a very common thread I've noticed in discussions with highly-intelligent men and women. It's only later in life you discover, no, they really don't expect that much from people.

Obviously, there's still questions that offer genuine challenge and ones you'll never solve, but the large chunk of them... "It's got to be harder than that!"...

Nah, I know that some of the questions will be easy enough to solve at a quick glance for me and at least half the population - those questions are needed to evaluate the people with a low IQ.
I don't expect a trick (at least not in these types of pattern based questions, it can be a slightly different matter with text based questions used in some IQ tests, but even those usually don't rely on verbal trickery - "which of the following is different from the two others: fork, spoon, rhinoceros"), it's just escalating difficulty requiring different levels of effort depending on your IQ, with the most difficult ones effectively unsolvable for anyone but those with the highest IQs the test is designed for.
This is a general population IQ test, so I'm guessing it's probably useless for those with an IQ much above 140 or 150 or so, other than to let them know they are in that very high range when they manage to solve all the questions with confidence rather than a certain amount of more or less wild guesses.

Post: #45

Is this a legit test? There were multiple solutions for 5 or 6 questions.

Post: #46

(10-15-2015 06:29 PM)Sharkie Wrote:  Is this a legit test? There were multiple solutions for 5 or 6 questions.

Are you sure about that? Early, mid or late (last 6-7) questions?

Post: #47

(10-15-2015 06:39 PM)MikeS Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 06:29 PM)Sharkie Wrote:  Is this a legit test? There were multiple solutions for 5 or 6 questions.

Are you sure about that? Early, mid or late (last 6-7) questions?

I definitely remember 3 in the first 10. A couple more later I think. Does everyone get the same Qs?

Post: #48

(10-15-2015 06:55 PM)Sharkie Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 06:39 PM)MikeS Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 06:29 PM)Sharkie Wrote:  Is this a legit test? There were multiple solutions for 5 or 6 questions.

Are you sure about that? Early, mid or late (last 6-7) questions?

I definitely remember 3 in the first 10. A couple more later I think. Does everyone get the same Qs?

I can't imagine they don't. That would cause variance in the results, and while scores will be different between different IQ tests, it seems a little stupid to aim for that within a single test.
I suspect they even run through in the same order for everyone, since they - broadly speaking - get progressively more difficult. With the last 5-6 questions or so (minus one question in that sequence that was surprisingly easy compared to the surrounding ones) probably only being solvable by people with an IQ around the 130+ range.

... I just ran through the first 12 questions again. None of them have more than one correct solution.

...... 13-20. Also only one solution each. Too tired to do the rest now, but it would very much surprise me if any of the questions have more than one correct solution.

Post: #49

I'll go back tomorrow and verify again.

Post: #50

I only got 133 run out of time before i did the last 7.

Im curious on how the brain of the guys that did 140+ works, what kind of patterns did you look for?
I mostly looked for a clockwise rotation, a sequence going from 1-3 or 1-4-7 to 7-9, symmetry, adding or substracting lines with each other, dots shooting lines, things missing to achieve balance.

There was only 1 sequence that was easier for me going from 1-2-3-4... 9. I imagine some guys are smart enough to do that with all the questions.
Do answers just "appear" to some people?

(10-13-2015 05:59 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  You'll know you're intelligent if you spent more time searching for the obvious trick behind the question than solving the question itself...

Since you're in a formal testing situation, so you assume the test is supposed to be difficult, and when the answers are immediately-obvious, you pull up short. It has to be a trick. You then start searching for the hidden layer of thought you assume is the real test.

You're looking for more complex layers of thought that aren't there. You're overestimating general intelligence and underestimating your own.

It's a very common thread I've noticed in discussions with highly-intelligent men and women. It's only later in life you discover, no, they really don't expect that much from people.

Obviously, there's still questions that offer genuine challenge and ones you'll never solve, but the large chunk of them... "It's got to be harder than that!"

You obviously have experience diagnosing people, so how can you tell that not everyone does that?

You talked about communication between people of different IQs, isnt the ability to relate to another more linked to personality or coming from the same background rather than intelligence?