Exceptionally smart people are actually disabled

[arab_chink]

Riddles are Impossible to solve.

https://www.rd.com/list/challenging-riddles/

Ok bro but mine isnt that hard, have you gotten an idea atleast?

 

[Deleted member 67900]

I mean the obvious

Which is what? That you lack social skills?

If that is what you mean then yeah that would be a valid subtle criticism of iq

 

[_MVP_]

Which is what? That you lack social skills?

If that is what you mean then yeah that would be a valid subtle criticism of iq

Yes

 

[Deleted member 67900]

Yes but the g factor itself has itself been discredited and even if there is a correlation between iq and eq, its not strong nor moderate (otherwise show a source) and they represent totally different things.

The g factor started out from spearman when people who did well on some tasks would generally do better on others, while those that did poorly would also do poor on others. Although I agree this is what the g-factor is about, I'm not convinced that people who can do rubix cubes fast can also program or do integral BEE, niche tasks

 

[Deleted member 67900]

Yes

Well there is a fine line between being smart and confident

 

[Deleted member 65658]

Idiot savant syndrome

theyre not high iq, again think elon musk, mark zuckerberg. Successful high iq genius's who arent babbling retards

 

[Deleted member 67900]

theyre not high iq, again think elon musk, mark zuckerberg. Successful high iq genius's who arent babbling retards

I unironically think I have savant syndrome

 

[Imretarded?]

intelligent retard was a hyperbole, im referring to the sheldon cooper, nikola tesla, newton type

Yes but the g factor itself has itself been discredited and even if there is a correlation between iq and eq, its not strong nor moderate (otherwise show a source) and they represent totally different things.

>says g factor has been discredited without providing a source
>tells me to provide a source
population is
Good job mate

you are failing to understand what IQ is. IQ is a proxy for G factor. If G factor was discredited, IQ would be discredited

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4664650/

Also we are talking about extremely high IQs, even a small correlation results in high differences on the tail ends of the bell curve. People with 140+ IQ generally are more socially competent. That is a fact.

A maths wiz is generally also going to be better at art or history than the their peers.

 

[Deleted member 67900]

>says g factor has been discredited without providing a source
>tells me to provide a source
population is
Good job mate

you are failing to understand what IQ is. IQ is a proxy for G factor. If G factor was discredited, IQ would be discredited

View attachment 2855985

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4664650/

Also we are talking about extremely high IQs, even a small correlation results in high differences on the tail ends of the bell curve. People with 140+ IQ generally are more socially competent. That is a fact.

A maths wiz is generally also going to be better at art or history than the their peers.

"If the g factor was discredited, iq would be too"

Exactly, and there is plenty of evidence that iq has flaws let's not go through this rabbit hole....

Anyways with the condescension out of the way, "A maths wiz is generally also going to be better at art or history than the their peers."

Than what peers? You mean the average person? Are you talking out of your ass? Send me some studies now buddy your turn.

 

[Imretarded?]

"If the g factor was discredited, iq would be too"

Exactly, and there is plenty of evidence that iq has flaws let's not go through this rabbit hole....

Anyways with the condescension out of the way, "A maths wiz is generally also going to be better at art or history than the their peers."

Than what peers? You mean the average person? Are you talking out of your ass? Send me some studies now buddy your turn.

Your turn? Nigger you never sites a single study for your claims. Also funny you just stopped talking about EQ and IQ correlation.

This is how this conversation is going to go, I'm going to be addressing all of your points while you slowly shift to other talking points when it gets hard to defend them.

I don't feel like having to deal with Brandolini's law today. Have a nice day.

 

[Deleted member 67900]

I unironically think I have savant syndrome

Your turn? Nigger you never sites a single study for your claims. Also funny you just stopped talking about EQ and IQ correlation.

This is how this conversation is going to go, I'm going to be addressing all of your points while you slowly shift to other talking points when it gets hard to defend them.

I don't feel like having to deal with Brandolini's law today. Have a nice day.

I didn't shift to any points, I've been asking you to cite your sources for iq and eq and I stopped talking because I was expecting for you to send them not some "brandolini" whatever excuse.

If you want some studies that discredit IQ then here you go:

IQ

Advance praise forIQ A Smart History of a Failed Idea"An up-to-date, reader-friendly account of the continuing saga of the mismeasure of women and men."—Howard Gardner, author of Frames of Mind and Multiple Intelligences: New Horizons"The good news is that you won't be tested after you've read...

books.google.co.uk

IQ in Question : The Truth about Intelligence - SAGE Publications Ltd - Torrossa

Purchase online the PDF of IQ in Question, Howe, Michael J. A. - SAGE Publications Ltd - E-book

www.torrossa.com

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0734282915621222

 

[Deleted member 65658]

>says g factor has been discredited without providing a source
>tells me to provide a source
population is
Good job mate

you are failing to understand what IQ is. IQ is a proxy for G factor. If G factor was discredited, IQ would be discredited

View attachment 2855985

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4664650/

Also we are talking about extremely high IQs, even a small correlation results in high differences on the tail ends of the bell curve. People with 140+ IQ generally are more socially competent. That is a fact.

A maths wiz is generally also going to be better at art or history than the their peers.

g factor doesn't take incoherent socialisation, maladaptive personality defects, mild motor disorders etc (disabilities) into account, the pre frontal cortex is pretty much responsible for the majority of higher consciousness so could be possible that other parts of the brain that don't affect g factor aren't working as intended but simultaneously requires neuroplastic measures from the pre frontal cortex to compensate

 

[Imretarded?]

I didn't shift to any points, I've been asking you to cite your sources for iq and eq and I stopped talking because I was expecting for you to send them not some "brandolini" whatever excuse.

If you want some studies that discredit IQ then here you go:

IQ

Advance praise forIQ A Smart History of a Failed Idea"An up-to-date, reader-friendly account of the continuing saga of the mismeasure of women and men."—Howard Gardner, author of Frames of Mind and Multiple Intelligences: New Horizons"The good news is that you won't be tested after you've read...

books.google.co.uk

IQ in Question : The Truth about Intelligence - SAGE Publications Ltd - Torrossa

Purchase online the PDF of IQ in Question, Howe, Michael J. A. - SAGE Publications Ltd - E-book

www.torrossa.com

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0734282915621222

Claims to have not shifted arguments

Argument shifted from if mental talents are interconnected or not to saying IQ is bullshit.

I don't think you are an idiot savant, I believe you are just an idiot and not worth anymore of my time.

 

[Deleted member 67900]

Claims to have not shifted arguments

Argument shifted from if mental talents are interconnected or not to saying IQ is bullshit.

I don't think you are an idiot savant, I believe you are just an idiot and not worth anymore of my time.

By that logic it would mean you shifted too because you started making claims such as iq and eq have a moderate-strong positive correlation, which you never corroborated.


See ya buddy!

 

[Imretarded?]

g factor doesn't take incoherent socialisation, maladaptive personality defects, mild motor disorders etc (disabilities) into account, the pre frontal cortex is pretty much responsible for the majority of higher consciousness so could be possible that other parts of the brain that don't affect g factor aren't working as intended but simultaneously requires neuroplastic measures from the pre frontal cortex to compensate

I agree high IQ people may have disorders but that isn't a result of extreme intelligence. Something like schizophrenia or Autism had nothing to do with high IQ.

Most genius level people are not mentally ill. They're usually a well socialized doctor or something. Not 'sheldon cooper',

 

[Deleted member 67900]

I agree high IQ people may have disorders but that isn't a result of extreme intelligence. Something like schizophrenia or Autism had nothing to do with high IQ.

Most genius level people are not mentally ill. They're usually a well socialized doctor or something. Not 'sheldon cooper',

Yeah it does because Autists usually have higher brain volume which somewhat positively correlates with your iq that you love so much.

 

[Imretarded?]

>says g factor has been discredited without providing a source
>tells me to provide a source
population is
Good job mate

you are failing to understand what IQ is. IQ is a proxy for G factor. If G factor was discredited, IQ would be discredited

View attachment 2855985

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4664650/

Also we are talking about extremely high IQs, even a small correlation results in high differences on the tail ends of the bell curve. People with 140+ IQ generally are more socially competent. That is a fact.

A maths wiz is generally also going to be better at art or history than the their peers.

By that logic it would mean you shifted too because you started making claims such as iq and eq have a moderate-strong positive correlation, which you never corroborated.


See ya buddy!

illiterate retard keeps yapping

 

[Deleted member 65658]

I agree high IQ people may have disorders but that isn't a result of extreme intelligence

You're not understanding my argument, im proposing the opposite. Their extreme intelligence is the result of their disorders

 

[Deleted member 67900]

I agree high IQ people may have disorders but that isn't a result of extreme intelligence. Something like schizophrenia or Autism had nothing to do with high IQ.

Most genius level people are not mentally ill. They're usually a well socialized doctor or something. Not 'sheldon cooper',

the idea that most genius people may be mentally stable could be mere survivorship bias as only we get the idea from the media and you don't actually read any studies on the brains on actual geniuses like Albert Einstein, John Von Neumann, Norbert Wiener and etc.

 

[Deleted member 67900]

You're not understanding my argument, im proposing the opposite. Their extreme intelligence is the result of their disorders

he doesn't know what he is talking about

 

[Imretarded?]

Yeah it does because Autists usually have higher brain volume which somewhat positively correlates with your iq that you love so much.

Autists are also much more likely to be total retards. You're mixing up cause and effect.

The autism in high functioning ASD people are not the result of their extreme IQ, their extreme IQ is a result of their disorder.

Again the typical 140+ person is not socially inept or disabled in some other way. You are looking at a subset of people who are like that and assuming that is what it's usually like to be extremely intelligent.

 

[Imretarded?]

You're not understanding my argument, im proposing the opposite. Their extreme intelligence is the result of their disorders

I read your argument. You said extreme IQ and mental disability is tightly linked and that a +1 SD IQ is ideal. That is false.

 

[Deleted member 67900]

Autists are also much more likely to be total retards. You're mixing up cause and effect.

The autism in high functioning ASD people are not the result of their extreme IQ, their extreme IQ is a result of their disorder.

Again the typical 140+ person is not socially inept or disabled in some other way. You are looking at a subset of people who are like that and assuming that is what it's usually like to be extremely intelligent.

"Autists are also much more likely to be total retards. "
The average IQ amongst autists really varies.

I'm not misunderstanding cause and effect, I know the difference between A then B and B then A, and just like douche said you are wrong on the idea that it's not true that asd/oranyothermentalillness is a result of high iq, it's usually like that rather than mentla illness causes high iq.

 

[Deleted member 67900]

I read your argument. You said extreme IQ and mental disability is tightly linked and that a +1 SD IQ is ideal. That is false.

No you really didn't understand what he said, I elaborated in my recent response shitter.

 

[Deleted member 67900]

I read your argument. You said extreme IQ and mental disability is tightly linked and that a +1 SD IQ is ideal. That is false.

you're misrepresenting what he also said, he didn't say it's "tightly linked" he more so said that there is a tight link between it causing disorders, as claiming the former would be also claiming that there is a tight link in mental disorder causing higher iq, which is what he even said, is not what he is saying.

 

[Deleted member 65658]

You said extreme IQ and mental disability is tightly

eh kind of, moreso very high iq is the result of the brain changing its structure to accommodate for mild defects elsewhere. not full blown autism but i see where youre coming from

that a +1 SD IQ is ideal. That is false

whats the optimal iq for social outcome then? including variables like educational attainment, income, relationships etc

 

[DelonLover1999]

Interesting theory ngl

But even at 2sd you can be very high functioning

140+ is where it gets kinda fucked up

 

[Imretarded?]

eh kind of, moreso very high iq is the result of the brain changing its structure to accommodate for mild defects elsewhere. not full blown autism but i see where youre coming from

whats the optimal iq for social outcome then? including variables like educational attainment, income, relationships etc

yeah that is how many idiot savants develop, like that case study of that kid who got shot in the head and became good at maths.

I don't think there is a optimum. Just don't be retarded theory. Someone with 120 IQ can easily make the average person think they're a genius.

A better way to look at it is to see that different levels of IQ are ideal for different social circles. A genius would do terribly around literal retards, he might get cut open like what happens in Africa. On the other hand, that same genius would be in his element in an intellectual environment.

Regardless of your social group, I think it's ideal to be around 10-20 points above average. Not above the national average, your friend group average. Be the 100 IQ guy in the hood. Be the 140 IQ guy in Harvard.

 

[Imretarded?]

@douche I'm mirin your logical reasoning even though i disagree.

 

[Deleted member 65658]

@Imretarded? the more super intelligent people I think of the more sense the theory makes, ted kaczynski, nikola tesla, isaac newton, william sidis, werner heisenberg, bobby fischer even the likes of not so exceptional individuals like elon musk, tobias lutge, mark zuckerberg, heck go to any cs, physics or maths class at a university. They're not idiot savants or autistic per se but they're odd, eccentric, weird imo these individuals were already destined to have an above average iq but they're 'exceptional' as a result of neuroplasticity offset by a mild disability of sorts

 

[Imretarded?]

@Imretarded? the more super intelligent people I think of the more sense the theory makes, ted kaczynski, nikola tesla, isaac newton, william sidis, werner heisenberg, bobby fischer even the likes of not so exceptional individuals like elon musk, tobias lutge, mark zuckerberg, heck go to any cs, physics or maths class at a university. They're not idiot savants or autistic per se but they're odd, eccentric, weird imo these individuals were already destined to have an above average iq but they're 'exceptional' as a result of neuroplasticity offset by a mild disability of sorts

Those guys are different. Ted was 160 IQ (remember most IQ tests are capped at 145/160 so he could be higher) and got ruined by LSD.

IQs that high are impossibly high so they're basically never the result of just a line of high IQ people passing down their smarts. It's nearly always some big mutation that hits them and big shifts like that nearly always result in something fucking up.

With autism, it has a very high SD, so maybe you're right that 100'000 thousand plus intellects are tightly tied to mental illness for the simple fact its too rare for two high functioning 160+ people mating like what happens with 130-145 people.

 

[Deleted member 65658]

IQs that high are impossibly high

thats kind of what I mean by exceptional