Are you or have you been obsessed with intelligence?

Post Reply New Topic

I'm relatively intelligent, maybe a standard deviation above the rest of the population (an IQ around 115). I don't know, but that's what I estimate it at. But I voted yes, that I have been somewhat obsessed with intelligence, and actually I still kind of am. I'm also somewhat obsessive about knowledge. I sometimes feel like I'm wasting time if I'm not doing something to increase my knowledge or understanding of how the world works. I very highly admire people who are highly intelligence and I think it's a shame that not everybody is highly intelligent.

I've also recently, within a year or so, been very interested in the study intelligence, as in psychometrics. I've been interested in what makes us intelligent, how the male and female brains are different from one another and also how brain size relates to intelligence. I've also been interested in the possibility of increasing intelligence by artificial means, such as nootropics (a class of cognition enhancing drugs). I'm fairly certain that as science advances past a certain point in the very near future it will become possible for us to vastly improve our intelligence as a species. What will be the consequences of that? I don't know. But if one group implements this technology, then those who don't will be at a marked disadvantage, which will pressure the others to do the same.

Intelligence is a pretty big deal. I think the intelligence differences among the people on this planet explain a lot of things. Therefore, it's a very interesting and controversial subject.

You might be interested in watching these videos if you haven't already:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXG-1YLGAS0[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8C48agMtV7I[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2T45r5G3kA[/youtube]

I wasn't implying anything academically related. Although I think that classes I am taking now in College are significantly harder than anything I took in high school. The point I was trying to get across was the community/atmosphere. College and High School are 2 completely different environments.




It's probably because I can read minds(Please refer to shadexiii for the details). On a more serious note, I didn't include As people into any examples because I didn't want to discriminate against my own kind. I don't know if any of them even had AS or like symptoms; but the examples do show that if you do not have the social skills to back up your GPA you get hosed.




Why must you hold such a grudge against people who are NT? Just because we have AS does not make any better or any smarter than people who don't.

Responding to the topic: Studying definitely hurt him in the long run. While there are many other variables and reasons why he didn't succeed in group work, I can say with confidence that studying was his ultimate failure.

I know this will be generalizing and I know this will be stereotyping but I'm going to make an example similar to what he did. Lets say instead of studying for 60 hours a week I play World of Warcraft for 60 hours a week. Right off the back I am limiting my social encounters(Besides in the digital world, and I'm not getting into THAT) and I would be isolating myself from society. Sure my GPA would decrease but more important my human contact and interaction decreases. That decreases my social skills. I hate to look at this in black and white because I hate people who look at things in black and white, but this is pretty much a textbook example.



Well, usually people do not think like that. But I know that things didn't turn out the best for you so I don't want to put something that would be interpreted as a personal attack. I will say that the GPA didn't help you as much as you thought it would.




There have also been statistical studies that show ACT scores determine how well you will do in College. And even more studies about how GPA is determined and so on and so forth. The real question is that do you measure intelligence as doing good on standardized tests? if you did, you would think that the people with the highest GPA and the highest GPA's are the smartest people in the world. Maybe it is just that I am pessimistic, maybe it is because I hardly ever agree with anyone in general, because I measure intelligence as a list of everything you do in life. If you fail in one thing, you fail in others as well.



So, just because people drink and party... this makes them unintelligent?

Personally I don't drink and I don't party very often but I cannot hold myself as superior to those who do.

You cannot claim yourself as better than the people who do drink and party because all they are really doing is following the trend.

The trend in College is to drink and to party every second humanly possible and it would be an inaccurate observation to place yourself on a pedestal just because you do not do these things.
However, you could make a good argument that people who drink and party just to make themselves feel "cool" or to look good are complete morons. That is an argument I would fully 100% support. Morons attract more morons.

And it's true, most of the other students I go to College with have the maturity of a 14 year old, but the reality is that they are just trying to fit in. Most people wouldn't like to stand out.



Yes you did; you claimed intelligence was based off of SAT results.



This all depends on which school you go to. When you go to a harder College it is impossible to get straight A's without the dedication and effort.

While many kids can succeed at doing good academically and (having a large group of friends, other activities, party a lot) socially this doesn't necessarily make them any smarter. In all objectivity, a person who goes home and studies for 3 hours then goes to a party to impress their friends is what I would call a textbook "tool."



I never stated doing well in school equals bad. I just merely said that people who have AS like symptoms are wasting their time spending so many hours studying because their main employment factor is probably not going to be their GPA. It is going to be their personalities. Many sites have referred to people with AS as "Sell your skills, not your personality." I couldn't agree more with that.

Don't even get me started with politicians......they are corrupt, even men, who just want money.



Well then, are doing good in school and having friends the two most important things in my life?

Nope, don't think so.



I'm going to answer this with a simple "No." Americans value hard work?!? Are you for real?

Why do you think the obesity rates have been rising?! The average American doesn't care about working hard; he or she just wants to get payed.



Well, this is an interesting list of "successful" people. I'm not going to comment too much about it since you are repeating what I said in my quote.



This is measuring peoples intelligence to how well they can pick up a pencil and respond A,B,C,or D to a multiple choice question. You are free to think that this is somehow important, but I'm just going to ignore your opinion and pretend it doesn't exist.



I guess that is good. Don't make the assumption that " less bright" people always end up in poverty. It is called leeching off of your smart friend, John.



So, you think you get good grades because you are intelligent? And you are viewing the grades you got in high school as a reflection of your intelligence(Not excluding the all so important SAT)?

And the kids who get straight A's and never study do have very good memory.

You're school record shows how much you actually care about school; beyond that- it is completely meaningless. And it's not like I do bad in school either, I do somewhat well.



Okay.......but you still think SAt scores determine intelligence. * Bounds head against the wall in hope that it will present a more intelligent argument*



The partying thing again. People can't party all day unless it was without alcohol. They would get totally trashed after 2 hours and pass out. However, without alcohol or any mind altering drugs, parties can go on for very long times.

You're stereotyping that people who go to parties have absolutely no idea what is going on in class or in the world around them. While this may hold true for some of the "hard Core" partyers(Not a word), it doesn't apply to people who go to parties like one a week or even once a month.

Just because people party doesn't mean that they don't care about classes or about learning.



This obsession you have isn't with intelligence. It is with what you view as intelligent. You view doing good in school and doing good on standardized tests as a measure of your own intelligence.

I guess that you can keep on going about life in that regard, but reality is bound to hit you at the end if you don't succeed socially.

Like I said, you don't have to agree with me and it would probably be better than you don't. Just wait until you graduate and if you only pursued what you viewed as intelligence to be important..........I wish you luck in finding a job.

In terms of intellectual intelligence, yes, I think the people with the best test scores are usually the brightest people. I don't agree that GPA necessarily measures intelligence, because someone just might be a hard worker, and someone else might just be lazy. You disagree with my opinion on test scores, but since you are asking for my opinion, I think if you tested the brightest people in the world on the SAT, they'd do really well. It's not like you hear of idiots getting 2400's on the SAT, or geniuses getting a 1000....they seem to reflect pretty well. Brightest does not necessarily equal most successful. But I think if you tested people know for their intellectual brilliance, they would indeed in most cases get the highest SAT scores (provided they'd been shown how to do basic math, grammar, and reading analysis at one point.)

I didn't say drinking and partying means you're unintelligent. I said it's unintelligent conversation and I don't like participating in that conversation - I don't find it funny to hear about people acting irresponsibly and dangerously. I'm friends with people who party, but when they start talking about how many times they threw up last night or how early they passed out, I quietly remove myself from the conversation. It's just not something I want to talk about. Plenty of very bright people party - I just don't think it's a bright thing to do, and it's not something I like to discuss. And yes, I have a lot more of a problem with people who drink to be cool than people who have a few beers during a game. Some girls on my floor drink a tiny amount, then come in and pretend to fall over and knock things down just to seem wasted and cool - that's when I get pissed, because I'm stuck cleaning up after them when they're not even drunk.


I said SAT results generally reflect intelligence. I didn't say it was the only factor or evaluation, or that's the proven test for every person. It's not like when I meet people the first thing I ask is their results to gage intelligence. I think it represents intelligence, but I don't think it's the only sign of it, or the only thing to be considered.


I agree. Dedication and effort are needed. Severe social isolation to the point of negatively impact your life and social skills are not.
So then who do you like? Who do you admire? Kids who are bright won't get anywhere, kids who have a good GPA and socialize are tools (which I agree with if they're just showing off)/ So only people who did poorly in school and have great social skills are to be admired? theyre the only ones who succeed? You say doing well in school doesn't make you smart, and test scores don't show that you're smart. What makes people smart? many factors, you say. So if a kid knows how to buckle down and suceed in school, and how to make friends and socialize with him, he's still a failure and unintelligent? What is your example of a well rounded person who will do well in life? Would you rather the kid partied for those first 3 hours? Or studied all day instead of not going to the party at all?
Or done some hobby he likes instead, like World of Warcraft, which you said also doesn't help? What's the good option in your opinion?
Yes, but if AS people can't improve their social skills, or at least not to a typical level, why shouldn't they focus on the skills they do have and hope to get by with those? That's what some people are forced to do. I often see stories of people with autism who support themselves through their artwork, music, poetry, or other abilities. They're forced to improvise. In many jobs, it's fine to sell your skills and not your personality. Probably not a job in human resources or sales, but it's fine for many jobs. And I agree with you on politicians. They're all phony.


Then what is important to you? What DO you like? You hate every option I put out there - kids who study too much, kids who party too much, kids who do both moderately, kids who are part of social organizations, kids who aren't part of social organizations, kids who devote themselves to their own private hobbies. What should people do? I wouldn't boil it down to the statement above, but in my life, I think the most important things are doing things you enjoy to improve yourself as a person, and having relationships with others whose company you enjoy ( family , friends, pets, etc.) You keep saying people need to have social skills - I agree that it's important and you tell me I'm wrong in saying that friends are important. I didn't say doing well in school is the most important thing, although I view it as a positive thing, but I believe education is very important. Education is different from doing well in school. I firmly believe it is important for people to understand the past and the world they currently live in if they want to function well in any aspect of life.
The historical American society valued hard work - whether it be working to build your own business, take care of your farm, or going to college. I agree we've become lazier, but we still work longer hours and in a more intense schedule compared to most of the world. I hate that Americans have become so lazy - I think it's sad that people have so many credit crises because they're irresponsible with money. The upcoming generations want everything handed to them. But hard work still gets you far in America - unless you're lucky enough to be an heiress or something. Maybe the majority of Americans are lazy obese people who don't value hard work, but I think most of them haven't really gone anywhere in life. In American, in general, if you work hard, you can get ahead.


Unless someone's a brilliant guesser, they're not just filling out letter bubbles. They're doing math problems, analyzing literary passages, showing an understanding of grammar, and coherently expressing their ideas in writing. While these skills in and of themselves might not equal great intelligence, people need to be pretty intelligent to get these questions right. Often only very bright people can pick out the nuances and symbolism of passages, express their ideas clearly, and recognize grammatical mistakes. I know you dont like my opinion on the SATs, but don't keep asking me to explain myself if you refuse to believe that they might have some relevancy.


When did I say that? There are plenty of people I don't consider intelligent who are very wealthy. Bush and Paris Hilton off the top of my head.



Partly. I mean, a complete idiot would have a real hard time getting A's. I must have at least some intelligence, or at least the intelligence to know I should work hard at school.
That's part of it. But the kids I knew who did that also had a very good understanding of the subject. Take history for example. I knew a kid who could read the chapter once the period before and ace a test. Part of it was memory. Part of it was a good understanding of all the political ramifications and how they related to all other aspects of society and history. They were therefore able to write really coherent and insightful essays, and remember things not just on fact recall, but because they understood them. A lot of the multiple choice questions required thought, not just simply regurgitation and these guys could analyze what they had read mentally and draw conclusions. It wasn't just "List when George Washington was born."


It also shows I was a coherent writer (an important skill in most businesses), a hard worker, a dedicated student, an avid reader who was able to comprehend what I was reading, and someone who understands history to some degree. These are skills any employer would like in an employee.



Yes, I believe that those are a measure of my intelligence. However, just because I'm intelligent doesn't mean I think I'll automatically succeed. I fully admitted I'm working on my social skills, and working to become more tolerant. I may think I'm intelligent, but I know there's more to life than that. Nowhere did I state that I thought intelligence was the most important thing in life, and that social skills are irrelevant. You're just making that up because for some reason you have a problem with me valuing education. I could see your problem if I came in here calling everyone idiots, and saying that unless you have a PhD from Harvard your lives are worthless. But IMO, I have not been very rude, I have been upfront about my issues, and said I'm trying to work on them. I don't see why you wish me such bad luck and can't wait until I fall on my face and "learn my lesson." I know what I have to learn, and I'm working to achieve it. I hope you do well, despite the fact that you obviously don't care about hard work and education, you don't respect others' opinions, and you look forward to negative things happening to people for your own personal satisfaction. I think I'm going to end this now, as it's moving towards flaming.

I like people who are both smart and nice. Some of the dumbest people I went to school with were also among the meanest. There are some smart people who are mean. They are usually conniving and encourage others to do their dirty work.

Roger Bannister was an example of an individual who lived a well-rounded life. He was intelligent, kind and athletic-and motivated to succeed. That is why I admire him.

If you are talking about kids who go to college and live away from their parents for the first time in their lives, and see that as an invitation to stay up late, party, indulge and engage in promiscuous behavior in an effort to assert their "maturity" and "independence," then I can't tell you anything in that respect because I was not that way when I was in college. I had absolutely no social life in college and didn't even live in a dorm room - I commutted from home every day.



It depends. If you are brilliant at whatever you do, and your social skills are such that at least you don't actively scare/annoy the hell out of every poor soul who comes into contact with you, you can go very far.



I don't know what your mental idea of "group work" consists of, but if by "group work" you mean I do A, John does B, Sue does C, and Larry puts together A, B and C, why would that even be an issue?



This is a forum for people with Asperger's Syndrome, and aspies are not exactly known for being good at increasing their social skills by virtue of sheer exposure to human contact.

Back in high school, where I was forced to have plently of human contat and interaction, I was so miserable that my social skills actually decreased. Prior to going to high school, I made an effort to be talkative and friendly; by the time I finished high school, I was too traumatized to even bother acknowledging the existence of other people. Had I been homeschooled/self-taught, I believe my social skills would have at least remained stagnant.



Well, I am an aspie and my way of thinking is not exactly what I'd call "usual." And regarding that comment you made about my GPA not helping me as much as I thought it would, that's irrelevant. In college I was a slacker and ended up with a "good" GPA simply because college was straightforward and because I was majoring in a subject that for me was easy. Did I make an effort to socialize during all that time I slacked off? No, when I wasn't watching TV or surfing the internet or playing video games I was taking long naps. At first I actually made an effort to forget about high school and start anew in college, but it was so obvious to the other kids that I was awkward, that I quickly got shunned by almost every single person I tried to socialize with. It's almost like my mere existence and the fact that I went to the same school they went to was insulting to them. Going through so many rejections and humiliations didn't increase my social skills one bit, it just sunk them even further.

Have you considered the possibility that the reason we tend to have poor social skills has to do with some type of neuropsychological deficiency rather than spending too much time studying?



If a person has the ability to do well on the GMAT/LSAT/MCAT/GRE without breaking a sweat or with minimal effort, and without cheating or guessing, I would consider that person to be extremely intelligent. (I never heard of a dunce who was able to do that.) On the other hand, if a person does poorly on any of those exams, it could mean a variety of things.



There isn't a one to one correspondence between intelligence and stardardized scores, but there is a strong positive correlation. Yes, there will always be exceptions.

Even though I had very low self-esteem as a child, I had an exaggerated sense of my intelligence..I thought I was perfectly capable of writing novels and that my paintings could wind up in museums.

Well I guess there is completely 100% no point in arguing with you about this. It only confirms one of the reasons why so many Neurotypical's hate people with personalities like AS. Thinking a test determines intelligence is one thing, but basing everything of it is another.



Eventually you will get use to it I guess. College students in America drink, and I don't think that is ever going to change. And I don't really like the whole drinking scene either because (To Me) College seems to be more about drinking and partying than actual learning. If I wanted to drink and party all day, I wouldn't need to pay some University $20,000 to sit in a lecture hall.



Are there any bricks or walls around in the general area?



This is a long response that can be answered by a simple answer. What I consider to be a smart is someone who is truly independent and does not follow what everyone else does for the sole reason to fit in or improve their status. Kids who drink and party every weekend at College are followers because they only do it because everyone else does it. Kids who only get high GPA's to impress people and show that they are smart are followers. What I view as intelligence is leadership because it shows that they can consciously make their own opinions and do not have to use other people to make decisions for them. This is much harder than it would seem, especially in a society in America.

Now, does this mean that all kids who party or study hard are followers and unintelligent? No, but the grand majority(I would say around 98% are). People only do things to fit it or to impress people. It's quite pathetic when I think about it for extended periods of time.



Thats why if you are 100% socially incompetent you should major in something like Computer Programming that doesn't require social skills.



Basically the answer is someone who is not a I will finish later

will you really?

There's no point in arguing with you about this either. I say i think test scores can show intelligence, but did I ever say I base everything off it Of course not. You're making things up. You're the one who refuses to concede test scores reflect anything at all. I said it's a factor. I'm being much more flexible.


Agreed.


You bring it up, I answer. You know my opinion - it's not like I don't listen to reason. I said what I feel, and also said that I don't feel test score are the most relevant thing in life. Most people realize that test scores do show something, or else they'd never be used. I never said they were the answer to the meaning of life or anything - you're the one who refuses to consider them at all.



That's an admirable quality, but I don't think it necessarily equals intelligence. It just means people have an open mind and don't listen to society. There are people who don't do anything society tells them because they don't feel like it - they may be pioneers who have changed history, but it doesn't mean they're bright. I agree it's great when people make up their own minds - but there are people who sit and get high all day because they enjoy it and they don't care about what society thinks - does that make them intelligent? There are very intelligent people who realize that they need (or at least usually need ) to fit in with society on some level so that they can further their ideas and help people make progress.

Agreed - but I don't think we're talking about people who are 100% incompetent. We're talking about people with social difficulties, but ones that are able to function at least fairly well. For example, people upon meeting me have no idea I have autistic tendencies. I can fake it very well - college and job interviews go great for me. Once I'm forced to spend a lot of time socializing though, my ability deteriorates somewhat. I get along with everyone, and I understand how to help people, so I should be able to get a normal job. However, it still would be hard for me to be in a position where I had to socialize a lot (ie sales or something like that.) There are people who aren't very outgoing or have some issues that can still succeed at typical careers.

And just to add - there are different types of intelligence. People are brilliant at all sorts of different things - math, manipulating people, war strategy, science, etc. I disagree that only non conformists are bright. As you have said, to succeed, people need social skills. People who refuse to follow any of society's rules may be brave, but not necessarily smart. As you said, whether it's individuality or a really high GPA - you may be commended for them, but your efforts don't guarantee success.

Disagreeing with society is easy, anyone can do it and any moron can be stubborn. What's difficult is getting people to consider your points of view and accept your ideas. On the other hand, I also agree with Brian in that many kids party and/or study hard (especially study hard) in an effort to fit in with the rest of society. The kid who locks himself up in his room studying all day because he doesn't want people to think he's not smart, is also a slave.



"Some brilliant people are nonconformists," therefore, "if people are nonconformists, it means they are brilliant" and therefore "I'm gonna be a nonconformist so I can be brilliant. "

Yes, some people need a brush-up on their logic. This argument reminds me of someone else here, who a few months ago identified himself as a savant because he was a nonconformist and "thought for himself." I guess he'd never actually looked up the definition of savant before.

That is why you are less intelligent than a brick!



Standardized Test scores are based on a result of how much you care about what you are learning. A person gets a higher score on a test like the SAT because that person cared about school and payed attention in class for the 10 years or so he/she was in class before the SAT; so when he/she took the SAT they did better than someone who did not care as much.

Because if you don't care about something you are not going to bother learning about it. Ignoring all other factors.

And of course, if you care more; you are going to study more. The real reason people don't do good on tests is because they really don't care about what they are learning:

And people who get a 4.0 GPA without studying must really care about school, because they can pay attention and listen exactly to what the teacher says for a 90 minute lecture. That is what I would call "dedication."

So, the real debate is whether or not that actually makes them dumb.

According to you, yes. People who do not care about school=Stupid.



People who get high every day are also conformists because they are using a drug to solve personal problems. This doesn't make them smart; similar to an alcoholic or something of that nature. Not to mention- Taking drugs isn't being a nonconformists to society as a whole. Considering most people in society take drugs.

And I never stated that you had to be a non-conformist to be intelligent; you are merely assuming I think that way. I just merely mentioned that people who follow what everyone else does for the sole reason of fitting in are tools; and most of the people I live with are like this.

It doesn't necessarily make them "stupid;" but it does take away their sense of indentity. How can you be a succefull as a person if you are not the one making your own decisions? Please explain to me how this is possible? It isn't.



I'm not talking about people who have AS or who are autistic; nor am I targetting people like this.



Most non-comformists are bright. But not all of them are necessarily bright.

Most conformists are tools.....Oh wait; they are ALL tools. I don't like arguing with tools.



I'm not stating that you have to disagree with society. You can agree or disagree with whatever you want.

It just has to be your decision. Not what your parents tell you; not what the media tells you; not what your friends tell you; and not what your 7th grade English teacher tells you either.

If you truly wanted to acquire "intelligence;" then you would have to make your own decisions by yourself. You could not have other people make them for you.



Thats exactly why you will never understand what a non-conformists truly is. You don't have to try to be a non-conformist which is something you obviously do not understand.



You can read what I posted above, but I highly doubt that it will actually matter. It is not like you actually understand what I am talking about anyway.

I used to judge everyone,including myself,based
on intelligence.That stopped when I learned about
Asperger's and realised my views on intelligence
were flawed.Information doesn't guarantee
wisdom and knowledge isn't always better than
experience.

I wasn't talking about you. That's why I quoted Mw99 and made no reference to your posts. Since I didn't mention anything about what you wrote, how do you know what I understood of your posts? Read with a critical eye, but try not to read too much into what isn't there.

I'll just ignore the first part of your post then. Or I can just pretend that it wasn't included.