i did an online one once and got 171. i followed all the directions but i dont want to try again in case its a fluke Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
126 with "outstanding" verbal abilities. Ironic, I don't know how to discuss that point with coherent words right now Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ...oh well, thats what I get for having slept 4 hours last night...zzzzZZzzz (don't like my IQ?! Fuh-Q! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ) ... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Exactly. The reason why most people keep doing IQ tests is because of their insecurity as to how smart they actually are. I admit this myself. They want something definitive, a numerical answer. But in most of the truth, intelligence is subjective and determined by others. Still, some people do not realize this, and so this thread remains eternal.
no that is'nt, you only needed an IQ of 0.0001 and you would have been higher. it's a wonder, if he has enough braincells to walk.
I just joined sciforums recently, so I'll make my first post brief. IQ is an estimation. As it increases in deviation from the norm it decreases in accuracy. By no means does it represent the 'be all and end all' of your intellectual existence, so stop putting so much emphasis on its importance. It is not the final authority on your mental ability; it gives you a generalized idea of your capacity. A higher IQ (to quantify, let's use the 132 threshold which is accepted as 'gifted') should tell you that you are above average, with a brain decently equipped for advanced cognition. Great! Wonderful! So there you are , accidentally given a nice brain by general standards, but what is it worth? Are you using it, applying it? Or does it just come around when it's time to take a test, then retreats back where it was hiding when fnished? I think the biggest downfall of the IQ is that it legitimizes people buying into their own inferiority or, in some cases, superiority. People assume that they're given this number and it indicates what they'll be able to achieve, or what others are able to achieve, and they buy into it for better or for worse. This is hardly true. Richard Feynman, for instance, is regarded as one of the most exceptional geniuses of the twentieth century. He was a tremendous particle physicist, a nobel laureat, and invaluable to the field of quantum mechanics. He was highly esteemed by his peers (who happened to be people such as niels bohr, robert oppenheimer, er...everybody who worked on the manhattan project, einstein). He was funny, witty, regarded as an outstanding lecturer -- both clear in his explanations and very captivating. However, when tested, his IQ was a very repectable 125. By all accounts he shouldn't have become a physicist, but a grocery store manager or an accountant, or whatever a 125-IQer is supposed to be. He certainly wasn't a genius, right? By the most modest classifications, he missed THAT by a good fifteen points. I mean he had the audacity to believe in his mental abilities. IQ is a thumbnail sketch of what you are capable of, don't aggrandize what it's worth too much.
i did two online tests today, which gave two widely varying results. The queendom site gave me a 118, while the iqtest gifted me with a 134. which is 'real'? incidentally, i had taken a number of 'paper-and-pencil' tests in college that gave me a score in the 120s range. (which is in the middle of my latest scores)
I have only taken two in my life. One when I was 16 in which I scored in the 120's (cant remember exact number)admimstered by my high school and one online where I scored a 129 at some bennet iq thingy. I took the 2nd one at 3 am and I was tanked on coffee....I am thinking that wasn't the best idea.. I looked at the poll and saw that 68 % or 99 of the people listed there IQ over 130 and I would conceed that according to the percentages that is not possible. Two things, some people inflated their scores or some people took some really easy IQ tests. There are things that I think hint at what your approximate IQ might be that one cannot cirucumnativgate. 1) Math skills. Math is a universal language and is based in such a structured way that it is a good indicator of ones intelligence. I meet some fella at the coffee house every year that says in the same sentence that he is incompetent in math but a genius. To me that is an oxymoron. 2) Language skills in native language. Everyone is born with their speaking one lanugage at least. Their native country has at least one language and people will look to develop at least one language. Under this premise I would say that ones ablity to assimlate, navigate and articuate at least their main language is a good indidcator of intelligence. Barring speech defects or hearing defects, I would have a hard time being convinced that language is not a manifestion of intelligence. 3) second language. I may be prejudice in presenting this, but I have noticed all the people that I met who I thought were smart with the exception of only a few were really versed in a second and sometimes 3rd, 4th fifth language. That is because for most of us speaking is a primary meathod of communiciation. Ones ablity to assimilate secondary languages is a mark of intelligence. 4) Ablity to deduce. We are natural problem solving species. And while we are not always accurate in solving our problems we are constantly motivated to do so. I think that the more intelligent one is the higher the propensity for them to deduce wheather it be through rationalization, analysis, intuition ect ect. 5) ablity to multi task. I say this becasue a set amount of cognitive thought is neccessary to prefrom the primary task and what is left over is used to the supplemental tasks. I think the higher the persons intelligence the more that is left over for supplemental tasks and more they can multitask or the more the degree if the total difficulty of the combined tasks can be. what do yall thinks are compontets of ones Iq?
