NationStates Jolt Archive

Be honest here.

NationStates: where the women are strong, the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average.

Be honest here.
Is this based on IQ?

100% think they are above average.. :rolleyes:

And they probably are.

And they probably are.

No. Do you understand that if everyone is above average - that would just make them average?

When I was in elementary school I was put in special classes with the rest of the nerds. There were three of us, maybe four. Throughout high school I was teased ruthlessly for being a brain even though my grades were average. I was lazy and bored silly. Some things never change. :D

Is this based on IQ?
BURN THE IQ TEST!!! DIE!!! KILL!!! STAB WITH KATANA!!!

*cough* ahem. I don't think IQ tests are a good tool for measurement of intelligence, because there are many types of intelligence not tested for in the tests. Take, for example, a musical or artistic genius. Comprehension of science and history are also not taken into account, and the list goes on.

Edit: To add--I think that most people on NS are probably above average, since only smarties seem to spend times on forums instead of actually going out and being social. I know, evil generalization and all that... *slinks into a corner*

My IQ tests at 146. IQ tests aren't perfect, but I don't think I could do that well if I weren't at least above average.

The first time I only tested at 130, but I was only five.

My IQ tests at 146. IQ tests aren't perfect, but I don't think I could do that well if I weren't at least above average.

The first time I only tested at 130, but I was only five.

Erm.. 146 isn't above average. You need to be well into 170 to be considered above average.

No. Do you understand that if everyone is above average - that would just make them average?
You didn't specify a universe. When you don't specify a universe, one is forced to assume that you mean the universe. Everybody on NationStates could very well be above average.

You didn't specify a universe. When you don't specify a universe, one is forced to assume that you mean the universe. Everybody on NationStates could very well be above average.

I sincerely doubt it...

How long have you been here, by the way?

Erm.. 146 isn't above average. You need to be well into 170 to be considered above average.
And where is 124? Is that below average? 'Cause that's my IQ.

Erm.. 146 isn't above average. You need to be well into 170 to be considered above average.

Check again, the average IQ is by definition, pathetically, 100. An IQ above 147 is genious. Ironically, mine was 147.

Erm.. 146 isn't above average. You need to be well into 170 to be considered above average.


Uhh generally IQ tests are weighted as 100 being average. 170 is well into the genius level. I'm not too familiar with these tests/scales but they do vary widely.

And where is 124? Is that below average? 'Cause that's my IQ.

No, 100 - 150 is about average.

Erm.. 146 isn't above average. You need to be well into 170 to be considered above average.

Erm yourself. Must be talking about a different test.
90-110= average
130= gifted
140= very gifted
180=genuis

Erm yourself. Must be talking about a different test.
90-110= average
130= gifted
140= very gifted
180=genuis

Yes, we're talking about a proper IQ test here, not something taken over the internet in 10 minutes.

Would you like me to make a special poll just for you?

Erm.. 146 isn't above average. You need to be well into 170 to be considered above average.

The Average is 100. Always. Per definition.

I think i'm about fair average.

Most people are smart. Except they don't think. Thats my advantage.

By definition, 100 is average, unless you're taking an IQ test on the internet. In that case, you're below average for claiming it's your IQ.

Ha, good point, MD3. I forgot about some of the people I've encountered here. However, my statement that "they probably are" could still be true.

Erm.. 146 isn't above average. You need to be well into 170 to be considered above average.

Actually:
The average IQ in the United States is usually set at 100
Taken from: http://www.sq.4mg.com/NationIQ.htm
They also have average IQ's for several other countries

Actually, on second check, 140-145 is the range for the beginning point of genius.

BTW, I took the IQ test a couple years ago--I was 13--but it was only one of those crappy online ones, which I don't trust. I got 139 on that. But, again, online test. Bleh. What I do know is I've got a great brain for math, science, and logic. The thing is my brain is crap in the lingual sector, so all the smart stuff I think in my brain comes out as "You know, that thing, with the stuff, if you divide it by the other thing, and it makes... that."

Yes, we're talking about a proper IQ test here, not something taken over the internet in 10 minutes.

Would you like me to make a special poll just for you?

Would you like me to dig out my education textbooks just for you? It would be fairly easy for me to do that and establish the IQ ranges that are defined from a scientific perspective in order to measure relative cognitive functioning, and get away from those ten minute internet quizzes.

Actually:

Taken from: http://www.sq.4mg.com/NationIQ.htm
They also have average IQ's for several other countries

That website is either about 4 years out of date, or very poorly put together. Either way I'm ignoring it.

The Average is 100. Always. Per definition.
Actually it's the 'standard', which is different. Different countries have different average.

Anywho, I put above average. I scored a 146 IQ (not online), not that I really think IQ is a good measure, but I'm told that I'm a surprisingly quick learner.

That website is either about 4 years out of date, or very poorly put together. Either way I'm ignoring it.


Fair enough, I wasnt offering it as a definitive source, just sort of as evidence that 170 isn't the beginning of "above average"

That website is either about 4 years out of date, or very poorly put together. Either way I'm ignoring it.


Fair enough, I wasnt offering it as a definitive source, just sort of as evidence that 170 isn't the beginning of "above average"

I think the average is 100 here in Britain.

No. Do you understand that if everyone is above average - that would just make them average?
Assuming you limit the group to only those on NS.

Yes, we're talking about a proper IQ test here, not something taken over the internet in 10 minutes.

Would you like me to make a special poll just for you?

Maybe I could have a special poll for people who know what their talking about.
I'm talking about the Stanford-Binet test. And I could hardly have taken my first test online, since that was over twenty years ago. Pay attention.

im below average intellgence. i just know alot of big words. im good at faking it.

An average of 100 means, your mental age is the same as your real age.

Or better: your mental abilities are the same as the AVERAGE mental abilities of your age group.

If you are below 100, your mental abilities are below the average of your age group.

If your are above 100, well, draw your conclusion.


However, if you are 90 and your IQ is 200, it could mean you are senile, just like the average senior at 110. :D

I always thought 100 was horrible. Hmm. Guess I was doing better than I thought.

I'm smarter then most people I meet...
I'm also far less socially apt, or that caring about being that socially apt, then most people I meet!

So there you have it.

Seriously, I score pretty high on the tests, but I don't think it says that much. And I think being uninformed is the biggest reason for common stupidity. Or being misinformed.

Examples of group intelligence tests include the Otis Lennon Mental Abilities Test and the Ravens Progressive Matrices. Examples of individual intelligence tests include the Weschler tests: WPPSI for pre-school children, WISC for school aged children, and WAIS for adults, and the Stanford-Binet (available in two forms, IV and LM, discussed later).

Results of intelligence tests are usually reported in a single standard score, an Intelligence Quotient or IQ. IQ scores are standardized to have an average score of 100, standard deviation of 15, so that 95% of the tested population score with two standard deviations of the norm, i.e. from IQ 70 to 130. Gifted children are generally identified as having IQ scores of 130 and above, although the cutoff for gifted may vary by state and school district.

The commonly used Weschler family of tests (WPPSI, WISC, WAIS) also have 10 sub-test scores, that are combined into two separate standard scores: performance and verbal. These sub-test scores are scaled from 1 - 19, with 10 being an average score. It is important to review the sub-test scores; they can give valuable insight into the relative strengths and weaknesses of the child. One or two unusually low sub-test scores may indicate a potential learning difference, which could lower a child's overall score and make a gifted child look 'average.' Also look for ceiling effects: it is said that two or more sub-test scores in the ceiling range (17 - 19) indicate that the child reached the ceiling of the test, and should be re-tested using a test designed to differentiate highly gifted children. At this time, the only such test available is the Stanford-Binet L-M.


I really would be interested in knowing what test you are thinking of. All sarcasm aside.

Hmm. Never heard of it Tbh..

Any link?
If it's not on the internet.. Most likely i've never done it in my life.

I´m probably less smart then I think I am.

You didn't specify a universe. When you don't specify a universe, one is forced to assume that you mean the universe. Everybody on NationStates could very well be above average.

Erm....you don't need to specify 'a' universe - by definition there can only be one (uni)verse. By calling the universe the universe, we are implying that there is just the one. If there were more than one we would need to call them multiverses.

Oh, and IQ tests are a very good way of measuring how good people are at doing IQ tests. They have no bearing on a person's intelligence level (whatever that means). Hence, the only people who defend them are people who have had a good result!! It makes them feel intelligent.

:sniper:

Erm....you don't need to specify 'a' universe - by definition there can only be one (uni)verse. By calling the universe the universe, we are implying that there is just the one. If there were more than one we would need to call them multiverses.

Oh, and IQ tests are a very good way of measuring how good people are at doing IQ tests. They have no bearing on a person's intelligence level (whatever that means). Hence, the only people who defend them are people who have had a good result!! It makes them feel intelligent.

:sniper:
You obviously haven't taken any (post-secondary) statistics or set theory.

Def: Universe or Universal Set
A set fixed within the framework of a theory and consisting of all objects considered in this theory.

Def yoinked from http://mathworld.wolfram.com/UniversalSet.html

They certainly aren't a definitive measure of intelligence, but I don't think they are totally worthless. I'm sure my score is helped by the fact that I generally do very well on tests period. That may be why my score got better between ages of five and twenty-five. I got better at taking tests as I got older.

I really would be interested in knowing what test you are thinking of. All sarcasm aside.

As would I.

Thank you for preventing me from having to dig out my textbooks, Bitchkitten. :) I would rather not see most of them ever again.

Erm.. 146 isn't above average. You need to be well into 170 to be considered above average.
Erm... The top criteria for membership in MENSA is an IQ of over 130. They say that's 1% of the global population. If that doesn't make "above average", then what does?

MD3, if you can tell me which tests you're speaking of, I would appreciate it. Feel free to TG me.

Look at my Nation Name. What do you think I'm gonna say? Above average is not adequate to describe the full and glorious brilliance of my intellect.

Look at my Nation Name. What do you think I'm gonna say? Above average is not adequate to describe the full and glorious brilliance of my intellect.

Or the expansive nature of your self-esteem. ;)

I don't think I'm smart I know I am. Although that might be sommat to do with the fact I'm at University.

A wise man knows he knows nothing.

I'm smarter than the average Warehouse manager... ;)

IQ tests are pretty shabby really. A lot of what they test you on is just how good you are at taking tests.

Besides, i'm fairly dubious about the concept of intelligence as a whole in any case. I am top of my class for philosophy, but flounder in chemistry, physics and maths (I got an A for Maths at GCSE but I reckon everyone must have done really bad that year cause I know I didn't do well on the exam).

I'd still say i'm above average, but only because the evidence to suggest that is overwhelming in terms of grades etc *Attempted to not sound arrogant but failed miserable :()

Meh, it was suggested that I join Mensa once, but never really followed up. I say that we are all intelligent people, just some of us are more ignorant than others – either misinformed or not informed. Of course, some have learning disabilities, but I don’t count that as lacking intelligence.

In regards to knowing everything there is to possibly know... I am smart enough to know that I know little of everything.

But even then there are different types of knowledge. There are the basic facts, empirically derived studies, generalizing theories and then there are the truths derived from those facts, studies and theories. Truths differ depending on which political structure they eminate from. Islamic truths differ from Christian truths. Republican truths differ from Democratic truths.

As each individual has its own political truths, it is impossible to ever know everything there is to know. Also, as the population grows on this planet (assuming for the moment there is no intelligent life in outer space) the ratio of what we know to what could be known dwindles significantly.

My IQ=136.

Not a bad attempt, eh?

Erm... The top criteria for membership in MENSA is an IQ of over 130. They say that's 1% of the global population. If that doesn't make "above average", then what does?
No - for membership of MENSA, you need an IQ of 140-150, tested by MENSA. This has to be achieved in a MENSA timed exam, where you sit two papers (can't remember what they're called). The cut-off is the top 2% of the population, which they estimate to be about 147.

No - for membership of MENSA, you need an IQ of 140-150, tested by MENSA. This has to be achieved in a MENSA timed exam, where you sit two papers (can't remember what they're called). The cut-off is the top 2% of the population, which they estimate to be about 147.
Then they're using a different scale. 147 is way less than 2% of the population -- it's more than three standard deviations from the mean.

I've heard the 130, as well, from a source that I know checks its facts.

I did an unofficial IQ test once and got a really high result. Key word being unofficial. I don't think i'm that smart, but then again, I don't really care, so...

I'm smarter than most people I meet, but I'm also very slow so uh...I forget what point I'm trying to make.

Then they're using a different scale. 147 is way less than 2% of the population -- it's more than three standard deviations from the mean.

I've heard the 130, as well, from a source that I know checks its facts.
Mensa (http://www.mensa.org.uk/mensa/index.html) say they take the top 2% of the population, which does indeed indicate ~2.1 standard deviations above the mean, ie IQ scores of 131+

I've never taken an IQ test :(
But I did get 1390 on my SAT, and that's above average.

I've never taken an IQ test :(
But I did get 1390 on my SAT, and that's above average.


very good! change your nation to "drunk big brain commie" ;)

I'm going with 150+ as my IQ. I won't say it's higher because i don't have enough data to be sure of what it really is. It's just that i've done some extreme things with my brain in my short life without actually studying for it.

No. Do you understand that if everyone is above average - that would just make them average?
the NS members have to balance out all those who are buying viagra through spam emails.

we must all be geniuses.

the NS members have to balance out all those who are buying viagra through spam emails.

we must all be geniuses.

lol :p

NationStates: where the women are strong, the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average.
lol Garrison Keillor

I remember that Illich Jackal and White Hats quickly solved BMV's cypher a while back so I think they are pretty smart.

I took an IQ test and got 126, like a year ago . . . what's the natn'l average?

I'm probably a little above average. However I feel that I could be much more intelligent.

Be honest here.
i think im above average but not enough to make a real difference - or at least im too lazy & tired all the time for any extra intelligence to shine through ;)
got iq of 138 in an official test a few years back (which aint bad) but last time i did a self-test it had dropped to 112 :(


edit: I took an IQ test and got 126, like a year ago . . . what's the natn'l average?
apparently the general average is 100.

My math skills are slightly above average and my memorization ability is average so I'd estimate my IQ to be around 100-110.

I have a B.A. and a M.A., and my grad GPA was 3.91. You decide what, if anything, that means. ;)

I remember that Illich Jackal and White Hats quickly solved BMV's cypher a while back so I think they are pretty smart.
And to return the complement, I would say your recall of a day in the life of NS that must be almost a year ago makes you the possessor of a remarkable memory! ;)

depends on whose company i'm in.

on the street or in a bar or just out and about, i'm above average.

among my classmates, i'm below average.

I think I'm average to above average in intelligence, but otherwise I'm pretty stupid. :D

BURN THE IQ TEST!!! DIE!!! KILL!!! STAB WITH KATANA!!!

*cough* ahem. I don't think IQ tests are a good tool for measurement of intelligence, because there are many types of intelligence not tested for in the tests. Take, for example, a musical or artistic genius. Comprehension of science and history are also not taken into account, and the list goes on.

Edit: To add--I think that most people on NS are probably above average, since only smarties seem to spend times on forums instead of actually going out and being social. I know, evil generalization and all that... *slinks into a corner*

Silly girl. You don't stab with a katana. You slash in nice, fluid, sweeping motions.

World's Greatest Geniuses (http://www.humanforsale.com/top.asp?gender=female)

Wow, aren't we an arrogant bunch? LOL. But seriously, when I was like 11 I took an IQ test and scored, like, 160 or somethin'. I think I'm getting dumber with age, tho. :D

Wow, aren't we an arrogant bunch? LOL. But seriously, when I was like 11 I took an IQ test and scored, like, 160 or somethin'. I think I'm getting dumber with age, tho. :DI seem to recall reading that the brain shrinks with age, so you're probably right.

Personally, I plan to divert the mental resources which control my left arm into my logical reasoning centres. I reckon that should give me an extra few years without sacrificing too much.

Regarding IQ tests: I reckon that they're a useful tool for selecting friends and potential partners. Stay the hell away from anyone displaying more than a passing curiousity about their IQ.

About Online IQ tests
Although such tests have become wildly popular with the explosion of the Internet in recent years, there is great reason to believe that these IQ tests are highly inaccurate in their estimation of one's IQ. For example, by inputting random answers on one particular IQ test, an IQ of roughly 80 is obtained. Comparing results among a large set of people shows a common factor—most scores are above 110. Most of these websites attempt to sell certificates showing test results.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iq#Online_IQ_tests

looks like the Greatest American Genious Ever was Bobby Fischer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iq#External_links
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Fisher

Well id say im mediocre(good example that aint spelt right?)
But then again i always put myself down kind of security blanket if you dont reach for the stars youll never fall and bump your head.HE HE

Um im full of useless information though maybe Average

And where is 124? Is that below average? 'Cause that's my IQ.
i got 124 too are we the same person?????????????????????????????????????

My IQ is 900, so eat me.

World's Greatest Geniuses (http://www.humanforsale.com/top.asp?gender=female)

That website is crap because it left out William Sidis. The smartest human ever. :confused:

Although I consistently score about 120-130 on most IQ tests, I would do a lot better if my mathematical abilities were better. My verbal and reasoning skills are good enough to suffice though. :D

A wise man knows he knows nothing.
socrates?

edit:Although I consistently score about 120-130 on most IQ tests, I would do a lot better if my mathematical abilities were better. My verbal and reasoning skills are good enough to suffice though. :D
i get the same thing! i probably loose tens of IQ.... um, points cos of that.

"if bucket A was being filled at a rate of 2 litres per second, bucket B, under bucket A has a capacity of 8 litres and the hole in the bottom of bucket A lets trough liquid at a rate of 0.2 litres per solar cycle, how long will it be before bucket B sprouts legs and fucks off?"

answer: "oh god i dont care!" ;)

Although I consistently score about 120-130 on most IQ tests, I would do a lot better if my mathematical abilities were better. My verbal and reasoning skills are good enough to suffice though. :D
I'm exactly the opposite. My math scores hit the ceiling of every test (even the GRE math subject test), but I have a reading/writing disability. The test I took 15 years ago placed me around 135-140, but I don't know if that's still accurate.

I got these off a Internet IQ test
United Arab Emirites
United Kingdom
United Airlines
United States Of America

Whats the opposite of Biscuit?
one option was Non-Biscuit

turns out the more questions you answered the dumber you got ranked MWhahahahahahahahhahahahahaha

Im sure all of you are taking online IQ tests. Take note that any test I myself have taken, say I'm a genius then ask me for money to explain to me what kind of genius I am. I think the real geniuses are the ones declining the tests, or making money off idiots :)

The BBC does the whole Mensa test the nation thing in the UK, here are the results, in the UK we can see that the average IQ is 100:
http://www.mensa.org.uk/testthenation/

Although I consistently score about 120-130 on most IQ tests, I would do a lot better if my mathematical abilities were better. My verbal and reasoning skills are good enough to suffice though. :D
Your reasoning skills are poor-Jokes

I'm exactly the opposite. My math scores hit the ceiling of every test (even the GRE math subject test), but I have a reading/writing disability. The test I took 15 years ago placed me around 135-140, but I don't know if that's still accurate.
Undoubtedly you are smart for getting into Northwestern but the GRE math section is all simple high school level geometry and algebra.

Undoubtedly you are smart for getting into Northwestern but the GRE math section is all simple high school level geometry and algebra.
No, no, the subject test.

No, no, the subject test.
That is pretty impressive.

I've never taken an IQ test :(
But I did get 1390 on my SAT, and that's above average.


<BRAG>I got a 1570.</BRAG> (Sorry about that! Oh well...my class rank compensates for the SAT score on a college application. I'm not even in the top 10% because I'm far too lazy :headbang: .)

Actually, I think my SAT score shows how inaccurate the SAT really is. I'm extremely good in math/science, but suck in English and history. However, I got a 770 math and 800 verbal. These scores, however, don't mean much. I know people who are much better than me in English who have yet to break the 700 barrier.

I'm smart enough to know when to act dumb. :)

every IQ test ive ever taken in the past 2 years has given me 167, since average is 100 i think i count as above average...

Does anyone know Einsteins IQ? I think Steven Hawking is about 280, but Einstein wasnt as clever as him... ;)

every IQ test ive ever taken in the past 2 years has given me 167, since average is 100 i think i count as above average...

Does anyone know Einsteins IQ? I think Steven Hawking is about 280, but Einstein wasnt as clever as him... ;)
Einstein was an infinitely greater scientist than Hawking.

I consider myself fairly smart. When I look around at other people in my class I think, "Are people everywhere really THIS dumb?"
People are so dumb that it's scary. :)
But anyway...

every IQ test ive ever taken in the past 2 years has given me 167, since average is 100 i think i count as above average...

Does anyone know Einsteins IQ? I think Steven Hawking is about 280, but Einstein wasnt as clever as him... ;)
einstein's IQ was 160 according to this (http://www.geocities.com/einstein_library/iq.htm) site and a couple of others i cant be bothered to link ;)
hawking's i dont know & cant find on the first page of google hits...

holy cow

einstein's IQ was 160 according to this (http://www.geocities.com/einstein_library/iq.htm) site and a couple of others i cant be bothered to link ;)
hawking's i dont know & cant find on the first page of google hits...
It certainly isn't 280 (much like that person's certainly isn't 167). Marilyn vos Savant has the highest recorded IQ (last I checked) at 228. Of course, there aren't enough people in the world for that to be an accurate number.

Marilyn Vos Savant is quite deplorable, she has wasted her talents and now writes gossipy trash for tabloid rags.

Marilyn Vos Savant is quite deplorable, she has wasted her talents and now writes gossipy trash for tabloid rags.

Who's she?

intelligence is nothing...arrrogance is this thread

intelligence is nothing...arrrogance is this thread

Why do you say that?

Because nearly everyone has voted themselves "Above Average"

Why do you say that?

Because nearly everyone has voted themselves "Above Average"
I agree. This thread is nothing but people's opinions of themselves, and indicates that most people think very highly of themselves.

Good on them! Ego is not an evil thing. The ego having a good opinion of oneself is not a bad thing. Egoism can be very healthy, and fun to be around. Egotism can be a nuisance, but it's not common, and it's not a norm. Standing next to someone who is sure in himself, within himself, is very re-assuring.

I consider myself to be of average intelligence in general because when it comes to certain subjects, such as English, i am above average, in other ones though, such as math and science, i am below average.

Actually, an over-healthy ego is very dangerous. If I thought I was a good doctor, although I had no medical training, would you want me operating on you?

But...

According the the standard of statistics, and various sources, an IQ test's median is 100 of all those who take it.

This of course, is imperfect, because every IQ test ever developed needs be updated with every birth and every single person's intellect to be correct to the point where you can consider it to be truly "accurate". If you look at standard deviations within the IQ test, (Which do differ, depending on the test.) then the actual measure of intellegence is clear.

According to the z-score system of percentiles, the actual deviation from the mean can be skewed left, such is the case with most IQ tests. As such, the IQ test, in order to be perfect, has to account for the mentally retarded, or disabled; to do this, of the people who take it, the data must be skewed left to be accurate. Thus we consider the average, those who take it must score higher than the true average in order for it to be correct.

Also, if we look at the differences within IQ tests, the standard deviation can be anywhere from 10 to 100, which causes comparison of data between tests to be extremely inscurate. If you examine this discrepancy, you can see the reason for the difference of the IQ scores of Stephen Hawking and Albert Einstein.

Ok, so Albert Einstein scores 160 on an IQ test that has a standard deviation of 20. This means that he would be 3 standard deviations from the mean, or have a z-score of 3.0. Examining z-score charts leads to the examination that he is in the 99.9 percentile, the very top of the top.

Let's say Steven Hawking takes an IQ test with a standard deviation of 100, and scores a 290. Putting his z-score at 1.9, (1.9 SDs from the mean.) meaning that he is only in the 97.1 percentile, scoring lower than Einstein.

Me, I scored a 192 on a test with a SD of 100, putting me in the 81.6 percentile, not too shabby, but generally nothing to brag about.

Sources:
z-scores (http://psych.colorado.edu/~mcclella/java/normal/normz.html)
IQ Tests (http://www.iqtest.com/whatisaniqscore.html?)

Actually, an over-healthy ego is very dangerous. If I thought I was a good doctor, although I had no medical training, would you want me operating on you?
Ego itself has nothing to do with self-confidence; it is simply a recognition of self.

i Be Smrat

i Be Smrat
:D

I'm above average. I'm lazy so I don't get marks in the high 90's or anything (may marks are low 90's), but I'm damn smart; just arrogant and lazy about it so it doesn't show too well.

I have a big ego, but I know when I've done something wrong and I'll accept it. If it is something I missed, I'll learn, if it's a dumb mistake, well then yah it was a dumb mistake and I'll do it again assuredly, I'm just too lazy.

Ego itself has nothing to do with self-confidence; it is simply a recognition of self.

Could it be a over-estimation of one self?

American Idol *cough Cough*

I consider myself above average not because of any silly stupid standardized test that is full of holes and BS. I consider myself above average because I had the intelligence to recognize the stupidity of what highschool was and get my diploma two years early.

No. Do you understand that if everyone is above average - that would just make them average?

Most would assume you are asking for average out of all people, not just those who frequent Nationstates. Nationstates itself is going to attract intellectuals and others who actually think about politics, philosophy, etc. - which will skew the results a bit.

You people need to be honest with yourselves; for example I realize that despite all my struggles, I am, and always will be, a complete moron and fool. No matter what, I am doomed to idiocy...

I voted my self average, I must be so smart.

People on here seem to be giving way too much credit to IQ tests. IQ tests do test something, but it's not any sort of intrinsic intelligence. This should be obvious from the fact that it is possible to study for them. If you do enough of the IQ test style puzzles you'll get better at them!

I took an IQ test myself a number of years ago (I think it was the Stanford Binet) and I got something in the 140-150 range(they told me roughly 1/10,000 people score as well). Since then my interests have turned towards mathematics and I've spent a lot of time solving puzzles. I remember the sorts of questions asked, and I'm positive I could do much better now, but I don't think I've gotten any smarter. If anything, I think my brain may be slightly less quick than it used to be.

Online IQ tests are just silly - once you know the sort of questions they ask, and the sorts of answers they're looking for, it's not hard to get perfect or near perfect scores on them.

In my opinion at least, intelligence isn't confined to the sort of mental gymnastics that IQ tests check for.

i am a smart ass, for sure. some IQ test gave me a 172. i laugh at that, but i did get a 1520 on the SAT, and didnt study. i skipped the sixth grade, and was always boooored in the gifted classes. i got accepted at some really good schools. and just think- I went to Mortuary College, and got a death degree! i embalm people!

hey, at least i am happy.

i am a smart ass, for sure. some IQ test gave me a 172. i laugh at that, but i did get a 1520 on the SAT, and didnt study. i skipped the sixth grade, and was always boooored in the gifted classes. i got accepted at some really good schools. and just think- I went to Mortuary College, and got a death degree! i embalm people!

hey, at least i am happy.

LOL! BS

LOL! BS
i have no idea what you are laughing at.

i have no idea what you are laughing at.

Lol I thought you were joking.

I remember when I first figured out I was 'different' from the other kids.

It was first grade, y'know when they split you up into reading groups for the first time. I remember the teacher sat us all in a circle and showed us our first reading book, one of the old 'Janet and Mark' series. We had learned our alphabet but this was the first time we were to put together words. The teacher told us we would go around the circle and everyone would try to read. She turned to the kid to her left and started helping him sound out the first word. I was sitting two seats to her right and would be one of the last she got to so I read ahead in boredom. I finished the first page, turned it and continued to read to myself. I went through the whole book and turned my attention back to the teacher. She was still working with that first kid, on the first page.

That's when I first realized some people were smarter than others, and I was smarter than most.

I remember when I first figured out I was 'different' from the other kids.

It was first grade, y'know when they split you up into reading groups for the first time. I remember the teacher sat us all in a circle and showed us our first reading book, one of the old 'Janet and Mark' series. We had learned our alphabet but this was the first time we were to put together words. The teacher told us we would go around the circle and everyone would try to read. She turned to the kid to her left and started helping him sound out the first word. I was sitting two seats to her right and would be one of the last she got to so I read ahead in boredom. I finished the first page, turned it and continued to read to myself. I went through the whole book and turned my attention back to the teacher. She was still working with that first kid.

That's when I first realized some people were smarter than others, and I was smarter than most.

o.o

Erm.. 146 isn't above average. You need to be well into 170 to be considered above average.


No. 140 is considered genuis level IQ.

where the women are strong, the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average.

What is that from? I know but I can't remember. THis is gonna bug me. Thanks alot.

I was smart, but I think I lost about 50 IQ points last night.

I was smart, but I think I lost about 50 IQ points last night.
I'm assuming(even though you know what assuming does to you) this had something to do with the forums?

What is that from? I know but I can't remember. THis is gonna bug me. Thanks alot.
I really do want to know....

84 1/2% of you think you are above avarage intelligence, they only way in which I can be said to be smart is that I have some appreciation of how much I don't know.

Several of you have pointed out the dangers in buying into an IQ test score. Another factor to consider is the score goal. The intended score goal is evaluate your capacity (along limited scope) based on your age. You’re not supposed to or ever will have the same IQ in any given month.

A simple IQ testing formula is (score / age x 100) so technically you can “get dumber” as you age. The goal of the tests was to quantify critical thinking of students but they have fallen out of favor. Our parents had to suffer through a generation of experts that relied heavily on these tests. Today you can go your whole life without meting anyone that’s ever been administered a test.

Almost all of the people reporting scores on-line have taken an on-line test, usually of dubious quality. Developing the tests to be current and applicable is expensive so you certainly never took a free test that was useful.

Additionally educators are expressing a belief that the test too narrowly judges critical thinking to serve any real purpose. You may have heard of EQ tests or Emotional Quotient tests; an attempt to quantify other centers of critical thinking ignored by IQ tests.

It’s completely normal for humans to test themselves. It’s unnatural to assume your normal and on track, at least at first. People need feedback because they want to be successful and find achievement. So I see why so many people are still into them. However I don’t think it’s healthy to place a strong value on your results.

Mensa was useful to find like minded people at one point but now we can do the same on the internet without joining a club.

Far more important tests, which accurately display ‘quality’, are college entrance exams, because a degree earns you more money. How decent a human being you are; do you have healthy relationships, good friends, someone to love? You measure of happiness; no matter your IQ, EQ, degree, income, etc how happy are you? You don’t need a damn test to tell you that much.

Sources:
z-scores (http://psych.colorado.edu/~mcclella/java/normal/normz.html)
IQ Tests (http://www.iqtest.com/whatisaniqscore.html?)

143, is that like, good and stuff?

I'm assuming(even though you know what assuming does to you) this had something to do with the forums?

Nah, it was booze related. I'm sure if I go back into town I'll find my missing IQ points somewhere lying in the streets

Well when I was younger I was given an IQ test, I scored 160 but alas now I think I wouldn't score quite as high.

Anyway, where I went to school they never made a big deal out of your IQ scores, it seems however they got predicated grades from it, hence mine were all straight A's, I didn't get straight A's in my exams though so. :p

My SAT score was only 1297, lots lower than some others here. I suppose I got an early jump learning to read when I was three, but lost my advantage by being totally lazy.

Well, depends on what your definition of average is...if by "average intelligence" you mean "totally omnipotent and omniescent, all-encompassing and all-knowing", than I guess I would be average. If by average you mean "IQ of 500", than I have to admit I am a bit above the average. Basically, I sit around all day thinking of ways to tamper with the very fabric of time, space, and existance, using one pin and a piece of string. I usually can come up with about a million and three ways by lunch, two million if you let me use two pins.

:D

I really do want to know....
Prarie Home Companion

Could it be a over-estimation of one self?

American Idol *cough Cough*
That's egotism. Same root word, different idea.

My God. Why do I get the feeling that some people wanted to post "My IQ is bigger than your IQ" in this thread. It's lame. Of course, I now sound like I'm trying to be all high and mighty. Bugger. Threads like these should be banned, they make people act all smart. Grr.

Before or after a suitable application of caffiene?
'Cause before caffiene, inanimate objects outsmart me.
And smart relative to what?
My cats think I am the God of Genuis because I can open a can a tuna.
My ferrets think I am a laughable moron because they *will* outsmart the latest patch to thier escape route.

.. they only way in which I can be said to be smart is that I have some appreciation of how much I don't know.I dont think Intelligence is related to "what you Know"...more to how smart you?...how good is your Brain?...how good is your Logic?

A 6 years kid could be more intelligent than a Geogrphy teacher...even if the smart kid has yet to learn where are all the mountains.

knoledge and intelligence are 2 separate things...

that is why in some countries they only test the Math half...and they do not include the language half.

Erm.. 146 isn't above average. You need to be well into 170 to be considered above average.
Technically, IQ tests are calibrated such that 100 is the average (by definition).

Of course, that includes people who are far, far below average (as well as people above average), so 100 isn't necessarily the median.

For more info, check out this page: http://iq-test.learninginfo.org/iq04.htm.

No. Do you understand that if everyone is above average - that would just make them average?

Perhaps nationstates attracts bright people. Although, based on some things that are posted... lol.

Perhaps nationstates attracts bright people.
Also, I'd say people who have high IQ's are more likely to want to vote and post them.


I personally never took an IQ test, so I guess I don't really know how smart I am...

Also, I'd say people who have high IQ's are more likely to want to vote and post them.


I personally never took an IQ test, so I guess I don't really know how smart I am...

That too. I don't like IQ tests, generally they give out waaaay higher scores than they should, and scores from different tests are incomparible (is that a word?). I don't really think that there is a foolproof method of measuring someone's intelligence. IQ tests? Arguably biased towards certain cognitive processes that do not necessarily embody intelligence. Exam results? Lots of external factors, like teaching methods, illness... When it comes down to it, does it really matter? All you need to know is, can you hold a good conversation with someone? Or in a work-related situation, is that person good at what they do?
Who caaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaares?
Sorry, I'm in a somewhat apathetic mood tonight.

People are smart in different ways. Plenty of academic geniuses have no social skills, don't get jokes, get lost in their own towns, etc.

I remember when I first figured out I was 'different' from the other kids.

It was first grade, y'know when they split you up into reading groups for the first time. I remember the teacher sat us all in a circle and showed us our first reading book, one of the old 'Janet and Mark' series. We had learned our alphabet but this was the first time we were to put together words. The teacher told us we would go around the circle and everyone would try to read. She turned to the kid to her left and started helping him sound out the first word. I was sitting two seats to her right and would be one of the last she got to so I read ahead in boredom. I finished the first page, turned it and continued to read to myself. I went through the whole book and turned my attention back to the teacher. She was still working with that first kid, on the first page.

That's when I first realized some people were smarter than others, and I was smarter than most.

You know how much that sounds like the opening paragraphs of an autobiography? You know, one of those irritating, self-important, egocentric (sp?) people who write irrelevant autobiographies.

Not that I'm suggesting you're like that ;)

Sorry

People are smart in different ways. Plenty of academic geniuses have no social skills, don't get jokes, get lost in their own towns, etc.
i agree. for as book smart as i am, i am also trying to invent common sense for my own personal use.

Lol, this is getting pretty ridiculous

:p Actually, IQ tests have to be revised UPWARD about every 10 years, because the population tends to get smarter, and the original tests were created to help children with learning problems. Odds are, if you took an IQ test from ten years ago or more, you'd end up with an impossibly high score. Go figure. A good book to read about the controversy is Stephen Jay Gould's THE MISMEASURE OF MAN. I supposedly took an IQ test back in 2nd grade, which came out 93. Went through school being treated like a subhuman for it, got into college anyhow, and still got laughed at. Years later, at 42, I took an IQ test and came out 119. Weird, huh.

You know how much that sounds like the opening paragraphs of an autobiography? You know, one of those irritating, self-important, egocentric (sp?) people who write irrelevant autobiographies.Hmm, wouldn't know, don't read many of those myself. If I was writing one though, I'm not sure if that's how I'd begin. It's just one of those odd memories or revelations that clutters up my brain. I sometimes try to air out some of them in essay form but it's hard to sort out the tangle. ;) Anyways, it just seemed a perspective was necessary to claim "above average".

Not that I'm suggesting you're like that ;) Well I'm not egocentric and I'm usually unassuming, but I have been known to irritate some.

SorryFor what? You'll have to try much harder to actually offend me.

Be honest here.

I don't think I'm smart; I know I'm smart.

In 4th grade, The whole class took the same state assessment tests, that schools use to see how thier students measure up to the rest of the national average.

Im not sure if its possible to ace the test, but I scored higher than anyone ever had at my school.
Got me a nice letter from the Gov's office itpromptly into the Principals office as a trophy, as if he'd taken the test himself.

So..a few other tests soon followed.
One of wich...was an I.Q test.

By this time, I was tired of all the fawning and big to-do over a stupid test, so I pretty much screwed it off.
Unfortunately, I scored pretty high on it too.

The numbers arent really important, but it was considered Genius level, and the school wanted to put me in the special nerd classes.
My Mother...said no.
Maybe it would have been better if she would have.
Who knows?

The point is, for the rest of my scholastic life, everytime a administrator was dissapointed in me, or decided I needed to be "straightened out"...
Out came those old scores, and I was shown "what I was capable of, and "what I could do when I applied myself."

See, being a "Genius" means nothing.
Its just a word, really, and has no significance oh who you are, or who you will become when your older.

Thats entirely up to you, and no test score can determine it for you.

I hate to quote Forest Gump, but "Stupid is, as stupid does."

Im not likely to cure cancer, or invent the better lightbulb, or anything like that.
Its just not who I am.

It certainly doesnt make me better or worse than anyone else.

In 4th grade, The whole class took the same state assessment tests, that schools use to see how thier students measure up to the rest of the national average.

Im not sure if its possible to ace the test, but I scored higher than anyone ever had at my school.
Got me a nice letter from the Gov's office itpromptly into the Principals office as a trophy, as if he'd taken the test himself.

So..a few other tests soon followed.
One of wich...was an I.Q test.

By this time, I was tired of all the fawning and big to-do over a stupid test, so I pretty much screwed it off.
Unfortunately, I scored pretty high on it too.

The numbers arent really important, but it was considered Genius level, and the school wanted to put me in the special nerd classes.
My Mother...said no.
Maybe it would have been better if she would have.
Who knows?

The point is, for the rest of my scholastic life, everytime a administrator was dissapointed in me, or decided I needed to be "straightened out"...
Out came those old scores, and I was shown "what I was capable of, and "what I could do when I applied myself."

See, being a "Genius" means nothing.
Its just a word, really, and has no significance oh who you are, or who you will become when your older.

Thats entirely up to you, and no test score can determine it for you.

I hate to quote Forest Gump, but "Stupid is, as stupid does."

Im not likely to cure cancer, or invent the better lightbulb, or anything like that.
Its just not who I am.

It certainly doesnt make me better or worse than anyone else.
smart words man

Your All Stooges!!

Erm.. 146 isn't above average. You need to be well into 170 to be considered above average.
This is about average (http://sq.4mg.com/NationIQ.htm) Where'd you get 170 as above average???

You meant "you're", right?

I'm above average, was tested for it as a kid, ended up in the "Gifted and Talented Education" program. At the University I'm in, I'm far ahead of most people in most of my classes (that is, I have to hold back constantly when the teacher asks a question, but end up answering it anyways because nobody else has a clue). Out of fairness, I do have a few years on most of the people (Delayed my education a tad -- I'm 23, and a junior), but I've had the same situation throughout my college career. Too bad I'm effing lazy, the downside of having access to understanding handing to you by your genetics rather than hard work. I'll probably end up doing much less in life than some more average people.

I will, however, be able to nitpick the hell out of them. So heh.

Well my IQ is about 162 (at least thats what my test said(not one i just took on the internet, A real one)) But I think i'm pretty stupid and over-rated.

Uhh generally IQ tests are weighted as 100 being average. 170 is well into the genius level. I'm not too familiar with these tests/scales but they do vary widely.

I'm at 182.....I am also a UK Civil Servant - now there's a paradox for you!

Saying that, I don't consider myself to be above average intelligence but then I might just have an over-optimistic view of the Human species!!

I'm at 182.....I am also a UK Civil Servant - now there's a paradox for you!


Dunnie happens to be a work collegue of mine and I'm afraid that I'm gonna rat her out. she ain't got a 182 IQ. sorry mate. although to be fair she is a bright lassy. I've got a bout 130 IQ, which I think make's me smart enough with out being goofy and neerdy.

An interesting fact is that your IQ does not stay the same. You can make your self smarter or dumber depending on how stimulated you keep your brain. So really depends if you can be bothered to be smart!! :D

There's an awful lot of mutual back slapping going on here, which is fine and dandy. I'm sure everyone's feeling good about themselves and that, after all, is what having a big group of friends is all about. But let us not forget that anyone who can't spell genius probably isn't one. ;)

Dunnie happens to be a work collegue of mine and I'm afraid that I'm gonna rat her out. she ain't got a 182 IQ. sorry mate. although to be fair she is a bright lassy. I've got a bout 130 IQ, which I think make's me smart enough with out being goofy and neerdy.

An interesting fact is that your IQ does not stay the same. You can make your self smarter or dumber depending on how stimulated you keep your brain. So really depends if you can be bothered to be smart!! :D

It is true that we work together...my IQ is really 137, however, nobody likes Bubblechunks and she smells of wee wee

nobody likes Bubblechunks and she smells of wee wee

I would just like to say that I don't smell of wee wee and people do like me. Dunnie is just mad at me for ratting her out for the 182 IQ. he he. now lets get back to saying how great we all are

I would just like to say that I don't smell of wee wee and people do like me. Dunnie is just mad at me for ratting her out for the 182 IQ. he he. now lets get back to saying how great we all are


.......and poopy....makes your eyes water

Most people who would play this would be more mentally capable than the average person so you end up with a disproportionally higher number of above average in NS.

Erm.. 146 isn't above average. You need to be well into 170 to be considered above average.
Average = 100, by definition, based on Gauss function.
Not smart, this Mutant.

(I'm ONLY 143 myself, which happens to correspond to upper 2% of population; not that THAT means anything.)

I might just have an over-optimistic view of the Human species!!
Right on the mark, that one. Intelligent people actually do have this tendency. Serves them well...

My last proper IQ test gave me 176, and my younger sister's was 151.

I'm currently studying astrophysics at Adelaide Uni, while she won't finish high school, and will probably go into uni when she's 21, and so doesn't need to do year 12.

Technically, IQ tests are calibrated such that 100 is the average (by definition).

Of course, that includes people who are far, far below average (as well as people above average), so 100 isn't necessarily the median.

For more info, check out this page: http://iq-test.learninginfo.org/iq04.htm.
Sorry, Wisdom Promotor, didn't check you out first.