I find myself in an unusual situation at this time. That is that I am a genius with a 161 IQ and I am sitting at U.N.O. in Omaha bored out of my mind and unchallenged and probably just barely going to pass this semester. Why well I know part of it is that the one school in town that is even worth my time won't take me back for two reasons I failed out of classes there due to working two jobs and going to school. And second that they are a Jesuit School even though the catholic church now accepts transgender people they still will not.
I suppose that I am just venting here but Has any one else had any experience with being a genius but in its own way working against you?
yep!
We are very similar - in my younger days I too measured similarly high on the various intelligence tests that I did - but like you I used to get bored, and because I could, I used to coast and do precisely no work... so only ever got average results.
I passed my Bsc without going to most of the lectures and having done precisely no revision or serious study beyond reading the text books once and relying on my eidetic memory!
I also think that when you are trans you waste an inordinate amount of brain power in simply solving the problem of how to become the person you so desperately want to be... and that skews your whole life.
I often wonder what I could have achieved if I had spent less of my energy in my early life simply fighting to be myself, and then fighting my way out from religious convictions which I realised were no longer helping me to grow, but instead had started to hold me back.
I have no claims to ascertain my intelligence as genius-level, but I have lately felt an indescribable sadness in feeling ineffectual in this world as if within me exists the ability to sway public opinion for the betterment of humanity's advancement towards enlightenment and greater understanding.
Reminding myself the feelings of "getting it" and being misunderstood only make me human like everyone else used to ground that sadness. Lately, though, doing so isn't working as well. I'm feeling a growing compulsion to be heard and understood, and I don't understand why even with the context of transition, i.e. what I want "heard and understood" doesn't involve the continued realization of my identity.
I have an IQ of 147, which is just within top 2 percentile aka genius, so I know what you mean. I've kinda overwhelmed myself with the amount of knowledge I've been building about Trans-Community
I think part of it is that being trans forces you to always be on the alert mentally.
I wouldn't claim to be a genius, but I'm certainly very creative, the difficulty is just getting me to focus on things long enough to do them. Case in point, I have a natural talent for writing (probably due to all the time I've spent inside my own head, both as a child and an adult), have no shortage of ideas and the scant things I do write I've been told have flashes of brilliance...but everytime i sit down and try to write my mind just skits away. Same with the music, same with teh photography...though not as much.
yeah, mostly when I try to think outside the book. my experience is that instructors don't like answers not in the manual :|
Friends say I'm intelligent I think I'm just famously Eccentric enigmatic and chaotically Anti-authoritarian to a fault thus giving that impression i'm smarter than I am, Although I have alot of knowledge in science and others things intelligence is only ever a matter of specializing your mind to varied tasks.
I got an IQ of 79 (lowest score) I didn't see the point in the test and put in silly answers. I dislike the idea of mensa... Intelligence should open peoples minds to others not close them off but that's my opinion from someone who is apparently borderline retarded.
Friends love my "projects" usually they often involve me doing zany stuff making toys electronics or clothes for friends or alternatively making something explode dramatically for them this year I intend to launch something into space... probably a camera.
Why does it seem that every time you hear somebody talking about how high their IQ is, the next thing you usually hear about is their failures?
...rhetorical question.
Quote from: Binks on April 02, 2010, 10:35:00 AMAnd second that they are a Jesuit School even though the catholic church now accepts transgender people they still will not.
Did this just happen recently? Someone got a link?
Just curious.
I have an autism spectrum disorder, and my IQ has been tested 3 times; 167 when I was 14, 181 when I was 18, and 197 just this past month. That said, being intelligent has definitely gotten in my way. I dropped out of HS in 9th grade, partly because of depression issues (which were at least partly because of trans issues,) but partly because I decided that since I wasn't learning anything in school, I might as well drop out and use the time to educate myself. As it turns out, most universities will care very little about a 2400 SAT if you've dropped out of HS.
Quote from: Jen on April 03, 2010, 12:30:56 AM
Why does it seem that every time you hear somebody talking about how high their IQ is, the next thing you usually hear about is their failures?
...rhetorical question.
erm... Not quite always I think.
Either that or you have quite an interesting ;) definition of failure I feel Jen! :laugh:
After all I may not have got the Firsts that I was expected to have done but holding honours degrees in three different subjects spanning, engineering arts, and sciences, an HND, a Bsc, and an MA could hardly exactly be considered a failure I feel... :D
Quote from: Jen on April 03, 2010, 12:30:56 AM
Why does it seem that every time you hear somebody talking about how high their IQ is, the next thing you usually hear about is their failures?
...rhetorical question.
Because there is no necessary link between high IQ - which is actually a very narrow and unsatisfactory definition of intelligence, let alone genius - and the ability to function successfully in the world at large, or go conduct satisfactory personal relationships. I come from a family (both parents included) of spectacularly clever people, academically speaking, who are also spectacularly screwed-up. Few of them have the skill to harmess their intelligence to practical or professional ends and when they do they swiftly become bored: once you've worked out how to do something, why do it again? Far better, IMO, to have a well-rounded personality that is smart enough to grasp ideas, but also practical enough to apply them and emotionally sensitive enough to deal with other, less gifted people.
FWIW I don't think there's anything other than a coincidental link between genius and gender incongruity. Tho I would say from personal experience that being transsexual has probably inhibited me somewhat, just because I never had that testosterone-fuelled win-at-all-costs mentality ... Thank God!!
~~Edited for language by Emelye~~
not a genius , but smart enough . the reason i guess would be that the uni where i live is crappy , not a bit interresting . while i'm great at off the study projects , like software programming and web design , and i'm actually good at it , even have a career and yet not able to graduate because simply , i rarely ..very rarely study at all
I always feel so guilty whenever I say something remotely mean :-\.
Just for clarity- I have noticed that people usually bring their IQ scores into conversation when they need a sort of ego crutch for falling short of their own expectations of themselves. I did not mean to suggest people with high IQ's don't generally find success in life, or that anybody in this thread is a failure :(. The juxtaposition is just ironic, that's all.
Quote from: Jen on April 03, 2010, 03:56:33 AM
I always feel so guilty whenever I say something remotely mean :-\.
Just for clarity- I have noticed that people usually bring their IQ scores into conversation when they need a sort of ego crutch for falling short of their own expectations of themselves. I did not mean to suggest people with high IQ's don't generally find success in life, or that anybody in this thread is a failure :(. The juxtaposition is just ironic, that's all.
Oh Jen, does it mean my IQ of 320 doesn't impress you! :-*
Now what universal problem to solve next. Mmm, bank account, :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
No, I think I need to concentrate on important issues; hyper spacial underwear. Go forth and support us in the right places
Sorry I hope I'm not being offensive, just a laugh
Cindy IQ=2
http://xkcd.com/715/ (http://xkcd.com/715/)
A genius (plural genii or geniuses,[1] adjective ingenious) is a person, a body of work, or a singular achievement of surpassing excellence. More than just originality, creativity, or intelligence, genius is associated with achievement of insight which has transformational power. A work of genius fundamentally alters the expectations of its audience. Genius may be generalized, or be particular to a discrete field such as philosophy, sports, statesmanship, science, or art.
Although difficult to quantify, genius is to a level of aptitude, capability, or achievement which exceeds even that of most other exceptional contemporaries in the same field. The normal distribution suggests that the term might be applied to phenomena ranked in the top 0.1%, i.e. three standard deviations or greater, among peers. In psychology, the inventor of the first IQ tests, Alfred Binet, applied the term to the top 0.1% of those tested.[2][3] This usage of the term is closely related to the general concept of intelligence.
Transgender (pronounced /trænzˈdʒɛndər/) is a general term applied to a variety of individuals, behaviors, and groups involving tendencies to deviate from the normative gender roles.
Transgender is the state of one's "gender identity" (self-identification as woman, man, neither or both) not matching one's "assigned sex" (identification by others as male, female or intersex based on physical/genetic sex). "Transgender" does not imply any specific form of sexual orientation; transgender people may identify as heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, pansexual, polysexual, or asexual; some may consider conventional sexual orientation labels inadequate or inapplicable to them. The precise definition for transgender remains in flux, but includes:
* "Of, relating to, or designating a person whose identity does not conform unambiguously to conventional notions of male or female gender roles, but combines or moves between these."[1]
* "People who were assigned a sex, usually at birth and based on their genitals, but who feel that this is a false or incomplete description of themselves."[2]
* "Non-identification with, or non-presentation as, the sex (and assumed gender) one was assigned at birth."[3]
A transgender individual may have characteristics that are normally associated with a particular gender, identify elsewhere on the traditional gender continuum, or exist outside of it as "other," "agender," "Genderqueer," or "third gender". Transgender people may also identify as bigender, or along several places on either the traditional transgender continuum, or the more encompassing continuums which have been developed in response to the significantly more detailed studies done in recent years.
Failure refers to the state or condition of not meeting a desirable or intended objective, and may be viewed as the opposite of success. Product failure ranges from failure to sell the product to fracture of the product, in the worst cases leading to personal injury, the province of forensic engineering.
Success may mean, but is not limited to:
* a level of social status
* achievement of an objective/goal
* the opposite of failure
* the succession of successfully executed tasks and successes
If you meet any of this conditions your life shall be wonderful!
If you do not meet any of this conditions your life shall be wonderful!
;D
I would like to point out that, at least in US, prison populations are bi-modal, i.e. prisoners represent a greater than expected population of very unintelligent and very intelligent people, compared to their respective population distributions. I am a member of Mensa and, for a while, a member of the transgender Special interest group. There were 3 of us worldwide, out of a couple of hundred thousand I think. The group was headed by a non-op older British person who had been a founder of the Beaumont Society in London. I think it was kind of famous in its day. (apologies if it still is) There is no transgender group anymore.
Perhaps if there are so many of us who are transgender and also good at taking IQ tests, then you others should join and as they say, strength in numbers. Having the imprimatur of a respected worldwide organization can give a bit of clout and outlet for acceptance.
Two things - First, it's odd you would single out the Jesuits like that as here in SF the most 'open and accepting' RCC outside of the one actually in the Castro District is the the one in Haight-Ashbury run by the Jesuits. And, having been taught by Jesuits I'm sure they don't have a policy on transgender, they no doubt have three or four and will use whatever one suits them best at the moment. As for the stand of the entire RCC, the Jesuits have never really been all that good at listening to Rome, so their policy may, or may not (and they could care less) be in line with Rome.
As for not being able to get back into Creighton University it's far more likely that - and this is almost a Jesuit tradition - once you've failed, you've failed. They are not much on second chances. Particularly when you are not taking responsibility (I failed out of classes there due to working two jobs and going to school) for your own behavior.* In Jesuit logic, you didn't fail due to having two jobs, you failed because your grades were not good enough, no matter what the reason was. Creighton is hard to get into, perhaps one of the best private Liberal Arts Universities in the Midwest, I'm sure it's even harder to get back into given the Jesuit standards.
Two. IQ test measure largely the ability to take IQ tests. About the only 'real world' application of this is in academic work where taking tests is a significant part of the deal. In the reality-based community, not so much. The range of what they test is very narrow, and says little to nothing about the ranges of intelligence that are applied every day in getting through life. In fact, as has been alluded to, they often are a liability. Too often I have found IQ test described geniuses (I myself reserve that word for real world accomplishments) tend to have three very distinct problems that have a profoundly negative effect on true accomplishment. To wit:
- such people when faced with something that they don't instantly know, become very easily frustrated to the point of worthlessness when trying to learn it. In other words, if they don't get it right away, they are never going to get it at all. Moreover since they are 'geniuses' the reason they didn't get it can't be them, but the blame must lie elsewhere.
- Whatever it is that such test are testing for there is according to my observations an almost inverse correlation between the score and the ability to get along with, communicate with, and work with other people. This tends - as I'm sure Ms. James will concur with - to be a real problem in higher education where brilliant academic work gets people teaching jobs, when in fact, they are just about always the worst teachers ever. They just don't ever understand why people 'just don't get it' right off, and are completely and utterly unable to help their students through the frustration of leaning it. (see above point).
- Far from being some sort of signpost to success, high IQ scores tend to be used as an excuse for failure. Which, when you think about saying 'Gee, I was just too smart to do well in school, or succeed at a job' comes off as sounding kinda retarded.
Having the imprimatur of a respected worldwide organization can give a bit of clout and outlet for acceptance.
You can't be seriously thinking of Mensa like that.
* - I even looked it up, and the Creighton code of conduct is almost word for word the same as my HS code of conduct. Inconsistent with this principle are all forms of dishonesty, excuse-making, failure to take responsibility for your behavior, trust in relationships and violations of the code of ethics of your foreseen profession. I know that because outside of looking up the Creighton code, some 40 years later I still have the one from my HS memorized. Damn Jesuits.
BTW, that's about the best thing they ever taught me. It has always served me well, and I taught it to my kids using the old blues line: 'Fess up when you mess up. If you read what you wrote, you have not done that. The way back in starts with a speech that would begin: Father, I failed because I did not work up to the level I'm capable of, I failed to apply myself with the vigor that I now understand is required of me...
In my opinion, MENSA is good for two things: penis-measuring, and excuse-making. If nothing else, I'm proud of this community (apparently teeming with super-geniuses) for generally not joining that group.
And if y'all are so smart, please go make a difference with your brilliant minds. Here's an idea: stem cell induced SRS. Make it happen =P.
PS- really great post, Tekla :).
It's Deja vu all over again! Didn't this conversation occur about a year ago? Financial writer Laura Rowley in her column of 5/3/07, quotes Jay Zagorsky a research scientist at Ohio State who examines the relationship between IQ and wealth. He found that each IQ point increase correlates to an increase in income of $234-616 per point above the base of 100. Smarter people, as determined on standardized IQ tests make more money. In our society pay is often a proxy of "worth". As wrong as that frequently is. I have seen other academic studies done that indicate that rather than the "wild eyed, disheveled, socially inept, madmen" picture of intelligent people that many have, actual studies indicate an alarming level of "mundaneness" to them. Ah, didn't Aesop have a fable about the fox and the grapes?
It seems too bad that the Pope and the RCC didn't use that "Jesuit Logic" with the scad of pederast priests preying on the choir boys, rather than just moving them on to a new parish, parents innocent of their crimes, and of course "fresh meat." Well, it seems good that at least some people got second chances. Perhaps Binks could arrange to rape a priest? Would she get a second chance then? Or are they only for priests, who one would think would have a higher duty to avoid sin to begin with? But then, that is the difference between logic and miracles. I do well with logic, but often fail to comprehend that whole religion thingy.
"wild eyed, disheveled, socially inept, madmen" picture of intelligent people that many have, actual studies indicate an alarming level of "mundaneness" to them
Pretty much true across the board in so many ways. It goes along with people who confuse fashion trends with being rebels, when real rebels learn that the first lesson of rebellion is to blend in, not to stand out. With something like real intelligence the trick is not to let anyone know until it's too late - it's your secret weapon. And if you have to tell everyone how smart you are, you're doing it wrong. Even if they are dumb, or perhaps especially if they are dumb, they ought to know that pretty quickly on their own if you really are.
It seems too bad that the Pope and the RCC didn't use that "Jesuit Logic" with the scad of pederast priests preying on the choir boys
Well, the joke at my HS was that Rome didn't listen to the Jesuits, and they returned the favor. Very few of the abuse cases involve priests involved in religious orders, because the orders have a lot more control over the priests then a parish or a local bishop does. Reports like that to the Provincial Superior, and then onto the Superior General, might not get you kicked out - but it sure would get you transfered to someplace far, far away from young people. Besides the Jesuits at my school would have been far more into your mom then your little brother.
Quote from: Cindy Stephens on April 03, 2010, 04:27:04 PM
It's Deja vu all over again! Didn't this conversation occur about a year ago?
I'm pretty sure that it did, only it was less than a year ago =P.
I will be honest and admit that MENSA is a pet peeve of mine, so I will just :-X about it. Intelligent people make me swoon, but a person's intelligence is made evident every time they open their mouth to speak. There is no need whatsoever for anybody to talk about how smart they are. Also, regarding the other aspect of this conversation, I doubt you'll find many people on Earth that find it interesting to know all the great things a person could have accomplished, if only.
Real accomplishment is always more interesting than woulda, shoulda, coulda.
Something to consider...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority)
Quote from: blackMamba on April 03, 2010, 09:39:13 PM
Something to consider...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority)
Thank you for posting this link. I'd always wondered why so many politicians who were so obviously so dumb thought they were smart enough to tell the rest of us how to live. And now I know ... ! :)
In Winnie the Pooh, the character Owl has a very high IQ. Owl is always quite ready to tell everyone how smart he is too, and to offer his advice about anything to anyone, whether they want it or not. For all of Owl's Knowing Things however, he never seems to have very practical advice. In fact, it is a Bear of Very Little Brain who often shows the most common sense of all, and is nowhere nearly as pretentious about it as old Owl.
Here's what Pooh had to say on the subject of Knowing Things:
"Sometimes, if you stand on the bottom rail of a bridge and lean over to watch the river slipping slowly away beneath you, you will suddenly know everything there is to be known." *
I dunno, I think I might have to agree with that.
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.faeriewylde.com%2FFW3%2FThemes%2Fchristmas2006_11%2Fimages%2Fpooh-16.gif&hash=ded8371d31529f9a66d8739343f9d68d4408e9cb)
* Winnie the Pooh, Pooh's Little Instruction Book
Love that Chloe,
If you put all the high IQ politicians in a debate the first thing they would do is have a salary increase. Then they dismiss Parliament for study tours.
Us idiots just do the work.
How was Aussie Easter? I noted your reaction to the shop and work closures, the next weird one is Anzac day. Love to hear your thoughts on that. And if you can, attend a dawn service. Very emotional from a part of my person I did not know that I had.
And no, it is not a glorification of war. Took me a while.
Hugs
Cindy
Quote from: tekla on April 03, 2010, 06:52:25 PM
Real accomplishment is always more interesting than woulda, shoulda, coulda.
Quoted for truth.
I do have to say that Tekla has it right. IQ is, at best, only a measure of aptitude, and you can still fail to live up to that potential by failure to apply yourself. In fact I think that those who apply themselves consistently often achieve far than those who have earlier shown much promise but squander it in an ill disciplined way. I have undoubtedly been guilty of that at times in the past.
I also like the comment about creeping up on someone and not letting them see you coming until it is too late. That's a very valuable lesson to learn I feel. It's a bit like winning a battle, you can either do it the costly American way, by vastly superior firepower and numbers, or you can be like the Spartans at Thermopylae, expend far fewer resources, and still get the result by a combination of courage consistency and cunning. Aged 17 I was a devotee of the American way. In my 50's I am finally learning to adopt Tekla's advice and go Spartan - and you know what? The results are so much better.
I only know what my IQ was because, like all schoolchildern in the UK in the 60's and 70's we were forced to take the tests. Even back then they seemed rather pointless I just happened to have a knack for them, so as for joining Mensa I can think of many better ways to spend my time.
Each to their own I feel.
When it comes to intelligence, I sorta fall in the middle ground. I am just smart enough to be considered intelligent by those who are average, but stupid by the geniuses. :icon_chick:
As I'm sure rejennyrated would agree with, creativity has much more to do with execution than clever ideas. What's the old adage? Art is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration? Seems about right.
Quote from: tekla on April 04, 2010, 01:53:13 PM
As I'm sure rejennyrated would agree with, creativity has much more to do with execution than clever ideas. What's the old adage? Art is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration? Seems about right.
Darn right I agree. I am learning that every day of late. In the last 9 days I have written 20,000 words to add to the 10,000 I already had. So now I have a mere 60,000 left to find.
When creativity suddenly goes from being a fun game to something that someone is seriously proposing to pay you for, with attached deadline, that's when you start to learn about the real value discipline and hard work as oposed to being a diletante prodigy!
I remember taking an IQ test and did alright. I was above average in testing but certainly not genius level. But I have to agree with Tekla on this one. People do better with IQ tests every time they take them and they actually have a very limited range of accurately testing one 'intelligence' There are several forms of intelligences that aren't taken into consideration. There are all sorts of intelligences that aren't considered ever.
Here is a good example of skills and intelligences people fail to notice...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_multiple_intelligences (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_multiple_intelligences)
Visual-spatial
Verbal-linguistic
Logical-mathematical
Bodily-kinesthetic
Musical-rhythmic
Interpersonal
Intrapersonal
Society (Here in America since thats where I live and know most about) mainly focus on one, logical-mathematical and hint sometimes at others. Sorry but anyone that can memorize can do math and history and are no better than all the other cogs. I have taken math into calculous and I never use it, and it doesn't make me any better than my best friend who is brilliant but cant even do algebra. Its all too common to downplay the arts and other useful skills. Like agriculture for instance...
I was in an ethics class and we had a debate on wether or not it would be better to include a required class in plants and animals or add another math class. Everyone except me and two other people voted for math... all I can say is FAIL. We have many math classes already and we cant even learn a little bit about our own planet. Its a little important to learn about what we need to survive don't you think? The ignorance people have of our own world and how nature works astounds me.... but thats getting off topic.
Art sports music drama and so much more is thrown out the window. All which are actually very important for people in their own right. Funds for them are constantly being cut.
I should really stop ranting now.
But yeah... IQ tests fail to accurately tell ones aptitude for life.
I was always required to take a full range of subjects, from math to lit to a full range of science classes, along with history, government and technical drawing.
My undergrad degree was Phi Betta Kappa, which requires excellence* in the liberal arts and sciences. My grad top degree was Phi Kappa Phi - which is outstanding work in one field, and that seems right to me.
Most of the people I work with have an outstanding degree of technical competence in carpentry, mechanics and electricity, but they are also (for the most part) extremely literate in cultural stuff and can go on for hours about music, theater, opera and all that stuff. They can read (and execute) schematics and blueprints, you can trust them with professional power tools, and they can quote Shakespeare at length also. Oh yeah, they are also very, very good with people. Hell my vitia/resume says under special skills: Works well with difficult people, works extremely well with extremely difficult people. And that's true.
The classic quote comes from Heinlein speaking as Lazarus Long:
A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly.
Specialization is for insects.
* - That's academic speak for all 'A's.
Quote from: Jen on April 03, 2010, 04:19:00 PM
In my opinion, MENSA is good for two things: penis-measuring ...
in that case, I think you may just have hit upon the reason why not too many folks round here are interested in joining it ... ! :)
I'm sure that she meant that MENSA is a reverse measuring device, the higher the score, the less you score.
I believe there are multi-intelligences, One person may be brilliant at one thing but useless at another and so forth. To use a narrow gauge for estimating one's intelligence leaves out others that might be just as or more intelligent than they in certain areas and meta cognition highlights this very well.
Now what did I say?
Stardust
I have always done very well on every test that I have taken, however I am not too sure if that means anything practical. I mean I can get a great score on a test, I don't need to study, I don't need to review, etc.
But, many times I feel really stupid. I mean, I do not have a great deal of wisdom. I make well informed decisions that are terrible. I don't want to sell myself short but, intelligence without wisdom doesn't seem to be very helpful.
And, whats more I question alot of the tests that told me I am intelligent, as in all actuality all I have really done is retain information with minimal input Is that intelligence, or just decent memory and perceptiveness? I mean I know that other people I have met who scored much lower on various tests were smarter than me.
For example, my troubleshooting skills are nowhere near my brothers, but he never gets close to my score on aptitude tests, so who is really smarter? personally I wouldn't say me...
intelligence without wisdom doesn't seem to be very helpful.
True that, or as Frank Zappa once said:
Information is not knowledge.
Knowledge is not wisdom.
Wisdom is not truth.
Truth is not beauty.
Beauty is not love.
Love is not music.
Music is THE BEST.
Quote from: tekla on April 04, 2010, 11:06:04 PM
intelligence without wisdom doesn't seem to be very helpful.
True that, or as Frank Zappa once said:
Information is not knowledge.
Knowledge is not wisdom.
Wisdom is not truth.
Truth is not beauty.
Beauty is not love.
Love is not music.
Music is THE BEST.
That's why multi-intelligence is a better way of defining intelligence.
Stardust
It has been like a million years since I have taken one of those tests but I was considered "quite bright" way back in my youth when I applied myself. The biggest problem was that my GID was getting pretty severe in my college years and it was pretty hard to care about anything. I wish I had transitioned before college - I probably would have finished if I had.... but that was 1969 and there wasn't much choice.
It is interesting to see people and their personal "ideas" concerning intelligence. It would be better if there were a scintilla of backup for those ideas. People do not get "better" at taking an IQ test multiple times. In fact your IQ stays fairly constant across age. Further, Mensa is NOT an organization to improve the world. It is a worldwide social group if disparate individuals given a platform to discuss ideas. Some seem quick to dismiss my suggestion of joining and then forming a special interest social group. The GAY group in Mensa performs clean-up and food handling service during part of every national gathering in order to gain exposure. So, every Mensan who attends is exposed to gay people in a flattering light. It is much easier to demonize someone or a group that you have never met. Exposure in a good light. Each month my Mensa Magazine has a list of literally dozens of books, novels, etc. written by Mensans and being printed that month. I suppose that trying to influence that group to, possibly, portray us in a positive light is a stupid idea. Sorry, if you are so closed minded that you can't see "possibility". As for me, I don't care how bitter the fox is who didn't get the grapes, cause I'm not listening.
People fear that which they don't understand, and among those things I would include higher intelligence and ->-bleeped-<-.
I feel flying the banner of the former as a means of promoting acceptance of the latter unnecessary at best and inefficient at worst. I'm far from unappreciative of the efforts you have described, but I know there are other ways to contribute without taking up the Mensa mantle.
If you have to tell people, or show them a card, then pretty much you're doing it wrong.
A few years ago now we were doing a band called Gomez. They showed up after a band field trip to Amoeba Records (which has a small stage people perform on) with a couple of kids and said they wanted them to do 30 min to open the show and that they would personally pay them. OK, what stars want we do. So, rolling our eyes - oh crap, street performers - we set them up, miked up the guitars and told the kids to play. It took about half a nano second for us to be amazed. Not only did all the stagehands go out in the audience (something most of us hate) and watch their entire set (unheard of) but they were so F-ing great that the promoter agreed to pay them out of his pocket and not the band's cut. (and that's like the earth spinning off it's axis and careening though the universe)
Point is, you don't have to tell people what a fricking awesome writer you are, wouldn't reading a couple of pages prove it? If you think you're the words greatest guitar player ever - then shut up and play your guitar. Should not your life and your work be the best proof of how smart you are, and not some card in your wallet?
I never have to tell people I'm just about the most awesome rock stagehand ever. I just have to tell them where I work and who I work for. The proof is always in the doing, not in the telling.
Again, my point has been completely misconstrued. Several people who have contributed or started this thread were bitching about being so bored because they were incredibly intelligent, and bandied about some off the wall number as their purported IQ's. I merely suggested as positive, creative outlet (among similar intelligent people) to burn off the energy. I am not suggesting that they join, get a card and "wave it about" to demonstrate their intelligence. Catholics get together for social groups and exchange business cards. Here in Florida the Baptists put out yellow pages sized business directories of fellow travelers. There is nothing wrong with that. You are just prejudiced against people of a certain intelligence. Perhaps you are threatened. Gee, aren't those EXACTLY the same feelings that many straight people have about gays and, as I like to refer to myself,-GENDER GIFTED.
I don't see anyone here expressing a prejudice against smart people.
Problem: occupying a bored genius
Solution A: video games
Solution B: books
Solution C: online chess
Solution D: better mousetrap
Solution E: arguing with creationists
"bored genius" seems to me an oxymoron. Like saying I'm so smart I can't find anything in the world that interests me, but I'm too dumb to invent something to do to keep from being bored.
arguing with creationists sounds like fun lol
Quote from: FairyGirl on April 07, 2010, 12:45:13 AM
"bored genius" seems to me an oxymoron. Like saying I'm so smart I can't find anything in the world that interests me, but I'm too dumb to invent something to do to keep from being bored.
arguing with creationists sounds like fun lol
It's not really fair because they aren't confined by logic and reason.
Solution E: arguing with creationists
I did that on a school board, it's a lot less fun that it sounds.
And smart people are rarely bored, they know how to amuse themselves, and are smart enough to take advantage of any situation.
By the way, I think that smart people are also pretty happy, how smart do you have to be to figure out how to get what you want?
Quote from: Starscrash on April 07, 2010, 01:02:04 AM
It's not really fair because they aren't confined by logic and reason.
but you can say stuff like "so how come Noah didn't get eaten by the velociraptors? HMMM?" :)
Quote from: FairyGirl on April 07, 2010, 01:37:23 AM
but you can say stuff like "so how come Noah didn't get eaten by the velociraptors? HMMM?" :)
Well
clearly he didn't have velociraptors on the ark, or they'd still be around today.
Quote from: Starscrash on April 07, 2010, 01:39:54 AM
Well clearly he didn't have velociraptors on the ark, or they'd still be around today.
Right, now I'm going to stick my head above the parapit. I am a creationist and also believe in adaptation but I don't believe in Darwinism. There is just as much a leap of faith in Darwinism as there is to believe in creation as a reason for life, the universe and everything, or is it just 42?
Getting off topic so this discussion would be another subject.
Stardust
When I get bored I write PTO on both sides of a piece of paper.
Keeps me occupied for hours :angel:
Quote from: tekla on April 07, 2010, 01:04:27 AM
Solution E: arguing with creationists
I did that on a school board, it's a lot less fun that it sounds.
But it's an incredible time waster!
QuoteAnd smart people are rarely bored, they know how to amuse themselves, and are smart enough to take advantage of any situation.
Smarts and IQ are two different things. I know some geniuses who are unhappy, boring douchebags.
Post Merge: April 07, 2010, 03:51:26 AM
Quote from: stardust on April 07, 2010, 02:20:51 AM
Right, now I'm going to stick my head above the parapit. I am a creationist
How old do you think the earth is?
Quote from: casorce on April 07, 2010, 03:50:35 AM
How old do you think the earth is?
That question could be open to debate, the Bible if taken chronologically with an understanding of the first two chapters of creation as a start then its only 6,000 years old approx, I have also seen carbon dating as an accurate way of dating rocks which would give millions of years, I have also read of a scientist who using the above method came up with only a 100,000 year date. Theory changes over time given the observation of science.
Taking the Biblical exegesis of the first two chapters of Genesis and the understanding of critical analysis of the text in the original tongue then it is not a scientific account of the creation by God. The original is a poetic account and as such can not be used scientifically. It would be like using Shakespeare to understand the culture of that time. Historically it would be inaccurate at best.
So I have postured to others (not here) that if light has slowed down (as, as been suggested by some scientists and is not a constant as previously thought) then the age of the universe is not as it seems and turns out to be younger.
I am not going to get into a debate about the in's and out's of scientific discovery about the age of the universe simply because science can not concretely and undisputedly know. It just uses observation, understanding of current thinking and postulates the theory. As such then it also is a leap of faith.
It could well turn out to be 42 after all, lol.
Sorry its off topic but just answering the question
Stardust
Quote from: stardust on April 07, 2010, 01:26:38 PM
Sorry its off topic but just answering the question
Actually, you didn't.
Answer the question, that is.
You equivocated instead.
Quote from: casorce on April 07, 2010, 03:25:31 PM
Actually, you didn't.
Answer the question, that is.
You equivocated instead.
I can't answer the question because I was not there. Scientists only use observation and theory. The observations are from our perspective today so its a question that can not be answered by any one. Now if you asked me to hazard a guess then I would say around the 100,000 year mark as I was convinced by certain criteria given in the book I read and evaluation of scientific data relating to the age of the universe and the observed slowing down of light speed. I was not trying to be evasive.
Is that equivocated enough for you.
Stardust
Well clearly he didn't have velociraptors on the ark, or they'd still be around today.
In fact, had Noah had velociraptors on the ark they would have been the only animals to walk off don't you think?
But it's an incredible time waster!
Not if you kids are in the school and some invisible (but omnipresent) sky spirit worshiping person wants to inject their superstitions as curriculum.
Case in point....
The observations are from our perspective today so its a question that can not be answered by any one.
It's far more than observations, there is at least a little measurement involved. But I'm guessing - I would say around the 100,000 year mark - you've never walked to the bottom of the Grand Canyon, or to the top of Yosemite.
Quote from: Cindy Stephens on April 05, 2010, 09:06:06 AM
I don't care how bitter the fox is who didn't get the grapes, cause I'm not listening.
Lol, do you mean to say you think we have
genius envy?
Can't really say that I've ever envied anyone's potential, though I'll be more than happy to cop to a lot of admiration for people's accomplishments.
But, in the end, I don't think that was as much about their intelligence estimates as it turned out to be about their work ethic, attention to detail, persistence, ability to stay on task, and diligence. I don't think my degrees are as much about being smart as they are about my work ethic, attention to detail, persistence, ability to stay on task, and diligence. I don't think I was/am a good teacher because I'm smart, I'm probably a good teacher because of my work ethic, attention to detail, persistence, ability to stay on task, and diligence. I don't think I'm good at what I do on stage because I'm smart, it's because of my work ethic, attention to detail, persistence, ability to stay on task, and diligence.
I do not think I am above average intelligence, but I think I am clever enough to get things done. I feel like my life lack any psychological enrichment, since it's like everything taught in school completely bores me. It's just too standard, and more of one size fits all. First of all you get graded 10 points if you have a syllabus, what the deal is that?
Just follow the directions and the rubric, then you pass!
I pass all my classes, and usually do the work at the last minute. Cramming, procrastination, and all, it beats studying and wasting time when my time could spent on my career and gender stuff lol.
Eh just bored of life.
Quote from: Cindy Stephens on April 06, 2010, 06:31:29 PM
Again, my point has been completely misconstrued. Several people who have contributed or started this thread were bitching about being so bored because they were incredibly intelligent, and bandied about some off the wall number as their purported IQ's. I merely suggested as positive, creative outlet (among similar intelligent people) to burn off the energy. I am not suggesting that they join, get a card and "wave it about" to demonstrate their intelligence. Catholics get together for social groups and exchange business cards. Here in Florida the Baptists put out yellow pages sized business directories of fellow travelers. There is nothing wrong with that. You are just prejudiced against people of a certain intelligence. Perhaps you are threatened. Gee, aren't those EXACTLY the same feelings that many straight people have about gays and, as I like to refer to myself,-GENDER GIFTED.
I'll admit to misinterpreting the reasoning behind your suggestions. I had assumed the motivation lay in using a known organization to promote a goal as opposed to simply enabling individuals to pursue a goal. (To be perfectly honest, though, you were the one who mentioned employing Mensa's "clout.")
However, I will not sit quietly and be accused of persecuting anyone. I am not threatened by nor prejudiced against* intelligence, Mensa, or your identity.
EDIT: Fixed incorrect preposition.