Poll: Rate your Intelligence! (UPDATED: NOW WITH I.Q. TEST TO PROVE YOUR BRAVDO!)

[Whateveralot]

I'm not that intelligent, however, I'm socically well-equipped and a very potent thinker, both abstract and physical.

I have however, one simple handicap. I have a hard time understanding simple logic. I always seek for more variables then there are (needed). My mind somehow won't comprehend stuff that feels "too simple", even though it's very straightforward.

Complex, partly illogical, varied things that 90% of the people wouldn't comprehend straight away are pieces of cake for me.

This makes me feel both very stupid sometimes, but also very smart.


That said, I'm one that learns not just from my own mistakes, but also from what others experience. I'm a very good listener (not so much a leader or do-er). This makes me very capable of creating ideas, schemes or plans out of thin air, which make absolute sense. However, I know an almost irrational lack of fear and I take risks, so I'm really depending on my plans to work.

I'm alive, so I suppose that that works out well for me.

My IQ was measured last year and it was around 130, so I suppose we can say I ain't a genius, but I'm definately above avarage.

 

[tautologico]

So, almost 70% of responses for above-average intelligence (either slightly above average or genius level), which is pretty strange if we assume a normal distribution for intelligence. Either selection bias or a lot of people here think too highly of themselves

 

[Rainforce]

So, almost 70% of responses for above-average intelligence (either slightly above average or genius level), which is pretty strange if we assume a normal distribution for intelligence. Either selection bias or a lot of people here think too highly of themselves

I sure do hate these polls, as well as the people who think they're higher than average. if 90% ARE above average, they would just make the new average. so yeah, nothing won in this one.
that's why I go with average anyways, because breaking the average is pretty much impossible.
also for the standard (actually logical) reasons:
I have bad grades, bad self-esteem, but normally outwit even the best in class when it comes to some form of direct competition,
but otherwise make way too many mistakes to ever get anywhere.
So yeah, that results in average at best.

Actually, I can't really tell, I might as well be some random stupid guy with insane amounts of luck. doesn't sound too bad, either way.

 

[Paradoxrifts]

Below average. Although I often have cause to think that I'm the only guy in the room who was taught anything about critical thinking.

 

[Thanatos662]

Oh look, more people mixing up average and median. Interesting how even people who are fairly skilled mathematically do that.

Allow me to explain with a simple example: 0, 1, and 1. The average of these numbers is (hopefully) obviously 0.66. A majority of the numbers are above this average. This scales as far as you want it to. As long as the lower elements are sufficiently low, an arbitrarily large proportion of the population can be 'above average'.

Oh, and if anyone cares, I ranked myself as 'average'.

EDIT: Of course, in practice this is unlikely, since intelligence is distributed roughly normally.

 

[Tanner The Monotone]

Though if people would look at how easily I can remember things and my puzzle solving skills, they would see how smart I really am.

People with good memories are often poor thinkers. Relying on your memory for everything means you exercise your reasoning less often.

Puzzle solving skills.......I said that I'm good at using reason.

 

[No social life]

I'm supposed to be a genius, however, I have the attention span of a goldfish and absolutely no motivation. So I'm not sure where that leaves me overall.

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

I only consider myself above average, because every one of my peer at my secondary school almost reveres as some sort of genius; so since I don't have anyone who is of a similar intelligence to mine to compare my cognitive abilities to(besides, my other, smarter friends, but since I don't go to the same school with them anymore, I cannot compare myself with them thoroughly to decide whether or not I'm average or not; after all, my brain switches off during the holidays somewhat, and casual behavior isn't a sure fire indicator of one's intelligence).

But, measuring myself against my fellow escapists, I would say average; also, both my brother and my mother think that I'm an idiot just because I'm not as able as they are in home economics.

 

[Dangit2019]

IQ: 125 with the average usually being 100.

So, not technically genius (I'm still outshined by the people in my class who actually pay attention), but I'm alright.

 

[JeffBergGold]

Please quote the part where I said intelligence is one dimensional.

Refer to your previous two post.

Barring severe physical deformities, anyone can learn to dance or play a sport if they invest enough effort into it.

Learning something and being good at it are two different things.

Same is true for half of the other shit you listed.

No, it's not.

No I'm not. All I'm saying is that retaining information is a form of intelligence. I never even half implied that it is only kind. Come on - you're a genius, you should know this. Clearly your "emotional intelligence" isn't quite up to scratch here.

I never said data retention isn't a form of intelligence. I said it is a low level cognitive skill that everyone is capable of and not and indicator of exceptional intellect.

Emotional intelligence can't be applied through a computer medium. Although, I can tell that you're very angry and taking the fact that you're awkward and socially inept personally. Also, that my diminishment of data retention makes you feel inadequate since it is something you've correlated your intelligence to.

You came out guns blazing saying that retaining information isn't a form of intelligence. I'm saying it certainly is.

I never stated that. You did. I'll state it again maybe you'll be able to comprehend it this time.

Data retention is a low level cognitive skill. It is not an indicator of exceptional intellect

Why does that bother you so much? Are you an idiot that's only good at regurgitating data on obscure topics? Do you believe that accumulation of data equals accumulation of intellect? If you do. You are an idiot.

really? no friggen Idea, I don't think so really.....

everyone thinks they are smarter than what they really are and its an incredibly hard thing to measure...

an IQ test isnt everything

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Normal folk and stupid folk rate themselves as smarter, smart folk rate themselves as lower.

So basically, reverse those results entirely to find the actual results.

I love debunking these "just world" "modesty" parrots.

http://www.talyarkoni.org/blog/2010/07/07/what-the-dunning-kruger-effect-is-and-isnt/

 

[Calibanbutcher]

Since it was asked: I went by a Mensa IQ-test. If that helps.
Also, am I the only one to notice, that, theoretically, since numbers are virtually infinite and we will need to keep naming them, one day "potato" will not only be a number but one that is of such magnitude that counting to it will be a very impressive achievement?
And being able to figure out such a high number all on your own and then count to it is quite a feat of the brain.
Just putting that out there...

 

[Amaror]

How smart do you think you are in relation to the rest of your country; Below average, average or above average, and what proof would you have to back that up?
It'll be interesting to see what results we get from the Escapist.

Spoiler

P.S.
I went for slightly above average, I always got good grades, and I've a degree, but then everyone has a degree nowadays...

We don't neet to guess that. We have the IQ for it. If you don't really know what it is:
The IQ of 100 always represents the average intelligence of the country you live in. So if you have a iq of above 100, your above average.

 

[Vault101]

really? no friggen Idea, I don't think so really.....

everyone thinks they are smarter than what they really are and its an incredibly hard thing to measure...

an IQ test isnt everything

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Normal folk and stupid folk rate themselves as smarter, smart folk rate themselves as lower.

So basically, reverse those results entirely to find the actual results.

hahaha...thats funny

I would liek to think that I'm totally smnart because of my modesty but I used to think I was smarter than I was so thats not the case

 

[manic_depressive13]

Just average. I'm nothing special but I like to think I'm not too stupid either. The majority of people will obviously consider themselves to be of above average intelligence.

 

[hatseflats]

I'm intelligent enough to know that I'm not particularly intelligent.

Also, fun fact: most people believe they are slightly above average. Which of course cannot possibly be true considering the definition of average.

In fact it can. Example: there are 7 people with an IQ of 100 and 3 people with an IQ of 70. The average IQ is then 91. 7/10 people have an above average intelligence.

What is true though is that more than half the people think they belong to the most intelligent (and hard-working &c.) half of the population. Because then we're talking about a median intelligence it really isn't possible for this to be true by definition.
Depending on the type of job, about 60-99% of all people rate classify themselves as belonging to the most intelligent, creative and hard-working half of the company. The 60% is typically true for mechanics and people performing menial tasks such as simple factory work. Almost 100% of bankers rate themselves amongst the most intelligent half. Teachers also rate themselves very highly.

As for IQ tests: they're actually a terrible way to measure intelligence. One problem is that different IQ tests test different things: some tests also rate things like memory and sense of directions, others don't. The value of testing these things is dubious in and of itself: like they show a clip of a fedex guy delivering a package and then afterwards the question is "what colour were the flowers". In that case you're basically testing whether people suck at focussing on what's important. Getting it right should subtract points rather than improve the score. Memory is not really a measure of intelligence anyway: very dumb people and some animals have a very good memory but that doesn't make them intelligent. Which brings us to the point that "intelligence" is bloody difficult to define. Does it include creative skills? Memory? Grammar? Vocabulary?
In most cases "intelligence" is defined as problem solving skills, which seems to be the most straightforward option. IQ tests are terrible at testing this. They test many things beside problem solving skills and even those questions which should test problem solving skills actually don't do so consistently.
People attribute much value to IQ tests but it should be obvious that it doesn't work: one can train to get high scores. Practising these tests can improve one's score tremendously without an accompanying change in intelligence. Even moderately intelligent people can train to score extremely well on these things. Many of the "problem solving" questions rely heavily on skills that are arbitrary and taught to us. For instance, if you see a question like "1, 2, 4, 8..." the answer does not have to be "16". We're trained to think like that because we've seen those kind of questions before but in most cases there are other possible patterns. Besides, if someone would not have seen such a question before he would probably struggle with them no matter how intelligent he is.

And I think we all know the people who claim they're highly intelligent but never achieve anything. In fact, from my experience it is the people who loudly claim they're very intelligent who always fail. What matters is what you do with what you have. As to that, I'm quite happy at the moment. I am amongst the highest scoring students at my department without spending too much effort on it. I like what I do. I know that by almost any measure (IQ, grades) I'm more intelligent than average but it simply doesn't matter.

 

[Murais]

Logic would dictate that I am average(And most likely many more than most here are willing to admit, I am guessing). I may perceive myself to be smarter due to personal narrative, but in my adult years I've come to meet many folks more intelligent than I, and quite a few dumber than I. You can call it whatever kind of average you want, but that is average to me. General intelligence is more than a bit subjective, anyway.

Besides, who the fuck wants to be a special snowflake like everybody else? Growing up is realizing that you are just like everybody else, but able to reconcile your identity to yourself enough that it doesn't matter anyway.