NationStates Jolt Archive

Good L-rd, at least one person on this board isn't in MENSA

*Waves arms*

Neither am I.

you show me yours and I'll show you mine ;)

I asked the question first, but alright. I'm not in MENSA.

I asked the question first, but alright. I'm not in MENSA.

too late, you told us that before. Doesn't count now.

I wonder if it should be an entry requirement for MENSA to see how long you can be made to ask the same question over and over again until you realize that the person you're asking has no intention of ever answering it.

Well I got 34 out of 33 right. The good thing is that the % chance matching the score can be checked.

I'm just curious as to what not being able to feels like. Maybe you could enlighten me?
Certainly. Come to the next Disabled American Veterans meeting and see for yourself.

I believe it's a "he".

Ah, I guessed incorrectly as to whose position you were misrepresenting. You can understand my confusion, since neither of those posts said anything remotely resembling "IQ matters more than knowledge."



It kinda does imply that consistently.

Which is why you've found so many examples of MENSA saying anything resembling that! Where by "so many" I mean "zero"!

too late, you told us that before. Doesn't count now.

I wonder if it should be an entry requirement for MENSA to see how long you can be made to ask the same question over and over again until you realize that the person you're asking has no intention of ever answering it.

I fucking hate you lol. :D

Well you could have just said. It wouldn't surprise me if you were though.

Certainly. Come to the next Disabled American Veterans meeting and see for yourself.

Nah, that might be too much in one room. I prefer to space my education out.

Yeah, I regular check online to make sure the Neonazis would let me join.
They let anybody in as long as you're white.


Hey, does anyone know where I could find a good quiz on the proper way to beat up Jews?
That synagogue in your town? Take a practice exam!

Nah, that might be too much in one room. I prefer to space my education out.
Hmm. For a start, look behind the dumpsters by your local Walmart.

suuuuure they do. You know, the trick isn't making us believe. It's making yourself believe. It's ok though, we understand. Not everybody can make the cut. Just don't have the brains.

But don't worry, it doesn't make you any less of a person.

It depends. The cut on what field? Intelligence? Well you're wrong, since an IQ test just test a very minor part of it.

By instance, do you consider Mozart as stupid? Probably not. Well, there are some indications that he wouldn't pass the Mensa test. He couldn't manage his finances and was most of the time broke as hell, while he earned rather good money.

Mensa people just show they are good in finishing IQ tests. Nothing more, nothing less.

I fucking hate you lol. :D

Heh, though all joking aside, it's not all together relevant to the question or topic on hand. MENSA is an organization with a private membership criteria. That criteria is an IQ equal or above a certian level, based on pre-approved tests.

That's no more elitist than a club of cigar smokers, basketball players, Halo gamers, or people over 6 feet tall. It's exclusive I suppose, in the sense that it excludes people if they don't meet the criteria, but is it elitist? Not in and of itself, no.

Are there people in MENSA who function in an elitist fashion because they equate their own high IQ to having a greater sense of worth as a human being? I'm sure there are. Are there people in sports clubs who function in an elitist fashion because they equate their own skill at sports to having a greater sense of worth as a human being? I'm sure there are.

That doesn't make MENSA an elitist organization. It makes some of its members elitist, but I think that's true for just about any organization you can find, there's bound to be that element there.

So much so that I'm fairly convinced that people who attack MENSA as being an "elitist" organization is not because the organization itself posits that high IQ means higher intelligence means higher worth as a human being, but those who attack it themselves, on some level, believe that to be true. It's not that, to these protesters, they complain because those mean MENSA folks think themselves better than everyone, it's that the protesters themselves believe it. It's not hate to MENSA, it's self loathing.

Are there people in MENSA who function in an elitist fashion because they equate their own high IQ to having a greater sense of worth as a human being? I'm sure there are.
And at least one in this thread.


posits that high IQ means higher intelligence means higher worth as a human being, but those who attack it themselves, on some level, believe that to be true.
Oh, I certainly do believe it to have a lot of truth to it. Higher intelligence is a necessary evolutionary trait, and IQ tests, as grossly inaccurate as they are, still have some positive correlation with intellectual abilities.
So does MENSA believe it to be true, otherwise it wouldn't need to exist.

It's just a question of having the common decency not to take steps to prove your superiority and shove it into everyone's face.

A few years ago, there was a Mensa convention in San Francisco, and several members lunched at a local cafe. While dining, they discovered that their saltshaker contained pepper and their pepper shaker was full of salt. How could they swap the contents of the bottles without spilling, and using only the implements at hand? Clearly this was a job for Mensa! The group debated and presented ideas, and finally came up with a brilliant solution involving a napkin, a straw, and an empty saucer. They called the waitress over to dazzle her with their solution.

"Ma'am," they said, "we couldn't help but notice that the pepper shaker contains salt and the salt shaker..."

"Oh," the waitress interrupted. "Sorry about that." She unscrewed the caps of both bottles and switched them.

A few years ago, there was a Mensa convention in San Francisco, and several members lunched at a local cafe. While dining, they discovered that their saltshaker contained pepper and their pepper shaker was full of salt. How could they swap the contents of the bottles without spilling, and using only the implements at hand? Clearly this was a job for Mensa! The group debated and presented ideas, and finally came up with a brilliant solution involving a napkin, a straw, and an empty saucer. They called the waitress over to dazzle her with their solution.

"Ma'am," they said, "we couldn't help but notice that the pepper shaker contains salt and the salt shaker..."

"Oh," the waitress interrupted. "Sorry about that." She unscrewed the caps of both bottles and switched them.

lmoa

A few years ago, there was a Mensa convention in San Francisco, and several members lunched at a local cafe. While dining, they discovered that their saltshaker contained pepper and their pepper shaker was full of salt. How could they swap the contents of the bottles without spilling, and using only the implements at hand? Clearly this was a job for Mensa! The group debated and presented ideas, and finally came up with a brilliant solution involving a napkin, a straw, and an empty saucer. They called the waitress over to dazzle her with their solution.

"Ma'am," they said, "we couldn't help but notice that the pepper shaker contains salt and the salt shaker..."

"Oh," the waitress interrupted. "Sorry about that." She unscrewed the caps of both bottles and switched them.

Cute, but the joke would work better with "engineers" or something than "MENSA members."

(For that matter, it would also work better if restaurants typically had labeled salt and pepper shakers, let along salt and pepper shakers labeled only on their caps. As the overwhelming majority of restaurants I've been to just have clear, interchangeable shakers, I thought this was going to be some sort of philosophical conundrum about the true nature of salt shakers or something for a second. :p )

Cute, but the joke would work better with "engineers" or something than "MENSA members."

The engineers' solution would be to assume the difference between salt and pepper to be generally negligible for a typical person in the typical scenario of combined usage.

The engineers' solution would be to assume the difference between salt and pepper to be generally negligible for a typical person in the typical scenario of combined usage.

Heh, also possible.

He says he has a high IQ, and that by his estimation he would "probably qualify"....to tell you the truth, everyone thinks they would "probably qualify" for MENSA.

Not true. I think I'm overqualified. :D

Which is why you've found so many examples of MENSA saying anything resembling that! Where by "so many" I mean "zero"!

How about the fact the founder sought to have MENSA be the solver of many world problems?

IQ means fuck all. I have quite a high one, but I'm dumb as shit.We're going to have to report you to the mods for flaming yourself.

How about the fact the founder sought to have MENSA be the solver of many world problems?

Wait, seriously? You're seriously arguing that wanting to solve the world's problems means you're arrogant or you think you're inherently better than everyone else? OH MY GOD THE NERVE OF THESE PEOPLE, SAYING THEY'D LIKE TO MAKE THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE. HOW DARE THEY?!

Wait, seriously? You're seriously arguing that wanting to solve the world's problems means you're arrogant or you think you're inherently better than everyone else? OH MY GOD THE NERVE OF THESE PEOPLE, SAYING THEY'D LIKE TO MAKE THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE. HOW DARE THEY?!

Not the fact that they want to, everyone wants to. It's that their founders thought the organisation instrumental in such a thing. Put it this way, they're an organisation that actively seeks people who are more intelligent (they explicitly state that the IQ test is just the best way for them to quantify this), using an arbitrary IQ premium. So, it's an organisation for people who are inherently more intelligent, and inherently more capable of solving world problems and brainstorming complex ideas (allegedly). There's not much of a meaningful distinction between that, and just 'better'.

Not the fact that they want to, everyone wants to. It's that their founders thought the organisation instrumental in such a thing. Put it this way, they're an organisation that actively seeks people who are more intelligent (they explicitly state that the IQ test is just the best way for them to quantify this), using an arbitrary IQ premium. So, it's an organisation for people who are inherently more intelligent, and inherently more capable of solving world problems and brainstorming complex ideas (allegedly). There's not much of a meaningful distinction between that, and just 'better'.

....yes, there is. As I've stated several times now.

If YOU equate "higher IQ" with "greater worth as a person," that's your call, but don't attribute that belief to anyone but yourself. I have a high IQ, and I am offended as hell that in some people's idiotic view, somehow just doing well on a test magically makes me arrogant. I don't think I'm a better person than Joe Schmoe of the 100 IQ. I think I have a higher IQ than he does, and that he is almost certainly better than me in other ways. Similarly, I think it would be ridiculous to accuse all professional football players of arrogance because they believe they are better at throwing a football than me (which they are). Again, why is saying that if you get a bunch of smart people together they might be able to come up with some smart ideas any more "elitist" than saying that if you get a bunch of good football players together they might be able to play a particularly good football game?

If YOU equate "higher IQ" with "greater worth as a person," that's your call, but don't attribute that belief to anyone but yourself.

And yet, such a huge number of people I've known who have joined these high IQ societies regularly regard themselves as more valuable and useful to society, of course it is the thinkers that build the societies.


I have a high IQ, and I am offended as hell that in some people's idiotic view, somehow just doing well on a test magically makes me arrogant.

Nobody ever said that.


it would be ridiculous to accuse all professional football players of arrogance because they believe they are better at throwing a football than me (which they are).

I'm not saying that, I said MENSA was an organisation that fosters arrogance (and Smunk agreed). Of course not everyone in the organisation is arrogant.


Again, why is saying that if you get a bunch of smart people together they might be able to come up with some smart ideas any more "elitist" than saying that if you get a bunch of good football players together they might be able to play a particularly good football game?

It's the fact that they seem to equate just having a high IQ as being generally all round 'smarter', and that they therefore have higher capabilities of solving problems in a wide range of areas and are capable of having more in-depth and meaningful discussions than your average Joe, which is bullshit. It's more accurate to say that its a club for people who are good at all sports, but the only requirement to get in is that you're good at football. MENSA is not just a club where people practice IQ tests and related problems all day.

And yet, such a huge number of people I've known who have joined these high IQ societies regularly regard themselves as more valuable and useful to society, of course it is the thinkers that build the societies.

I obviously can't argue with your anecdotal evidence, but equally you can't argue with mine, which is that all the MENSA members I have personally met have been nice, non-arrogant people. I think the sensible conclusion would therefore neither be "all MENSA members are arrogant assholes" nor "all MENSA members are wonderful folks" but rather "MENSA members are fairly normal human beings insofar as some of them are nice and some of them are assholes, regardless of whether or not they're in MENSA."


Nobody ever said that.

Sorry, ADMITTING to doing well on a test means I'm arrogant. (And trust me, people have said that. Heck, I used to get accused of being "stuck-up" and then beaten up regularly in elementary school because the teachers revealed my scores while I was busily trying to hide them. It's hard not to see remnants of the same "You bitch, how dare you be smart?!" indignation in some of the arguments here.)

I'm not saying that, I said MENSA was an organisation that fosters arrogance (and Smunk agreed). Of course not everyone in the organisation is arrogant.

I'm glad you recognize the latter, but I don't agree with the former - or, rather, I don't believe it fosters arrogance any more than any other club with membership requirements. To stick with the football example, I have no doubt being a pro football player can make someone arrogant. I still don't think that makes pro football teams inherently arrogance-fostering.

It's the fact that they seem to equate just having a high IQ as being generally all round 'smarter', and that they therefore have higher capabilities of solving problems in a wide range of areas and are capable of having more in-depth and meaningful discussions than your average Joe, which is bullshit.

...why is that bullshit? IQ is not a perfect system of measurement, obviously, but it's a reasonable one, and I don't think there's much doubt that there's a pretty strong correspondence between IQ score and "higher capabilities of solving problems in a wide range of areas," seeing as that's pretty much exactly what IQ tests are designed to measure.

It's more accurate to say that its a club for people who are good at all sports, but the only requirement to get in is that you're good at football. MENSA is not just a club where people practice IQ tests and related problems all day.

I'm not sure what your point is here?

It's hard not to see remnants of the same "You bitch, how dare you be smart?!" indignation in some of the arguments here.)


Only if you look at the arguments remarkably non objectively. I have seen nobody attacking people for being 'smart' at all. Only arguments attacking one organisation (not because they're merely 'smart'), or arguments attacking the idea that a high IQ necessarily makes you more able to solve issues and discuss more deeply any academic subject.


I'm glad you recognize the latter, but I don't agree with the former - or, rather, I don't believe it fosters arrogance any more than any other club with membership requirements.

That's because the majority of other clubs have membership requirements which have a lot more relevance to what they actually do. For a football club, they test how good you are at football, to see how good you are at football. Different to MENSA, the way I see it.


...why is that bullshit? IQ is not a perfect system of measurement, obviously, but it's a reasonable one, and I don't think there's much doubt that there's a pretty strong correspondence between IQ score and "higher capabilities of solving problems in a wide range of areas," seeing as that's pretty much exactly what IQ tests are designed to measure.


IQ tests really only test how good you are at solving simple quantitative, and lateral thinking puzzles. Just because you are good at these tests, doesn't mean you have any fucking clue as how the international economy can be more efficient, for instance, or even that you're any better at board games. But you say yourself it's not a perfect measurement, that means that people are being excluded unfairly, merely due to imperfections in the measurement.

...why is that bullshit? IQ is not a perfect system of measurement, obviously, but it's a reasonable one, and I don't think there's much doubt that there's a pretty strong correspondence between IQ score and "higher capabilities of solving problems in a wide range of areas," seeing as that's pretty much exactly what IQ tests are designed to measure.


I actually disagree with you here, but I make no bones about the fact that my basis may not entirely be rational. I don't agree that IQ is a very good measurement because it is something that apparently is given to you once, and that's your 'score'. I disagree with this because it's apparently unchangeable. I find it difficult to believe that your intelligence can be measured once throughout your life and that's it. Further, it's so easy to lie to the test. if you done ten or twenty IQ tests before you were 'tested', I'm betting that your IQ would come back as being nigh genius. If you had things on your mind, or you hadn't really been effectively taught prior to the test, it could come back inaccurately low. If it's to be something that I could personally take seriously, it would have to be something that could br recognised as in flux and changing all the time.

(and to be clear, I wouldn't want you to read this as being in agreement with the view of mensa being elitist dicks. it's their membership criteria, they can do what they want with it. if I cared, I'd have tried to join. :P)

It depends. The cut on what field? Intelligence? Well you're wrong, since an IQ test just test a very minor part of it.

By instance, do you consider Mozart as stupid? Probably not. Well, there are some indications that he wouldn't pass the Mensa test. He couldn't manage his finances and was most of the time broke as hell, while he earned rather good money.

Mensa people just show they are good in finishing IQ tests. Nothing more, nothing less.

How is the ability to manage one's finances in any way related to anything other than how they manage their finances? Lots of smart people are absent-minded or lacking in practical experience with mundane tasks that others take for granted. So I won't ask Mozart for financial advice -- it'd be foolish to ask anyone not good at something for advice on that thing anyway. However, if I need to know a good cadence formula for Classical Era sonata-rondo's development section, Mozart would be an excellent person to ask.

Too bad he's dead.

Only if you look at the arguments remarkably non objectively. I have seen nobody attacking people for being 'smart' at all.

Vault 10's claims that discussing being a member of MENSA in a thread about MENSA was "flaunting" and that being in MENSA was analogous to being a neo-Nazi seem like attacks to me, but you're certainly entitled to disagree.

Only arguments attacking one organisation (not because they're merely 'smart'), or arguments attacking the idea that a high IQ necessarily makes you more able to solve issues and discuss more deeply any academic subject.

Ah, but you just added a pretty significant word - "necessarily." With THAT in there, we agree. A high IQ certainly doesn't necessarily make you better at any particular task or subject. It does mean that, on average, you're likely to be better at a given intellectual task or subject than someone with a significantly lower IQ. If Mary has an IQ of 150 and Bob has an IQ of 110, that doesn't mean that Bob might not understand, say, economics much better than Mary. It means that, presented with a new, random topic, Mary will usually be able to grasp it more quickly and easily than Bob. I don't think any of the people in this thread defending MENSA have argued for a second that Bob isn't going to be smarter than Mary about some things.

That's because the majority of other clubs have membership requirements which have a lot more relevance to what they actually do. For a football club, they test how good you are at football, to see how good you are at football. Different to MENSA, the way I see it.

I don't honestly see a big difference. MENSA wants to get together extremely intelligent people, so they use the best and simplest measurement they can come up with to determine intelligence.

IQ tests really only test how good you are at solving simple quantitative, and lateral thinking puzzles. Just because you are good at these tests, doesn't mean you have any fucking clue as how the international economy can be more efficient, for instance, or even that you're any better at board games.

Agreed, as I said above.

But you say yourself it's not a perfect measurement, that means that people are being excluded unfairly, merely due to imperfections in the measurement.

Well, sorta. I don't really think it's "unfair," since the club is quite straightforward about letting people in based on IQ scores, not "smartness" or something similar. I mean, to stick with the football analogy, being a fantastic lineman is not going to help you if the team says they're looking for a running back. That's not exactly "fair" either, but that's kinda how life works.

I actually disagree with you here, but I make no bones about the fact that my basis may not entirely be rational. I don't agree that IQ is a very good measurement because it is something that apparently is given to you once, and that's your 'score'. I disagree with this because it's apparently unchangeable. I find it difficult to believe that your intelligence can be measured once throughout your life and that's it. Further, it's so easy to lie to the test. if you done ten or twenty IQ tests before you were 'tested', I'm betting that your IQ would come back as being nigh genius. If you had things on your mind, or you hadn't really been effectively taught prior to the test, it could come back inaccurately low. If it's to be something that I could personally take seriously, it would have to be something that could br recognised as in flux and changing all the time.

(and to be clear, I wouldn't want you to read this as being in agreement with the view of mensa being elitist dicks. it's their membership criteria, they can do what they want with it. if I cared, I'd have tried to join. :P)

I think IQ makes a lot more sense if you see it as an estimate rather than some sort of exact and immutable Truth. In other words, while I think it would be ridiculous to assert that someone who scored a 142 as a 6-year-old is objectively smarter than someone who scored a 138 as a 25-year-old, I don't think it's at all ridiculous to state that someone who scores a 170 at age 6 is "pretty darn smart" and always will be (barring brain damage or something, anyway :tongue: ).

I wonder if Mensa has done anything to improve humanity?

I wonder if Mensa has done anything to improve humanity?

What's that got to do with anything? Has Toastmasters done anything to improve humanity? What about sewing circles or coffee klatches? At least in the nation I live in, the right to assemble is not restricted by the need to be a boon to the entire world. In fact, I'm pretty sure that all fraternal organizations (Lions, Eagles, Kiwanis, etc.) couldn't be held to that standard.

What's that got to do with anything? Has Toastmasters done anything to improve humanity? What about sewing circles or coffee klatches? At least in the nation I live in, the right to assemble is not restricted by the need to be a boon to the entire world. In fact, I'm pretty sure that all fraternal organizations (Lions, Eagles, Kiwanis, etc.) couldn't be held to that standard.

Those groups tend not to think they are a higher life form and many actually do things for people.

Evidence that MENSA members "tend to think they are a higher life form" and do not "do things for people"?

Evidence that MENSA members "tend to think they are a higher life form" and do not "do things for people"?

You're the evidence?

You're the evidence?

Wow, that was a bitchy (and hilariously inaccurate) little flame.

Wow, that was a bitchy (and hilariously inaccurate) little flame.

Bitchy?
Little Flame?

Ok?

Wow, that was a bitchy (and hilariously inaccurate) little flame.

Ah! Re-read.

For some reason your post registered as you were implying rather then asking..

I offer nothing more then my perceptions. I have not met a mensa person who didn't think they were superior and I have not heard of them doing things for people.

The other groups mentioned, I can remember reading blurbs, hearing people talk about doing things.

If you have evidence to the contrary, by all means offer it. I am not adverse to reversing a statement.

Ah! Re-read.

For some reason your post registered as you were implying rather then asking..

I offer nothing more then my perceptions. I have not met a mensa person who didn't think they were superior and I have not heard of them doing things for people.

The other groups mentioned, I can remember reading blurbs, hearing people talk about doing things.

If you have evidence to the contrary, by all means offer it. I am not adverse to reversing a statement.

I haven't heard of Mother Teresa eating cookies. I'm going to tell people she doesn't eat them until someone proves to me that I need to reverse that statement.

Has Toastmasters done anything to improve humanity? What about sewing circles or coffee klatches?
Have any of them claimed to gather for the purpose of improving the humanity?

Have any of them claimed to gather for the purpose of improving the humanity?

Many fraternity and sororities do. People fairly frequently choose to participate in clubs/groups with similar people (similar defined however they choose) and they frequently use that association to do or try to do some good works. Often they feel that the act of improving the members, either through education, thought excercises, experiences, whatever, improves the society those members are a part of. It's sort of silly that it would bother anyone that a group would expect something as lofty as all that as a part of existing.

They choose to associate with other people with high IQs. There are a number of reasons for this, not the least of which being that most geniuses spend their lives in schools and dealing with groups designed to cater to the average or even below average. It's not entirely different than learning disabled people associating as it's just a situation where people fall outside the norm and choose to associate/commiserate/deal with it.

I haven't heard of Mother Teresa eating cookies. I'm going to tell people she doesn't eat them until someone proves to me that I need to reverse that statement.

Considering she is dead; you don't have to reverse the statement.

Hmmmm?

You are wrong! I win!

Those groups tend not to think they are a higher life form and many actually do things for people.

Where do you see MENSA thinking they're a higher life form?

I offer nothing more then my perceptions. I have not met a mensa person who didn't think they were superior and I have not heard of them doing things for people.

The other groups mentioned, I can remember reading blurbs, hearing people talk about doing things.

If you have evidence to the contrary, by all means offer it. I am not adverse to reversing a statement.

Then, no offense, you offer almost nothing at all. Your perception is limited by the fact that you've met how many MENSA members? You're the one saying MENSA is decidedly elitist and a "higher life form" -- the burden of proof is on you.

Have any of them claimed to gather for the purpose of improving the humanity?

Has MENSA? Seriously, folks, I'm no fan of the group, but I'm not going to demonize them without evidence, either.

Many fraternity and sororities do.
I've been in a fraternity. While some could think of it as an improvement for the humanity, it was generally understood that the real points were concealed alcoholism, hard drug use, consensual party rape and petty crime cover-up.


It's not entirely different than learning disabled people associating as it's just a situation where people fall outside the norm and choose to associate/commiserate/deal with it.
Being snobs is OK, but please don't try to associate with the legitimately disabled people.

Where do you see MENSA thinking they're a higher life form?

Then, no offense, you offer almost nothing at all. Your perception is limited by the fact that you've met how many MENSA members? You're the one saying MENSA is decidedly elitist and a "higher life form" -- the burden of proof is on you.


So how is the challenger exempted from burden of proof? "I think you are wrong" weighs more then "I think I am right."

I could say that I know a few and attended a meeting and the response is "well that is just a limited view" Never mind the that I have probably met more then you. So what do you base your perception on?


Has MENSA? Seriously, folks, I'm no fan of the group, but I'm not going to demonize them without evidence, either.

So how is a question demonization? I only asked have they done anything and I did declare I would reverse the statement.

It's funny how neigh sayers are exempt from burden of proof.

A simple check of the MENSA site would have proved me wrong.

http://www.mensa.org/index0.php?page=11

So I admit the statement improving humanity was wrong. The group I checked out didn't have anything like that........

Now as to thinking they are superior? Well, the ones I have known/met did have that viewpoint. I am sure there are "normal" ones out there as I did not declare they were all that way.

Stupid questions do not exist. You have to look in the answers.





Voila. Old members protect old members.

No, the person who first said there are no stupid questions was clearly wrong. There are some questions that are quite stupid. I think that saying came about by people trying to make others who ask stupid questions feel better about themselves.

And that is exactly why people rightly see the Mensans as elitist. This statement, more specifically the presence of "still" in it, implies that your higher IQ is more important than his specific knowledge, so you are, overall, better than he is.

It's just a statement of fact. We both know what is what and don't pretend to BS each other. That's why we are such good friends. We recognize that each of us in unique and blessed with a certain number of gifts. He was a much better football player than I was. So he's more "elite" than me in that regard.

Normally it would be "I'm taller, but he's still better at basketball", since height causes being good at basketball, not the other way around.



Just like anyone not in MENSA knows that knowledge matters more than the IQ test results.

So teach a retarded kid advanced particle physics. Let's see how much knowledge you can administer. You do that and I'll tell you IQ means jack shit.

Considering she is dead; you don't have to reverse the statement.

Hmmmm?

You are wrong! I win!

I think you don't get it. You have the burden of proof. No, the challenger is ABSOLUTELY exempt from the burden of proof. Disputing a claim takes EXACTLY as much evidence as the claim has behind it. You offered no legitimate evidence and thus "no" is a perfectly adequate way to debunk it.

With hasty generalization based on the MENSA members you've met and 3.62 you can get a small frappaccino. You're not going to accomplish much else with it.

I think you don't get it. You have the burden of proof. No, the challenger is ABSOLUTELY exempt from the burden of proof. Disputing a claim takes EXACTLY as much evidence as the claim has behind it. You offered no legitimate evidence and thus "no" is a perfectly adequate way to debunk it.

With hasty generalization based on the MENSA members you've met and 3.62 you can get a small frappaccino. You're not going to accomplish much else with it.

Maybe I don't.

Then again "I think you are wrong" without evidence does not disprove much......

Maybe I don't.

Then again "I think you are wrong" without evidence does not disprove much......

It disproves every single statement made without any evidence behind it, which is what you did.

As much credibility as an argument that begins with "well, every single X I ever met did Y" might seem to have, it really doesn't have any. That EXACT argument has been used to justify the "black people are criminals" argument, the "white people can't dance" argument and just about every collossally stupid argument in between. Now, it's certainly possible that your claim doesn't suck balls, but your argument certainly does. To be clear, it's not that your claim cannot be true; it's that your claim is unfounded.

Now, if you've got some actual evidence for this junk, feel free to present it. Till then your argument goes in the junk heap with the rest of the unfounded tripe.

So teach a retarded kid advanced particle physics. Let's see how much knowledge you can administer. You do that and I'll tell you IQ means jack shit.
Well, as they rightly say, "If you can't explain it to an idiot, you don't understand it yourself."

Don't know about retards, but I have successfully explained fairly complicated concepts to people with below average intelligence. If you understand it yourself, you can always put it in a form understood by the specific person. This form will be longer than one designed for a high-intelligence learner, but it won't take any difficulty for you to produce it. If you understand it yourself.

If, on the other hand, you merely remember it as it was taught to you, but don't really understand it, then, of course, it does take a genius to understand it from your explanations.


---

As for retards, being one isn't always just about low IQ. It may be not reasonably possible to teach a retard something perfectly doable by a cat or a dog.
The IQ tests are evaluating the inductive reasoning, which you don't even need to do 95% of school math. They don't give you a list of equations showing that 3*3=9 and 3^2=9, leaving you to figure out that the "^2" symbol means multiplying the number by itself. They chew it all up for you, you only apply the rules, do the routine that's infinitely easier than an IQ test. A pocket calculator can do that, and it has an IQ of 0. Only in high school, where you learn calculus (if you do), do you meet a task requiring deductive and inductive reasoning.

In the real life, too, you only need these functions in intellectually demanding jobs - engineer, scientist, pilot, welder, brewer. A shop clerk, an administrative assistant, some managers, governmental clerks, many others, whoever does the things by the book don't even need these functions. An IQ of 0, i.e. not being able to complete any task on the IQ test, is perfectly enough for them.

Correlation is a different matter, of course, but correlation is just about coincidences, not strict relations.

It disproves every single statement made without any evidence behind it, which is what you did.

As much credibility as an argument that begins with "well, every single X I ever met did Y" might seem to have, it really doesn't have any. That EXACT argument has been used to justify the "black people are criminals" argument, the "white people can't dance" argument and just about every collossally stupid argument in between. Now, it's certainly possible that your claim doesn't suck balls, but your argument certainly does. To be clear, it's not that your claim cannot be true; it's that your claim is unfounded.

Now, if you've got some actual evidence for this junk, feel free to present it. Till then your argument goes in the junk heap with the rest of the unfounded tripe.

*sigh* jolt barfed my response.

Rebuttals without evidence are no more valid than claims without evidence.

-edit delete-

Ok. Ards comments in moderation opened my head a little. Sorry I can hyper-focus at times and miss the obvious.

I was not attempting to defend a logic flaw on purpose. Are all Mensa people of the mindset that they are a superior life form? I can't answer that as I can't prove it. Never mind the fact, I didn't think I was making that claim.

I should have been more explicit and spoke of the one group rather then saying "Mensa" To me it registered as the one group but to the reader it came across as the whole organization.

So in turn I withdraw the claim as presented.