Post: #1

Since the Watson getting blackballed at NYU thread got derailed, here's a new thread to discuss it.

IQ when combined with various other metrics such as family background, school grades, and temperment is a moderate indicator of future success.

Genetics and culture play a part in determining IQ.

Post: #2

Post: #3

I predict that IQ will be a highly relevant factor in whether people do or do not decide to have a tantrum about cold, hard reality.

Post: #4

That depends. Who would you trust to solve a problem? Ginny? Or Forrest Gump? (yes they are fake characters).
Serious Question. Ginny is "average" and way damaged. Forrest Gump is way below average and pretty much cool.

We put too much emphasis on IQ when really it is only one ruler that exist of many that should be taken into account.

Post: #5

Define success?

Post: #6

(09-12-2016 07:49 AM)Pride male Wrote:  Define success?

That's the key point. What is success?

1. Making a global empire?
2. Being a good wage tax slave?
3. Getting good grades in school?
4. Getting laid a lot?

If anything IQ is good for number 2, maybe number 1.

Post: #7

IQ is the most important factor in predicting "success", i.e. behavior in life. The Bell Curve book shows the data which overwhelmingly supports this; (if you have not already observed this in life).

Post: #8

Malcolm Gladwell: The Problem With Geniuses, Parts I and II.

Post: #9

Doubt it.

That said, if you're looking at it from an employer's perspective it's a positive indicator. The best indicators of success for potential hires are general ability tests, cognitive reasoning tests, and ethical tests in that order. Right at the bottom of the list are the resume and personality tests.

Post: #10

I'm not discounting the value of IQ. But I do believe emotional IQ is pretty damn important. Smarts don't mean shit if you can't hold it together, survive through tough times, and learn to be honest about your own flaws and improve them without hating yourself. I worry about people with lower emotional IQs more than I do than those with lower general IQs. Those are the mofos who will resort to violence for petty shit, or beat their children for breathing the wrong way.

Post: #11

In general, yes. However Wayne Rooney earns £250,000 a week but probably has an IQ of 80. I'd say it's a combination of IQ, hunger and competitiveness.

Post: #12

"I'm not discounting the value of IQ. But I do believe emotional IQ is pretty damn important. Smarts don't mean shit if you can't hold it together, survive through tough times, and learn to be honest about your own flaws and improve them without hating yourself. I worry about people with lower emotional IQs more than I do than those with lower general IQs. Those are the mofos who will resort to violence for petty shit, or beat their children for breathing the wrong way."

The phrase "emotional IQ" has always annoyed me. IQ is a very specific thing, that can be measured, tested, and judged in thousands of ways. "Emotional IQ" is something an author came up with to make people feel better about themselves.

It's like saying, "Yeah, sure. Some guys are taller than others. But other guys are proud, unwavering, badasses who always stand up straight no matter what, even if they might be 5'6''. Those guys are "emotionally tall", even if they're not "tall"."

Post: #13

"I was never book smart but you know I got street smarts to make up for that."

Post: #14

MENSA should be evidence enough that there are some really unsuccessful, lame people out there with very high IQs.

Post: #15

Answer: fuck no.

Close the thread.

Post: #16

Guys like Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot etc had be very smart and messed up quite a lot. When did you hear the last time from a "dump" guy that want to change the world for a better society? Actual its more the people that are smart and have some kind of sending or mission to change society that are a problem. Not the guy that likes to watch TV and nothing more.

Post: #17

Average IQ of a group (nation, ethnic group, etc.) correlates highly with the economic output and some other indicators (like low violent crime) of that group.

As G-Manifesto would say, the rest is up to you.

Post: #18

Old saying that "If you have to say you are, then you aren't" applies. Nobody going around bragging about their street smarts has them, while there's plenty of people out there who have recognized that they have a higher EQ than IQ and are using it to make bank.

Post: #19

MENSA should be evidence enough that there are plenty of unsuccessful, lame people out there with high IQs.

Post: #20

I don't think IQ is very effective at measuring the power of the whole brain. It's not just a blob. It has different components with different strengths. I think IQ overweights certain brain strengths and underweights others.

If this wasn't the case, all you would need to run a successful company is to grab a bunch of people from Mensa. In reality if you did that you'd probably go bankrupt.

IQ is just a too general and biased measure of human intelligence. As I said in the other thread, it's more likely that the correlation between IQ and earning power is a 3rd-factor correlation (i.e. both stemming from the true "real-world-value-weighted brain strength"). We should always remember the golden rule of statistics: correlation doesn't imply causation.

As for predicting success in youth, I think outstanding real-world performance is the best indicator. This could be anything. If the kid is picking up piano 10 times better than anyone else -- that's detecting a strength that could lead to success. If he's assembling a computer at 9 years old when other kids are playing with lego -- that's an indicator. If he's leading groups of the other kids around and controlling them with ease -- that's an indicator.

Good all-rounders tend to end up just that. You have to shine at least a little at something to get leverage. My theory is that a child's success depends on:
- The kid excelling at something relative to his peers
- That thing being found while he's still young
- The kid having the ambition, or being given the right kind of support and direction, to drive that thing home

Pretty much everything else just leads to the cubicle.

Post: #21

(09-12-2016 10:07 AM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  "I'm not discounting the value of IQ. But I do believe emotional IQ is pretty damn important. Smarts don't mean shit if you can't hold it together, survive through tough times, and learn to be honest about your own flaws and improve them without hating yourself. I worry about people with lower emotional IQs more than I do than those with lower general IQs. Those are the mofos who will resort to violence for petty shit, or beat their children for breathing the wrong way."

The phrase "emotional IQ" has always annoyed me. IQ is a very specific thing, that can be measured, tested, and judged in thousands of ways. "Emotional IQ" is something an author came up with to make people feel better about themselves.

It's like saying, "Yeah, sure. Some guys are taller than others. But other guys are proud, unwavering, badasses who always stand up straight no matter what, even if they might be 5'6''. Those guys are "emotionally tall", even if they're not "tall"."

(09-12-2016 10:20 AM)XPQ22 Wrote:  MENSA should be evidence enough that there are some really unsuccessful, lame people out there with very high IQs.

Yeah. I've met too many brilliant engineers, computer science folks, even English majors/writers who couldn't empathize with people, had zero emotional insight on themselves, and couldn't even carry a basic conversation with someone outside of their field. There needs to be some real world way to reflect that, and emotional IQ is the best I've seen so far.

Post: #22

Post: #23

Is IQ an effective tool for determining future success?

That is not even a valid question - it's like asking 'is water an effective tool for determining plant growth'? Has public education sunk so low that people are now unable to form proper correlations between the subject and its object? (no insult to the OP but it seems like a glaring issue to me)

One may 'aid' in achieving the other but how can IQ be used to 'determine future success'?

A more appropriate question would be:

Is IQ an effective predictor of future success?

The answer would be: of course not. I myself know many highly intelligent people who in my humble opinion are not very successful - especially academics who get their PhD, then start teaching and rest on their laurels for the remainder of their life. Then again success is relative measure - how exactly do you define it? Dollars earned per year? Recognition within a particular field? Happiness in one's profession? Babes plowed whilst traveling abroad? (Roosh may have an opinion on that)

Inherently an IQ score (i.e. a measure of one's cognitive abilities) is a very effective tool for determining the probability of future success but of course it is unable to predict success. Because quite simply - the more intelligent you are the higher the odds that you are going to leverage that intelligence to your personal benefit (whatever that may be) and that of your community.

Attempting to rationalize IQ scores as an unreliable or unfair measure of mental acuity is downright silly and reflects ignorance at best and a perhaps a low ranking pertinent score at worst. Very rarely will you come across highly intelligent people arguing over IQ scores. They simply accept IQ as a fact of life and move on. The most vehement opposition and emotional outbursts against IQ scoring in my experience comes from the very people who feel threatened by it. And you don't need a Mensa membership to hazard a guess as to who that may be.

I personally only tested once in my life and was rather surprised to be evaluated at 148. Frankly I never considered myself as overly intelligent and as a youngster I actually didn't do very well in school. Maybe I was a late bloomer or perhaps I was simply too distracted by getting laid - I was a bit of a horndog back then. I know for certain that I have a shitty memory and learning languages or rote learning in general is a lot of work for me. But they didn't test me for memory back then - and one could make the point that one's ability to memorize is a type of intelligence. Had it been I would have scored a lot lower. And I wouldn't have cared much really to be honest. I know what I am and what I am capable of. I also have learned to accept my limits.

Food for thought: Have you noticed that IQ scores are only controversial when it comes to humans? Not once have I come across an article that demonizes IQ scoring on animals, such as chimps, dolphins, parrots, etc. That fact alone should give you pause ;-)

Post: #24

If success means high earning power then I would say IQ is just one of the factors... I repeat just one of the factor...

E.g Salt is not the only ingredient that makes a meal taste delicious... you get my drift.

Post: #25

I think the biggest difference is going to be between 100 and 120. 130 and 150 probably aren't that different in terms of life success.