[SamuelBRoberts]

"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."
^-

I think in a lot of cases, 130 is going to be more successful than 150. After a certain point you find it really hard to relate to other people. Trump is probably 130 or so, for instance.

That's just me talking out of my ass, though. I don't have any data to back it up.

[Bazzwaldo]

I have an elder brother with a very high IQ, he is a parasite who lives with my Mum waiting for her to die
I have a younger brother who has an average IQ, he is a parasite who is waiting for my Mum to die
Over the years I have noticed some people are exceptionally practical at using what intelligence/skills they have, whilst others are unable to engage their high intellegence/skill-set into a practical outcome, my siblings come to mind but what they consider sucessful may involve ethical implications
Survival of the fittest will always win no matter what metric you apply it to, from being born into a wealthy family, inheriting beauty, fitness, intellegence, none of this ultimately matters, its all about laying down your skillset practically and I would argue, ethically

[scorpion]

There's a staggering amount of misunderstanding surrounding IQ, which is why there's often a corresponding hostility towards statistics drawn from IQ.

The main thing to keep in mind is this: the metric of IQ is useless as an absolutely accurate predictive tool when applied individually, but is statistically proven as an absolutely accurate predictive tool when applied to large populations. In other words: if you show me a single individual with an IQ of 130, I cannot definitively say that he will be more successful in life (meaning: higher earning, healthier, less criminally inclined, etc...) than another individual with an IQ of 90. However, if you give me a sample of 1,000 people with IQs of 130 versus 1,000 people with IQs of 90, I can statistically guarantee that the sample of people with 130 IQs will on average be more successful. This is not up for argument. This is not my opinion. This is literally as statistically sound as stating, "An average sample of 100 NFL players will be more athletic than a sample of 100 random Americans."

We don't really know what IQ (also called g for "general intelligence") actually is. We just know that we can sort of measure whatever "it" is with carefully designed tests, and that people who excel at these tests tend to excel in other areas of life that demand cognitive capacity. This phenomenon has been observed repeatedly in thousands of studies, across all cultures and races. Higher IQ, on a population level, always correlates with improved life outcomes. But again, it bears repeating that an individual IQ score is not determinative of anything. It's simply a measurement of how well the person did on an IQ test. We can make predictions based on statistical correlations that we know exist, but statistics also tell us that outliers exist. There are plenty of 90 IQ millionaires walking around. Some people beat the odds, or simply possess other traits that compensate for IQ. If you're 7 feet tall and 300 lbs. of solid muscle, you can probably find a way to leverage those traits to become successful. If you've got an utterly magnetic personality, the world is your oyster. Conversely, there's no shortage of people with 130+ IQs who are total failures, who never took advantage of their intelligence (and who are smart enough to recognize and lament this fact, and become extremely embittered as a result).

People need to stop being offended by discussions of IQ. These statistics aren't personal. No one is talking about you. These are statistical correlations drawn from large population data. If I tell you that men over 6'5" tall are wildly overrepresented in the NBA and you shout out "BUT WHAT ABOUT MUGSY BOGUES MAN!" then you're committing the same error many people do with IQ. Remember, IQ predictions can only be drawn with 100% accuracy across populations. Individually we can make only rough predictions based on IQ. Outliers and exceptions always exist in both directions (i.e. the 90 IQ millionaire and the 140 IQ virgin drug addict living in his mother's basement).

[Gorgiass]

(09-12-2016 05:38 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

"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."
^-

I think in a lot of cases, 130 is going to be more successful than 150. After a certain point you find it really hard to relate to other people. Trump is probably 130 or so, for instance.

That's just me talking out of my ass, though. I don't have any data to back it up.

That's the gist of the "Outliers" chapters Suits referred to earlier. They are worth reading. Clif notes - http://www.litcharts.com/lit/outliers/ch...ses-part-1

Relatedly, my mother (of course) forwarded me an article the other day making the case that male children get a majority portion of their IQ from their mothers chromosome. The internet leans toward agreeing with her, for what that's worth. Something to consider, or not, depending on your take on the issue.

[Brodiaga]

(09-12-2016 07:55 AM)scrambled Wrote:  

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).

I would recommend this book to everybody who is interested in this subject.

The Bell Curve clearly demonstrates how IQ is strongly correlated with being successful at any job, particularly a professional one. It is the most important factor when it comes to being successful at work. The authors focus on work as opposed to running own business because more data is available regarding paid employment.

The problem with this book, in addition to SJWs shitting bricks and calling it rayciss since the 90s, is that it requires at least basic knowledge of statistics to understand. Unfortunately, statistics is a very dry and difficult subject. Even to learn the basics, one needs a certain level of intelligence, concentration and work ethic. As Nassim Taleb mentioned in one of his books (I am paraphrasing here), statistical concepts can't be reduced to sound bites or an MBA-style executive summary.

I would say that IQ is definitely the most important "input parameter" when it comes to success in life if you measure success by the amount of money you make. Of course, there are losers among MENSA members, but the percentage of losers among the intelligent is much lower than among the stupid. The higher the IQ the higher the chance of becoming successful.

Another red pill truth about IQ, which is also described in The Bell Curve, is that it doesn't change much over one's lifetime. Of course, basic conditions, such as proper nutrition and access to education, have to be met in order for the brain to fully develop. Other than that, IQ is mostly determined by genes. The authors of The Bell Curve conservatively estimate that 60% of IQ is hereditary. By conservatively, I mean that the real percentage is likely to be even higher.

[Fortis]

Thanks for coming in and dropping a coherent post on IQ, Scorpion. Dudes need to stop taking this shit so personally. If guys on this forum are smart enough to be wondering about IQ I'm not really worried that this forum. Play on, playas.

[Brodiaga]

(09-12-2016 07:54 PM)scorpion Wrote:  

Conversely, there's no shortage of people with 130+ IQs who are total failures, who never took advantage of their intelligence (and who are smart enough to recognize and lament this fact, and become extremely embittered as a result).

One of the most annoying and unlikable types is the misunderstood genius.

I remember reading an article by some douchebag who bragged about his super high IQ and complained about being a loser pretty much in the same sentence. I can't find the article, but his whining was along the lines of "do you know how hard it is to be surrounded by people who are much stupider than you"?

My reaction was like, ok asshole, you claim to be super smart, but what do you have to show for it? Have you found the cure for cancer? Have you made millions? Have you written great books or music that will last for centuries? If not, you are just an annoying loser, a waste of good luck. Same as lottery winners who waste their money and go broke instead of investing it and making it last for generations.

[ivansirko]

^I agree with this guy

[AboveAverageJoe]

The question should be: Will a high IQ quarantee you money, pussy, and happiness?
You don't need an IQ over a hundred to tell you no.
Many other factors play a larger, combined effect.
Drops Mic.

[Zep]

(09-12-2016 08:21 PM)Brodiaga Wrote:  

One of the most annoying and unlikable types is the misunderstood genius.

I remember reading an article by some douchebag who bragged about his super high IQ and complained about being a loser pretty much in the same sentence. I can't find the article, but his whining was along the lines of "do you know how hard it is to be surrounded by people who are much stupider than you"?

Was it Chris Langan by any chance?

[Brodiaga]

(09-12-2016 09:08 PM)Zep Wrote:  

(09-12-2016 08:21 PM)Brodiaga Wrote:  

One of the most annoying and unlikable types is the misunderstood genius.

I remember reading an article by some douchebag who bragged about his super high IQ and complained about being a loser pretty much in the same sentence. I can't find the article, but his whining was along the lines of "do you know how hard it is to be surrounded by people who are much stupider than you"?

Was it Chris Langan by any chance?

I googled his name and didn't find the article I was referring to. I think that guy was less intelligent, probably scored around 150+ on standardized IQ tests and thought the world owed him everything because of that.

[Lion of Judah]

I'm sure no here will look at this post, since it seems people here are more interested in relating their personal opinions on IQ than scientific facts and consensus, but here some interesting links:

https://jaymans.wordpress.com/jaymans-ra...a-q-f-r-b/

http://drjamesthompson.blogspot.com/

https://pumpkinperson.com/

I also would like to mention Linda Gottfredson, she's written some very accessible material on the correlation between IQ and occupational success.

[Lion of Judah]

(09-12-2016 07:54 PM)scorpion Wrote:  

The main thing to keep in mind is this: the metric of IQ is useless as an absolutely accurate predictive tool when applied individually, but is statistically proven as an absolutely accurate predictive tool when applied to large populations.

I mostly agreed with your post, but I don't agree with this statement (entirely). IQ tests are actually very useful even at the individual level. It's the reason why colleges and the military use them for decisions regarding admissions/personnel.

[Lion of Judah]

(09-12-2016 09:43 PM)Brodiaga Wrote:  

(09-12-2016 09:08 PM)Zep Wrote:  

(09-12-2016 08:21 PM)Brodiaga Wrote:  

One of the most annoying and unlikable types is the misunderstood genius.

I remember reading an article by some douchebag who bragged about his super high IQ and complained about being a loser pretty much in the same sentence. I can't find the article, but his whining was along the lines of "do you know how hard it is to be surrounded by people who are much stupider than you"?

Was it Chris Langan by any chance?

I googled his name and didn't find the article I was referring to. I think that guy was less intelligent, probably scored around 150+ on standardized IQ tests and thought the world owed him everything because of that.

I think you're speaking of Rick Rosner. Yep, he was a loser.

[Pride male]

Would you rather be a meat head that bangs dozens of hot chicks? Or a socially inept genius like Tesla?

[Delta]

What is the definition of "success?" If we're talking professional success, i.e. making lots of money, then the answer is a resounding yes. That is intuitively obvious, empirically proven and beyond debate.

All things considered, do intelligent people tend to lead more happy, fulfilling lives? That one I'm not at all sure about. In fact, I wouldn't even be surprised if super high IQs correlate negatively with happiness. So many people who are unbelievably good at analyzing abstract concepts most people could never hope to understand, are absolute shit at utilizing their high-powered minds to get what they want out of life.

[chicane]

(09-12-2016 11:52 PM)Delta Wrote:  

What is the definition of "success?" If we're talking professional success, i.e. making lots of money, then the answer is a resounding yes. That is intuitively obvious, empirically proven and beyond debate.

All things considered, do intelligent people tend to lead more happy, fulfilling lives? That one I'm not at all sure about. In fact, I wouldn't even be surprised if super high IQs correlate negatively with happiness. So many people who are unbelievably good at analyzing abstract concepts most people could never hope to understand, are absolute shit at utilizing their high-powered minds to get what they want out of life.

It can lead to a lifetime of isolation and loneliness. So, a high IQ can be very good or it can feed on itself and be very bad. I learned some very important lessons too late to be of much use.

[H1N1]

(09-12-2016 07:58 PM)Gorgiass Wrote:  

Relatedly, my mother (of course) forwarded me an article the other day making the case that male children get a majority portion of their IQ from their mothers chromosome. The internet leans toward agreeing with her, for what that's worth. Something to consider, or not, depending on your take on the issue.

I was told the same thing by a top anesthetist the other day. I was in mixed company so I had to smile and nod and limit myself to an, 'oh really'. But, this idea that intelligence is mostly inherited through the female line must be nonsense.

I am not a scientist, by any stretch, but even the most casual observer of day to day life must surely see that most women, almost without exception, are really monstrously stupid. Even (particularly) the clever ones are dumber than a sack of rocks.

You could present me with a thousand studies on this and I would still scream bullshit until they dragged me away, kicking and screaming.

My social circle is predominantly made up of people who have been privately educated, and then gone to a handful of top universities (Oxbridge, Imperial, LSE, UCL). This obviously includes a reasonable number of girls, who have had almost every opportunity one could possibly dream of - good nutrition, stable families, the best education money can buy. Without exception, the most remarkable thing about all these girls is how universally stupid they are. It is an object lesson that serious education is completely wasted on women. Of course, it is also staggering just how many men manage to squander such extraordinary opportunities and emerge unscathed from the brush with academia - something far harder to forgive.

When I look at my clever male friends, they invariably (with one notable exception) have highly intelligent fathers, and trophy mothers (some of whom, admittedly, look more like participation trophies).

I am prepared to accept that female intelligence is inherited through the maternal line. That seems entirely probable to me.

[Glaucon]

(09-13-2016 04:38 AM)H1N1 Wrote:  

My social circle is predominantly made up of people who have been privately educated, and then gone to a handful of top universities (Oxbridge, Imperial, LSE, UCL). This obviously includes a reasonable number of girls, who have had almost every opportunity one could possibly dream of - good nutrition, stable families, the best education money can buy. Without exception, the most remarkable thing about all these girls is how universally stupid they are. It is an object lesson that serious education is completely wasted on women. Of course, it is also staggering just how many men manage to squander such extraordinary opportunities and emerge unscathed from the brush with academia - something far harder to forgive.

[Tex Cruise]

(09-12-2016 07:58 PM)Gorgiass Wrote:  

Relatedly, my mother (of course) forwarded me an article the other day making the case that male children get a majority portion of their IQ from their mothers chromosome. The internet leans toward agreeing with her, for what that's worth. Something to consider, or not, depending on your take on the issue.

Is it possible that some women may carry the genetic material necessary for producing high intelligence without actually having high intelligence themselves (because they are women)?

Example: I have a huge cock. My dad has a huge cock. Obviously my mother does not have a huge cock... but her dad (my grandpa) did, so did I get my huge cock from my father's side or my mother's side?
I don't know. I just thought this thread needed more cock measuring.

[Fortis]

H1N1, it might not be that far-fetched that intelligence is passed through the mom's side. I'm not a scientist, but don't we get penis size from mom's side? It could just be one of those random things. Intellectually, I am much more like my father, though, so perhaps it's a bit of a split.

I'd be full of shit if I said my mother wasn't mostly responsible for sending me to the best schools she could afford and really encouraging me to develop a strong love of learning, BUT I think my dad and I seem to linger around the same intelligence level despite the fact that I didn't grow up with him.

[weambulance]

(09-12-2016 11:35 PM)Pride male Wrote:  

Would you rather be a meat head that bangs dozens of hot chicks? Or a socially inept genius like Tesla?

I'd rather be what I am than either of those.

[Leonard D Neubache]

Let's try and put this in perspective by asking some stupid things.

Are dumb people more likely to succeed in life than smart people?

Are smart people more likely to become losers than dumb people?

Call me simplistic but it's pretty cut and dried.

[Phoenix]

(09-13-2016 10:04 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

Let's try and put this in perspective by asking some stupid things.

Are dumb people more likely to succeed in life than smart people?

Are smart people more likely to become losers than dumb people?

Call me simplistic but it's pretty cut and dried.

Yeah but that doesn't help the argument that it's an effective tool. It's a tool, that's all.

[El Padrone]

Hey Tayo. You Nigerian? I hear you guys got some balls in game. Is it so?