What's Your IQ?

[Disk98]

How relevant:

 

http://www.clsnyder.com/WordPress/2006/08/04/are-smart-people-jerks/

 

Are smart people jerks ?

 

 

Are smart people jerks?

Albert Einstein is generally remembered as a “warm and fuzzy”, congenial teddy bear of a man, who also happened to be an off the charts genius. The popular perception of the “absent minded Professor” also fits this stereotype. However, another stereotype is that of the autistic, aloof, introverted, socially inept but brilliant geek who generally dislikes people, and avoids contact with them. Some studies of “techies” have confirmed a high incidence of Asperger’s syndrome, suggesting that perhaps the latter stereotype is more apt to be correct.

It has long been my experience that, at least in the world of surgery, a “nice” surgeon would have a relatively equal likelihood of being “good”: i.e., technically skilled, well read, efficient, and generally skillful. However, surgeons who most people would consider “jerks” i.e. unfriendly, short tempered, and generally lacking a good bedside manner, have a much higher chance of being “good surgeons”. The rationale proffered for this is that if an incompetent surgeon is a pleasant fellow; nice, easy to get along with, well liked, then his or her incompetence will be “put up with” or at least tolerated by associates, underlings, et cetera. However, if a generally nasty person is also incompetent; coworkers, associates, underlings, will have a much lower threshold for tolerating the person, and would be likely to complain, censure, etc. this individual. Although obvious, this is not an argument in favor of surgeons or anyone else acting like a jerk. Recalling basic logic 101, if 99% of people who are 6’5″ tall are men, it does not follow that all men are 6’5″ tall.

An alternative explanation was recently noted in an article about extremely high IQ individuals. The article pointed out that, if the average IQs is 100 “by definition”, and a mildly retarded person (IQ of 75 to 80) interact for long periods of time, the person of average intelligence is likely to become frustrated, and to not have much in common with the mildly retarded individual. This is not to say that the person of average intelligence would have some underlying prejudice against the other person, or would necessarily treat them badly. The idea is simply that a person of average intelligence, if forced to interact 8 to 12 hours a day with people who were mildly to moderately retarded, would likely find it in a difficult and frustrating experience. Therefore, if a person with an IQ of 150 – 160 is exposed on a daily basis to “normal” people (IQ of 100 – 120) they also would likely find it a difficult and frustrating experience, since the difference between their level of intelligence and normal people, and the difference between the normals and retarded individuals (at least in terms of IQ points – a debatable and hotly contested topic) is similar. This argument is used to explain the putative antisocial personality characteristics of the introverted intelligentsia.

Well, I suppose you hit the nail on the head, but I started this thread with pure intentions. I'm not boasting, but I feel like if I start a thread with a question, I should give it an answer. I meant no "cockiness" from the whole thing. :( Call me a baby, but I'm a tad offended that you would think so lowly of someone you don't even know.

Edited December 15, 2014 by Disk98

[savagegrace26]

How relevant:

 

http://www.clsnyder.com/WordPress/2006/08/04/are-smart-people-jerks/

 

Are smart people jerks ?

 

 

Are smart people jerks?

Albert Einstein is generally remembered as a “warm and fuzzy”, congenial teddy bear of a man, who also happened to be an off the charts genius. The popular perception of the “absent minded Professor” also fits this stereotype. However, another stereotype is that of the autistic, aloof, introverted, socially inept but brilliant geek who generally dislikes people, and avoids contact with them. Some studies of “techies” have confirmed a high incidence of Asperger’s syndrome, suggesting that perhaps the latter stereotype is more apt to be correct.

It has long been my experience that, at least in the world of surgery, a “nice” surgeon would have a relatively equal likelihood of being “good”: i.e., technically skilled, well read, efficient, and generally skillful. However, surgeons who most people would consider “jerks” i.e. unfriendly, short tempered, and generally lacking a good bedside manner, have a much higher chance of being “good surgeons”. The rationale proffered for this is that if an incompetent surgeon is a pleasant fellow; nice, easy to get along with, well liked, then his or her incompetence will be “put up with” or at least tolerated by associates, underlings, et cetera. However, if a generally nasty person is also incompetent; coworkers, associates, underlings, will have a much lower threshold for tolerating the person, and would be likely to complain, censure, etc. this individual. Although obvious, this is not an argument in favor of surgeons or anyone else acting like a jerk. Recalling basic logic 101, if 99% of people who are 6’5″ tall are men, it does not follow that all men are 6’5″ tall.

An alternative explanation was recently noted in an article about extremely high IQ individuals. The article pointed out that, if the average IQs is 100 “by definition”, and a mildly retarded person (IQ of 75 to 80) interact for long periods of time, the person of average intelligence is likely to become frustrated, and to not have much in common with the mildly retarded individual. This is not to say that the person of average intelligence would have some underlying prejudice against the other person, or would necessarily treat them badly. The idea is simply that a person of average intelligence, if forced to interact 8 to 12 hours a day with people who were mildly to moderately retarded, would likely find it in a difficult and frustrating experience. Therefore, if a person with an IQ of 150 – 160 is exposed on a daily basis to “normal” people (IQ of 100 – 120) they also would likely find it a difficult and frustrating experience, since the difference between their level of intelligence and normal people, and the difference between the normals and retarded individuals (at least in terms of IQ points – a debatable and hotly contested topic) is similar. This argument is used to explain the putative antisocial personality characteristics of the introverted intelligentsia.

Well, I suppose you hit the nail on the head, but I started this thread with pure intentions. I'm not boasting, but I feel like if I start a thread with a question, I should give it an answer. I meant no "cockiness" from the whole thing. :( Call me a baby, but I'm a tad offended that you would think so lowly of someone you don't even know.

 

I'm the biggest c*ck on the board so don't worry about it.

[Babycat]

I haven't got a clue. I'm just a cat. ;)

[Fordgalaxy]

Rush is a thinking man (or woman)'s band. That must mean there are some pretty bright people around here. What is your IQ?

 

Mine is 165.

 

For reference, Albert Einstein's was just north of 160. I'd guess you took one of the many on-line but not accurate versions. Or maybe you really are in the minuscule % or people with ultra high IQs. Maybe you and Marilyn vos Savant should hook up.

[Disk98]

Rush is a thinking man (or woman)'s band. That must mean there are some pretty bright people around here. What is your IQ?

 

Mine is 165.

 

For reference, Albert Einstein's was just north of 160. I'd guess you took one of the many on-line but not accurate versions. Or maybe you really are in the minuscule % or people with ultra high IQs. Maybe you and Marilyn vos Savant should hook up.

Yeah, maybe. :D No, friend, that number is real. It was a few years back, but it's from an actual evaluation.

[Segue Myles]

How relevant:

 

http://www.clsnyder.com/WordPress/2006/08/04/are-smart-people-jerks/

 

Are smart people jerks ?

 

 

Are smart people jerks?

Albert Einstein is generally remembered as a “warm and fuzzy”, congenial teddy bear of a man, who also happened to be an off the charts genius. The popular perception of the “absent minded Professor” also fits this stereotype. However, another stereotype is that of the autistic, aloof, introverted, socially inept but brilliant geek who generally dislikes people, and avoids contact with them. Some studies of “techies” have confirmed a high incidence of Asperger’s syndrome, suggesting that perhaps the latter stereotype is more apt to be correct.

It has long been my experience that, at least in the world of surgery, a “nice” surgeon would have a relatively equal likelihood of being “good”: i.e., technically skilled, well read, efficient, and generally skillful. However, surgeons who most people would consider “jerks” i.e. unfriendly, short tempered, and generally lacking a good bedside manner, have a much higher chance of being “good surgeons”. The rationale proffered for this is that if an incompetent surgeon is a pleasant fellow; nice, easy to get along with, well liked, then his or her incompetence will be “put up with” or at least tolerated by associates, underlings, et cetera. However, if a generally nasty person is also incompetent; coworkers, associates, underlings, will have a much lower threshold for tolerating the person, and would be likely to complain, censure, etc. this individual. Although obvious, this is not an argument in favor of surgeons or anyone else acting like a jerk. Recalling basic logic 101, if 99% of people who are 6’5″ tall are men, it does not follow that all men are 6’5″ tall.

An alternative explanation was recently noted in an article about extremely high IQ individuals. The article pointed out that, if the average IQs is 100 “by definition”, and a mildly retarded person (IQ of 75 to 80) interact for long periods of time, the person of average intelligence is likely to become frustrated, and to not have much in common with the mildly retarded individual. This is not to say that the person of average intelligence would have some underlying prejudice against the other person, or would necessarily treat them badly. The idea is simply that a person of average intelligence, if forced to interact 8 to 12 hours a day with people who were mildly to moderately retarded, would likely find it in a difficult and frustrating experience. Therefore, if a person with an IQ of 150 – 160 is exposed on a daily basis to “normal” people (IQ of 100 – 120) they also would likely find it a difficult and frustrating experience, since the difference between their level of intelligence and normal people, and the difference between the normals and retarded individuals (at least in terms of IQ points – a debatable and hotly contested topic) is similar. This argument is used to explain the putative antisocial personality characteristics of the introverted intelligentsia.

Well, I suppose you hit the nail on the head, but I started this thread with pure intentions. I'm not boasting, but I feel like if I start a thread with a question, I should give it an answer. I meant no "cockiness" from the whole thing. :( Call me a baby, but I'm a tad offended that you would think so lowly of someone you don't even know.

 

I getcha buddy!

[The Analog Grownup]

Most likely too low.

[Segue Myles]

Most likely too low.

 

Same

[Lorraine]

I deleted my post. When I read the post I commented on, I was not taking the word that was used to be representative of a body part. Edited December 15, 2014 by Lorraine

[Lorraine]

Rush is a thinking man (or woman)'s band. That must mean there are some pretty bright people around here. What is your IQ?

 

Mine is 165.

 

For reference, Albert Einstein's was just north of 160. I'd guess you took one of the many on-line but not accurate versions. Or maybe you really are in the minuscule % or people with ultra high IQs. Maybe you and Marilyn vos Savant should hook up.

Yeah, maybe. :D No, friend, that number is real. It was a few years back, but it's from an actual evaluation.

Just goes to show that there is no relation between smarts and good taste in music. :laughing guy: Just teasing. ;)

[Mr. Not]

How relevant:

 

http://www.clsnyder....t-people-jerks/

 

Are smart people jerks ?

 

 

Are smart people jerks?

Albert Einstein is generally remembered as a “warm and fuzzy”, congenial teddy bear of a man, who also happened to be an off the charts genius. The popular perception of the “absent minded Professor” also fits this stereotype. However, another stereotype is that of the autistic, aloof, introverted, socially inept but brilliant geek who generally dislikes people, and avoids contact with them. Some studies of “techies” have confirmed a high incidence of Asperger’s syndrome, suggesting that perhaps the latter stereotype is more apt to be correct.

It has long been my experience that, at least in the world of surgery, a “nice” surgeon would have a relatively equal likelihood of being “good”: i.e., technically skilled, well read, efficient, and generally skillful. However, surgeons who most people would consider “jerks” i.e. unfriendly, short tempered, and generally lacking a good bedside manner, have a much higher chance of being “good surgeons”. The rationale proffered for this is that if an incompetent surgeon is a pleasant fellow; nice, easy to get along with, well liked, then his or her incompetence will be “put up with” or at least tolerated by associates, underlings, et cetera. However, if a generally nasty person is also incompetent; coworkers, associates, underlings, will have a much lower threshold for tolerating the person, and would be likely to complain, censure, etc. this individual. Although obvious, this is not an argument in favor of surgeons or anyone else acting like a jerk. Recalling basic logic 101, if 99% of people who are 6’5″ tall are men, it does not follow that all men are 6’5″ tall.

An alternative explanation was recently noted in an article about extremely high IQ individuals. The article pointed out that, if the average IQs is 100 “by definition”, and a mildly retarded person (IQ of 75 to 80) interact for long periods of time, the person of average intelligence is likely to become frustrated, and to not have much in common with the mildly retarded individual. This is not to say that the person of average intelligence would have some underlying prejudice against the other person, or would necessarily treat them badly. The idea is simply that a person of average intelligence, if forced to interact 8 to 12 hours a day with people who were mildly to moderately retarded, would likely find it in a difficult and frustrating experience. Therefore, if a person with an IQ of 150 – 160 is exposed on a daily basis to “normal” people (IQ of 100 – 120) they also would likely find it a difficult and frustrating experience, since the difference between their level of intelligence and normal people, and the difference between the normals and retarded individuals (at least in terms of IQ points – a debatable and hotly contested topic) is similar. This argument is used to explain the putative antisocial personality characteristics of the introverted intelligentsia.

Well, I suppose you hit the nail on the head, but I started this thread with pure intentions. I'm not boasting, but I feel like if I start a thread with a question, I should give it an answer. I meant no "cockiness" from the whole thing. :( Call me a baby, but I'm a tad offended that you would think so lowly of someone you don't even know.

 

I'm the biggest c*ck on the board so don't worry about it.

 

Sorry, Savage. I couldn't resist that one.

 

...Aren't you a size queen though? :P

[Mr. Not]

Most likely too low.

 

Same

 

This thread has been making me smile up until this point...

[Lorraine]

How relevant:

 

http://www.clsnyder....t-people-jerks/

 

Are smart people jerks ?

 

 

Are smart people jerks?

Albert Einstein is generally remembered as a “warm and fuzzy”, congenial teddy bear of a man, who also happened to be an off the charts genius. The popular perception of the “absent minded Professor” also fits this stereotype. However, another stereotype is that of the autistic, aloof, introverted, socially inept but brilliant geek who generally dislikes people, and avoids contact with them. Some studies of “techies” have confirmed a high incidence of Asperger’s syndrome, suggesting that perhaps the latter stereotype is more apt to be correct.

It has long been my experience that, at least in the world of surgery, a “nice” surgeon would have a relatively equal likelihood of being “good”: i.e., technically skilled, well read, efficient, and generally skillful. However, surgeons who most people would consider “jerks” i.e. unfriendly, short tempered, and generally lacking a good bedside manner, have a much higher chance of being “good surgeons”. The rationale proffered for this is that if an incompetent surgeon is a pleasant fellow; nice, easy to get along with, well liked, then his or her incompetence will be “put up with” or at least tolerated by associates, underlings, et cetera. However, if a generally nasty person is also incompetent; coworkers, associates, underlings, will have a much lower threshold for tolerating the person, and would be likely to complain, censure, etc. this individual. Although obvious, this is not an argument in favor of surgeons or anyone else acting like a jerk. Recalling basic logic 101, if 99% of people who are 6’5″ tall are men, it does not follow that all men are 6’5″ tall.

An alternative explanation was recently noted in an article about extremely high IQ individuals. The article pointed out that, if the average IQs is 100 “by definition”, and a mildly retarded person (IQ of 75 to 80) interact for long periods of time, the person of average intelligence is likely to become frustrated, and to not have much in common with the mildly retarded individual. This is not to say that the person of average intelligence would have some underlying prejudice against the other person, or would necessarily treat them badly. The idea is simply that a person of average intelligence, if forced to interact 8 to 12 hours a day with people who were mildly to moderately retarded, would likely find it in a difficult and frustrating experience. Therefore, if a person with an IQ of 150 – 160 is exposed on a daily basis to “normal” people (IQ of 100 – 120) they also would likely find it a difficult and frustrating experience, since the difference between their level of intelligence and normal people, and the difference between the normals and retarded individuals (at least in terms of IQ points – a debatable and hotly contested topic) is similar. This argument is used to explain the putative antisocial personality characteristics of the introverted intelligentsia.

Well, I suppose you hit the nail on the head, but I started this thread with pure intentions. I'm not boasting, but I feel like if I start a thread with a question, I should give it an answer. I meant no "cockiness" from the whole thing. :( Call me a baby, but I'm a tad offended that you would think so lowly of someone you don't even know.

 

I'm the biggest c*ck on the board so don't worry about it.

 

Sorry, Savage. I couldn't resist that one.

 

...Aren't you a size queen though? :P

No.

[savagegrace26]

Rush is a thinking man (or woman)'s band. That must mean there are some pretty bright people around here. What is your IQ?

 

Mine is 165.

 

For reference, Albert Einstein's was just north of 160. I'd guess you took one of the many on-line but not accurate versions. Or maybe you really are in the minuscule % or people with ultra high IQs. Maybe you and Marilyn vos Savant should hook up.

Yeah, maybe. :D No, friend, that number is real. It was a few years back, but it's from an actual evaluation.

 

By "a few years back" he means when he was evaluated in the second-grade. He posted that somewhere in this thread.

 

His IQ has obviously dropped a few notches over the years...

[savagegrace26]

Rush is a thinking man (or woman)'s band. That must mean there are some pretty bright people around here. What is your IQ?

 

Mine is 165.

 

For reference, Albert Einstein's was just north of 160. I'd guess you took one of the many on-line but not accurate versions. Or maybe you really are in the minuscule % or people with ultra high IQs. Maybe you and Marilyn vos Savant should hook up.

Yeah, maybe. :D No, friend, that number is real. It was a few years back, but it's from an actual evaluation.

 

By "a few years back" he means when he was evaluated in the second-grade. He posted that somewhere in this thread.

 

His IQ has obviously dropped a few notches over the years...

[savagegrace26]

And IQ scores are most reliable when they are administered in adulthood.

[Mr. Not]

Anything can change. Maybe him not knowing this is a sign that he's lost a few points over the years...

Your most fitting results will be the ones you receive when you take the test during adulthood.

 

* * *

 

His IQ has obviously dropped a few notches over the years...

And IQ scores are most reliable when they are administered in adulthood.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0PQ6GC6KYc

Edited December 15, 2014 by Mr. Not

[The Analog Grownup]

Most likely too low.

 

Same

 

This thread has been making me smile up until this point...

 

Sorry? ;)

[Mr. Not]

Most likely too low.

 

Same

 

This thread has been making me smile up until this point...

 

Sorry? ;)

 

 

http://i1135.photobucket.com/albums/m628/Reportedspam/rep.gif

[Lost In Xanadu]

banana!

[Disk98]

Rush is a thinking man (or woman)'s band. That must mean there are some pretty bright people around here. What is your IQ?

 

Mine is 165.

 

For reference, Albert Einstein's was just north of 160. I'd guess you took one of the many on-line but not accurate versions. Or maybe you really are in the minuscule % or people with ultra high IQs. Maybe you and Marilyn vos Savant should hook up.

Yeah, maybe. :D No, friend, that number is real. It was a few years back, but it's from an actual evaluation.

 

By "a few years back" he means when he was evaluated in the second-grade. He posted that somewhere in this thread.

 

His IQ has obviously dropped a few notches over the years...

Dropped?! I don't think so. I'm sixteen years old and in college. I passed my GED exam with an A!

[The Analog Grownup]

Most likely too low.

 

Same

 

This thread has been making me smile up until this point...

 

Sorry? ;)

 

 

http://i1135.photobucket.com/albums/m628/Reportedspam/rep.gif

 

My IQ is too low to understand this

[savagegrace26]

Rush is a thinking man (or woman)'s band. That must mean there are some pretty bright people around here. What is your IQ?

 

Mine is 165.

 

For reference, Albert Einstein's was just north of 160. I'd guess you took one of the many on-line but not accurate versions. Or maybe you really are in the minuscule % or people with ultra high IQs. Maybe you and Marilyn vos Savant should hook up.

Yeah, maybe. :D No, friend, that number is real. It was a few years back, but it's from an actual evaluation.

 

By "a few years back" he means when he was evaluated in the second-grade. He posted that somewhere in this thread.

 

His IQ has obviously dropped a few notches over the years...

Dropped?! I don't think so. I'm sixteen years old and in college. I passed my GED exam with an A!

 

Uh...ok...

 

I aced my GED too...without any preparation or "studying". I just went and took it. The GED is remarkably easy. (They didn't grade it with letter grades when I took it).

 

I was under the impression that you were older. You're unintentional "boasting" can be excused because you're 16 ;)

 

What are you studying in college?

 

EDIT: You remind me of Zumbi for some reason...

Edited December 15, 2014 by savagegrace26

[Disk98]

Rush is a thinking man (or woman)'s band. That must mean there are some pretty bright people around here. What is your IQ?

 

Mine is 165.

 

For reference, Albert Einstein's was just north of 160. I'd guess you took one of the many on-line but not accurate versions. Or maybe you really are in the minuscule % or people with ultra high IQs. Maybe you and Marilyn vos Savant should hook up.

Yeah, maybe. :D No, friend, that number is real. It was a few years back, but it's from an actual evaluation.

 

By "a few years back" he means when he was evaluated in the second-grade. He posted that somewhere in this thread.

 

His IQ has obviously dropped a few notches over the years...

Dropped?! I don't think so. I'm sixteen years old and in college. I passed my GED exam with an A!

 

Uh...ok...

 

I aced my GED too...without any preparation or "studying". I just went and took it. The GED is remarkably easy. (They didn't grade it with letter grades when I took it).

 

I was under the impression that you were older. You're unintentional "boasting" can be excused because you're 16 ;)

 

What are you studying in college?

 

EDIT: You remind me of Zumbi for some reason...

Electronic Music Recording. And, yes, I suppose, looking back on some recent posts, I can see a bit of a Zumbi connection. But, anyway, back to college, I'm taking 21 credits between the winter and spring and will be (hopefully) getting my Associate's degree in 2016. Lost IQ points? Give me a break. ;)

[savagegrace26]

Rush is a thinking man (or woman)'s band. That must mean there are some pretty bright people around here. What is your IQ?

 

Mine is 165.

 

For reference, Albert Einstein's was just north of 160. I'd guess you took one of the many on-line but not accurate versions. Or maybe you really are in the minuscule % or people with ultra high IQs. Maybe you and Marilyn vos Savant should hook up.

Yeah, maybe. :D No, friend, that number is real. It was a few years back, but it's from an actual evaluation.

 

By "a few years back" he means when he was evaluated in the second-grade. He posted that somewhere in this thread.

 

His IQ has obviously dropped a few notches over the years...

Dropped?! I don't think so. I'm sixteen years old and in college. I passed my GED exam with an A!

 

Uh...ok...

 

I aced my GED too...without any preparation or "studying". I just went and took it. The GED is remarkably easy. (They didn't grade it with letter grades when I took it).

 

I was under the impression that you were older. You're unintentional "boasting" can be excused because you're 16 ;)

 

What are you studying in college?

 

EDIT: You remind me of Zumbi for some reason...

Electronic Music Recording. And, yes, I suppose, looking back on some recent posts, I can see a bit of a Zumbi connection. But, anyway, back to college, I'm taking 21 credits between the winter and spring and will be (hopefully) getting my Associate's degree in 2016. Lost IQ points? Give me a break. ;)

 

Eh...you want to debate more shit? Doing well in school doesn't really have a direct correlation with IQ. Motivation and how much you want to apply yourself matters jsut as much, if not more. There are smart people who are lazy and/or not interested in how the formal education system works and/or have interests that don't align or are not aided by a formal education and don't do well, and there are "less smart" who excel in school just because they are more motivated, patient, disciplined, etc.