Poll: How intelligent do you think you are?

[BanicRhys]

You see, most people think they're slightly above average because they excelled at an area of study or believe they know more than anyone in their limited circle of friends.

But I know that I'm pretty much the creme of the intellectual crop. But don't admire me, children, pity me. Hark! It is a lonely life up here among the Gods, you must forget me and cherish the lives you were given, for there is no bliss like stupidity.

 

[jacob97900]

I usually get high to very high scores in most subjects, but i'll readily admit that I'm the laziest person I know. It really makes me wonder what people do when they study for Math all the time, yet I study for an hour the night before and still score 40% better than they do in a test. Its hard to define what intelligence is, is the person who puts lots of effort into studying and works hard the smart one, or the lazy guy who breezes through life leaving everything to the last minute.

 

[Vidi Kitty]

I was in the advanced classes during school, so above average I suppose. My problem is that I'm far too apathetic to apply myself with most things, so whilst I may have a good base to work from, I can't use that because I just don't care to.

and this is why I haven't even touched college and why I almost failed my senior year. I'm pretty sure I made a teacher rethink her life and quit after I wrote an essay about how horrible her teaching methods were and how outwardly rude she was to her students. I then proceeded to explain to the higher up staff the problem I was having and dropped the class the next day. She was at the school for one more year after that.

I don't know more than other people, but I have a different way of looking at things that lets me figure stuff out differently/faster than other people. Sometimes that backfires and I over complicate things and end up taking the long way about solving the problem...

 

[Davey Woo]

Compared to most of the people I come across online, I'd say I'm of above-average intelligence. However, the Escapist community appears to consist almost entirely of people with "above-average" intelligence, so I guess collectively we bring the "average" up quite a bit...

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

I'm supposedly above average by a good bit...

But my ADD makes it so hard to focus that it balances out, and leaves me at the average mark.

In fact, for harder courses, I CAN'T just "get it" and do well. I need to do a lot of work to practice it first. And that's where I get screwed over. :s

 

[Custard_Angel]

As much as it pains me to join the crowd of people saying "im smarter than the average person", but I know I am.

As evidence I cite a bachelor in pharmaceutics, an honours degree in medical science and my current doctorate study in pharmacology.

But this pretty much means I only know more than average in the areas of chemistry, biology and health science.

As a counterpoint to myself I will also say that I know very little about music theory or art or philosophy or any of those other areas I find boring.

 

[similar.squirrel]

I'm attending the Irish equivalent of community college after getting around 50% in my high-school finals. Twice.
Whatever illusions I may have had about my intellectual prowess have been put in their place by that little fact.

I read and think a whole lot, but that's fucking pointless when it doesn't translate to real-life success.

 

[Pinkamena]

This exact same thread was made not even a week ago.

 

[CG]

extremely

 

[everythingbeeps]

I think I'm mostly just wasted potential. I know I have the capacity to be way smarter than I am, but I didn't try or pay attention in school, I never took hard classes, I never challenged myself. I always killed standardized tests, but I only did okay in high school and college.

Even today, I don't really try. I don't read difficult books, I don't even bother with non-fiction, and forget about technology. I'm just not interested in learning how new stuff works. I can get into spirited debates about a lot of stuff, and can generally hold my own, but that's hardly a challenge on the internet.

 

[Samurai Goomba]

I'm of average intelligence, which is pretty friggin' smart.

And most of those who think they're "above-average" are just plain wrong. Above-average is a meaningless term unless we define it. Almost nobody is "average" when defined by what most folks think it means (average seems to be the new "stupid" or "inferior" insult). If you don't have a 4.0 GPA and aren't an expert in your chosen field, you haven't earned the right to consider yourself above anyone else.

 

[efAston]

6

 

[Flailing Escapist]

How are you measuring "intelligence"? I can learn new things, well, most new things; you could beat me in the head with a big book of science until quantum equations drip from my ears and I still wouldn't be able to tell you what the speed of terminal velocity is. But give me a script to memorize and a week later I can tell you the damn thing backwards.

But what the fuck do I know, right? I'm sure all of us are stupid we just don't realize it yet.

 

[Jaime_Wolf]

Fuck, practically everyone on here says they are above average. That doesn't even make sense.

Intelligence quotients are not a reliable means of discovering one's intelligence, especially when it isn't an official MENSA test. For one thing, the tests are automatically favourable to anyone who just happens to have a knack for tests (keeping cool and confident, etc.) and if your reading speed isn't up to scratch, that blurs the results further.

Actually, it makes perfect sense. You think these forums are a random sample of the full population? You're looking at a very, very narrowly constrained group of people.

Yes, but I find it unlikely that this group just so happens to consist of purely those with greater than average intelligence. Perhaps this particular forum might attract more intelligent people and discourage the stupid, but there is no verification whatsoever to suppose that is the case. Perhaps it is more reasonable to assume that bias is a big issue when it comes to judging one's intelligence.

Also, MENSA is an organization for people with high IQs. They're not a scientific source for information on intelligence testing - they're a social club of people who have tested high. I'm not sure what you mean by an "official MENSA test" either, since they primarily use existing tests designed by the psychological community (which, I should note, typically finds MENSA to be quite misguided in its interpretation of test results).

By "official MENSA test" I mean "test approved to get you into MENSA"; standardised, approved IQ tests, as opposed to random unverified ones that you can find on the internet. I've taken a number of unofficial internet tests and my IQ apparently measures either 67, 189 or somewhere in between. Naturally, MENSA would only accept applications from certain tests they can trust.

I agree that IQs use a very vague concept of intelligence, and that how you define intelligence is key. But I also think that the means of testing intelligence is of crucial consideration. Are the test subjects good at concentrating? Will they panic or act defeatist in the face of questions? I know a perfectly intelligent person who has an IQ of 75, according to state tests. I'm fairly certain she isn't borderline mentally retarded, so either the test failed to gauge her intelligence accurately, or IQ is just a lousy means to judge intelligence.

Probably both. My point wasn't that test conditions don't matter, only that, even beyond how much influence they can have, there are even larger, more intrinsic problems in the whole business of testing intelligence. Like I said, there's a reason no one really works on general intelligence anymore.

Edit: Also, MENSA accepts some fairly old, really sketchy tests. The thing that should immediately call the whole enterprise into question is the realization that it can actually matter which test you take - people can and do score significantly differently on different tests. Additionally, they can score significantly differently depending on time of day, test setting, gender, ethnicity, age, etc. These are not even remotely stable measures for the most part.

 

[Sir Strange Of The House Lycan]

About as smart as people tell me I am. Which is, in age order; My age peers consider me really fucking intelligent, but weird and loathsome, people about 2 to 3 school years above me consider quite smart indeed, and most adult think I'm rather average, if a teensy bit above it.

 

[AngryMongoose]

People tend to emphasize those arbitrary ratings of intelligence in which they score high, thus allowing nearly everyone to feel well above average.

Myself included.

Doin' a BSc Mathematics at an internationally recognized uni (UCL - London's Global Asian University), so I'm willing to say I'm fairly clever. I was in the 28% of people who passed thew induction week test, so I'm gonna say I'm cleverer than two thirds of them

Outside the sciences, however, my competence drops to average, and down to manchild levels for subjects like music and art.

 

[Gorilla Gunk]

Highly, but only in the autistic/aspergers sense.

 

[demoman_chaos]

I am smarter than the average bear.

 

[Agayek]

that kinda hurts to read... Even if your first statement is really true, please try not to appear as a total hypocrite on the internet but do something better with your competence.

It's not so much hypocrisy as admitting I'm human. Like I said in my first post, I can't really say objectively how intelligent I am. As such, my take on it falls under the same heading as my second post.

Essentially, all I was trying to do was a "take what I said with a grain of salt" kind of thing. Obviously, I failed to get that across, but such is life.

 

[The_ModeRazor]

Dunno. But you can't make me care.

(also, this thread comes up at least once every few days around here)