← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Conservative
Thread ID: 7524 | Posts: 32 | Started: 2003-06-21
2003-06-21 07:28 | User Profile
[url=http://www.emode.com/tests/uiq/authorize/register.jsp?url=/tests/uiq/index.jsp]http://www.emode.com/tests/uiq/authorize/r...s/uiq/index.jsp[/url] I don't know how reliable it is though.
Regards,
Ares
2003-06-21 09:26 | User Profile
Seems fairly accurate. I scored a 138; in comparison, I scored 146 on the WAIS and 172 on the Catell's Culture Fair Test, (the one Mensa uses) which has a standard deviation of 24.
2003-06-21 17:00 | User Profile
Did anyone take Birdman's little eleven-question test last week?
It's what we used to call an "idiot test" - which tests your attention to the deceptively simple terms of the question, rather than your ability to recognize a pattern.
I consider this sort of test a better measure of one's ability to deal with controversial questions in social science and philosophy (which demand a comprehension of the problem more than skill at devising a solution - since rarely is there a "solution" preferable to endurance of the "problem").
2003-06-21 19:49 | User Profile
I completed the test, but I could not find the results.
Anybody?
2003-06-21 20:19 | User Profile
Originally posted by Ed Toner@Jun 21 2003, 13:49 * *I completed the test, but I could not find the results.
Anybody?**
Ed,
Are you refering to Birdman's test (which worked on my XP machine but not my Windows 98 box)?
If you're talking about the test linked by Ares, punch the "get your results" button at the end of the test. Then you have to enter personal info.
2003-06-21 20:22 | User Profile
Originally posted by Ed Toner@Jun 21 2003, 12:49 * *I completed the test, but I could not find the results. **
Then you failed the test :D
2003-06-21 20:25 | User Profile
Originally posted by madrussian+Jun 21 2003, 14:22 -->
QUOTE (madrussian @ Jun 21 2003, 14:22 ) <!--QuoteBegin-Ed Toner@Jun 21 2003, 12:49 * *I completed the test, but I could not find the results. ** Then you failed the test :D**
Thanks for the rousing belly laugh, MR! Good one!
NeoNietzsche
2003-06-21 20:47 | User Profile
I got a 142 with the following answers (if I haven't made a mistake in recording and transcribing them):
1) C 2) B 3) D 4) E 5) B 6) D 7) A 8) C 9) B 10)D 11)B 12)D 13)B 14)A 15)B 16)C 17)C 18)A 19)C 20)B 21)D 22)D 23)A 24)D 25)B 26)D 27)A 28)A 29)D 30)B 31)D 32)B 33)B 34)C 35)B 36)B 37)D 38)A 39)B 40)C
Does anyone have a list of the correct answers or a list from a higher score?
weisbrot
2003-06-21 21:37 | User Profile
*Originally posted by NeoNietzsche@Jun 21 2003, 16:47 * ** I got a 142 with the following answers (if I haven't made a mistake in recording and transcribing them):
Does anyone have a list of the correct answers or a list from a higher score? **
No, I'm keeping those all to myself.
I do have a stack of (completely unneeded) "member enlargement" spams I'll be happy to send your way, though...
damian
2003-06-21 21:39 | User Profile
Seems fairly accurate, I scored 136 - 2 points less than my usual score. Tho to keep things in perspective I note that Marilyn vos Savant, whose IQ of 228 is the highest ever recorded, has not exactly contributed much to science or art. She is, instead, a question-and-answer columnist for Parade magazine. And many run-of-the-mill physicists have IQs much higher than Nobel Prize winner Richard Feynman, who many acknowledge to be the last great American genius (his IQ was a merely respectable 122).
madrussian
2003-06-21 22:11 | User Profile
Perhaps Feynman wasn't a genius after all, just another tribesman being shamelessly promoted. He was good in popularizing the science, but in terms of his contribution to physics? Feynman diagrams, which are graphical aid for application of perturbation theory of QED is the only thing I remember.
Paging Roy Batty :lol:
Wayland
2003-06-21 22:18 | User Profile
The [url=http://www.highiqsociety.org/noflash/nonmembers/iqtests.htm]High IQ Society[/url] claims to have several tests that will measure IQ in the upper ranges more accurately.
"Most professional intelligence tests are designed to determine most accurately the IQ of the average person, which is around 100. For the above-average person, however, these tests don't discriminate nearly as well. As a solution to this problem, we have designed our test to be much harder than the average IQ test, and, therefore, be more accurate at higher levels."
It looks like you might need some higher math to do well on their Test For Exceptional Intelligence so I passed on that. I did do the Ultimate IQ test last year and it took me about 1.5 to 2 hours if I recall with a few floor-pacing breaks thrown in. I remember that I guessed at the answers to three questions although that doesn't mean I answered the others correctly, just that I had an answer of some kind worked out. Two of the three guesses were what you might call educated guesses, the other I had no clue at all.
Some people might be interested in seeing how their score on this more difficult test compares to a score returned from one of the more general tests like the one mentioned at the start of this topic. I scored higher on this more difficult test so I'll assume it's more accurate. :D
damian
2003-06-21 22:43 | User Profile
Originally posted by madrussian@Jun 21 2003, 18:11 * *Perhaps Feynman wasn't a genious after all, just another tribesman being shamelessly promoted. He was a good in popularizing the science, but in terms of his contribution to physics? Feynman diagrams, which are graphical aid for application of perturbation theory of QED is the only thing I remember. **
Besides popularizing the science, Feynman was known for his novel and creative approach towards QED theory, something high IQ people are generally not noted for, which illustrates my point that IQ is over-rated. I'm personally acquainted with 5-6 people with IQ's in the high 140s whom I consider essentially worthless as far as them achieving or accomplishing anything of import - unless you deem figuring out parlour tricks and crossword puzzles a usefull skill.
madrussian
2003-06-21 22:52 | User Profile
In other words, Feynman wrote a "QED for Dummies" book. Not the genius level, that's for sure.
I don't think IQ is overrated, unless by overrating your mean achievement of visibility and financial success. It's just that often high-IQ people got stuck at perfecting something minor. I'd say there is a good correlation between IQ and success, but sometimes high-IQ people may have problem communicating with the lesser human beings. :D
damian
2003-06-21 23:19 | User Profile
I think that while it's true that a very bright person will invariably score high on these tests, I've met others who, while scoring highly, never impressed me as being all that bright in a general sense. Kind of like they possessed an idiot-savant like skill that made them proficient at pattern recognition or analogies, which while useful, is but one facet of what I would think constitutes intelligence.
damian
2003-06-21 23:20 | User Profile
Originally posted by madrussian@Jun 21 2003, 18:52 * *In other words, Feynman wrote a "QED for Dummies" book. Not the genius level, that's for sure.
**
I guess that's one way to put it. :lol:
madrussian
2003-06-21 23:24 | User Profile
*Originally posted by damian@Jun 21 2003, 16:19 * ** I think that while it's true that a very bright person will invariably score high on these tests, I've met others who, while scoring highly, never impressed me as being all that bright in a general sense. Kind of like they possessed an idiot-savant like skill that made them proficient at pattern recognition or analogies, which while useful, is but one facet of what I would think constitutes intelligence. **
Perhaps IQ tests faile sometimes to recognize freaks with some extraordinary generally useless abilities, like those who can compute complicated arithmetic expressions in mind. I may have seen them but never recognized their high IQ.
damian
2003-06-21 23:38 | User Profile
Originally posted by madrussian@Jun 21 2003, 19:24 * ** Perhaps IQ tests faile sometimes to recognize freaks with some extraordinary generally useless abilities, like those who can compute complicated arithmetic expressions in mind. I may have seen them but never recognized their high IQ.*
No, you misunderstood me, I wouldn't consider idiot-savants to be intelligent, I was implying that there are some people who score high because of a narrowly focused and peculiar talent that translates well into achieving a high IQ score, yet doesn't correlate with the ability to contribute anything useful to the arts or sciences in general.
Happy Hacker
2003-06-22 00:18 | User Profile
*Originally posted by Ares@Jun 21 2003, 07:28 * ** [url=http://www.emode.com/tests/uiq/authorize/register.jsp?url=/tests/uiq/index.jsp]http://www.emode.com/tests/uiq/authorize/r...s/uiq/index.jsp[/url] I don't know how reliable it is though. **
It looks bogus to me. I took it and believe I answered every question correctly (with maybe a couple of exceptions). Every question can be answered correctly by someone of average intelligence with just a little bit of thinking.
I don't know my score with certainty because I didn't want to sign up for spam. But, I think it's one of those things designed for everyone to feel good about their IQ in hopes of making it easier to get you to pay for their products. It's the classic case of a salesman telling you that you're smart so that you'll be dumb and allow yourself to be ripped off.
Alka
2003-06-22 00:23 | User Profile
**Perhaps IQ tests fail sometimes to recognize freaks with some extraordinary generally useless abilities, like those who can compute complicated arithmetic expressions in mind. I may have seen them but never recognized their high IQ. **
I would agree with this. After all, I've met many so-called 'intelligent' individuals who scored high on an IQ test but who have failed miserably at life and who have difficulty grasping complex philosophical issues.
According to this IQ test, I have an IQ of 138 (not surprisingly, I usually receive a result -depending on the type of IQ test administered - of between 140 - 180: once in my teens I received an IQ result of 186, much to the excitment of my family).
What this - and all the other IQ tests - tells one about me, essentially, is that I am great at counting change, figuring out distances between moving objects, and detecting visual patterns.
Does this mean I am smarter than others?
Of course it does! :th:
LOL Just kidding. It just means I'd make a better train ticket-taker than some. And that I'm dumb enough to sit through another stupid IQ test.
IQ tests are about as accurate a means of discerning intelligence as is scrutinizing outward appearance. Looks - and test results - can be very deceiving.
NeoNietzsche
2003-06-22 01:47 | User Profile
Originally posted by weisbrot+Jun 21 2003, 15:37 -->
QUOTE* (weisbrot @ Jun 21 2003, 15:37 ) <!--QuoteBegin-NeoNietzsche@Jun 21 2003, 16:47 * ** I got a 142 with the following answers (if I haven't made a mistake in recording and transcribing them): Does anyone have a list of the correct answers or a list from a higher score? **
No, I'm keeping those all to myself.
I do have a stack of (completely unneeded) "member enlargement" spams I'll be happy to send your way, though...**
Most generous of you, WB - sorry to hear that a personal deficiency has become public knowledge.
Ruffin
2003-06-22 02:08 | User Profile
So are there any standards for these tests? I've only taken them online, like this, and I've scored in the 160s, the 140s, and now... gulp, 134. This one seemed more like a real IQ test than others I've taken.... but I'm beginning to feel like Al Capone by the swimming pool.
madrussian
2003-06-22 03:35 | User Profile
It's hard to create a series of tests that would produce the identical score for the same individual, whose performance may vary too from time to time. However, when applied to large samples of population, the difference in performance by different groups is meaningful.
Ruffin
2003-06-22 04:17 | User Profile
What I mean is... are there any test writers who're at least very generally respected as authorities at it? As opposed to the seemingly very qualitatively different types one comes across on the internet, for example.
Campion Moore Boru
2003-06-22 23:26 | User Profile
Ruffin:
The tests always have a plus minus. I scored a 138, which is in the neighborhood of 5 to seven points from what I scored in a controlled environment as a kid.
LA Refugee
2003-06-23 01:03 | User Profile
141, not bad, and reasonably close to other test results.
weisbrot
2003-06-23 02:17 | User Profile
*Originally posted by NeoNietzsche@Jun 21 2003, 21:47 * ** Most generous of you, WB - sorry to hear that a personal deficiency has become public knowledge. **
Indeed.
But then again, you haven't exactly been discreet in advertising it. Buck up, fellow; no one's judging you.
NeoNietzsche
2003-06-23 02:56 | User Profile
Originally posted by weisbrot+Jun 22 2003, 20:17 -->
QUOTE* (weisbrot @ Jun 22 2003, 20:17 ) <!--QuoteBegin-NeoNietzsche@Jun 21 2003, 21:47 * ** Most generous of you, WB - sorry to hear that a personal deficiency has become public knowledge. ** Indeed.
But then again, you haven't been exactly been discreet in advertising it. Buck up, fellow; no one's judging you.**
Again, very generous of you, WB. Good to know that the relative size of my organs has aroused no interest aside from that which you have expressed.
I take it from your previous remarks that your genitals, rather, are admirably large in comparison with your brain.
Eendracht Maakt Mag
2003-06-23 19:02 | User Profile
Originally posted by Ruffin@Jun 21 2003, 22:17 * ** What I mean is... are there any test writers who're at least very generally* respected as authorities at it? As opposed to the seemingly very qualitatively different types one comes across on the internet, for example. **
No on the Internet. In any case, standardized IQ tests are usually accurate only to a standard deviation or so. Someone who scores 150 could score 165 or 135 on another test.
na Gaeil is gile
2003-06-24 10:13 | User Profile
Originally posted by Prodigal Son@Jun 23 2003, 13:02 * No on the Internet. In any case, standardized IQ tests are usually accurate only to a standard deviation or so. Someone who scores 150 could score 165 or 135 on another test.*
Which renders the results fairly useless on an individual basis; the online tests are even worse. Iââ¬â¢ve scored anywhere between 110 and 180, useless but fun.
A whole motherload of tests and IQ related info for anyone whoââ¬â¢s interested:
[url=http://66.154.91.2/tests/index.html]High-Range IQ Tests[/url] [url=http://www.barryhoward.com/HighIQ.htm]Barry's High IQ Site[/url] [url=http://www.majon.com/cgi-bin/IQ?Q=iqtest4]How smart are YOU?[/url] [url=http://www.highiqsociety.org/noflash/nonmembers/iqtests.htm?IQ]International High IQ Society[/url] [url=http://home8.swipnet.se/~w-80790/Index.htm]IQ score converter[/url] [url=http://www.syvum.com/iq/]Various tests & puzzles[/url] [url=http://www.pressanykey.com/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/pak/iqtest.pl]PressAnyKey - IQ test[/url] [url=http://www.sigmasociety.org/index_eng.html]Sigma society[/url] [url=http://www.sigmasociety.org/Sigma_Testes_Eng.html]Sigma soc's test - see if you can solve questions 20 to 35[/url] [url=http://www.allthetests.com/intelligence.php3?offset=20&search=&sortby=zugefuegt]AllTheTests.com[/url] [url=http://www.cerebrals.com/testing.htm]The Cerebrals society tests[/url] [url=http://home.hetnet.nl/~rijk42/iqtestlinks.html]Ultimate IQtest link site[/url] [url=http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/hoeflin.html]Uncommonly Difficult IQ Tests[/url] [url=http://www.geocities.com/rnseitz/Vocabulary_Intro.html]Vocab. based tests[/url]
Walter Yannis
2003-06-25 11:18 | User Profile
*Originally posted by NeoNietzsche@Jun 21 2003, 17:00 * ** Did anyone take Birdman's little eleven-question test last week?
It's what we used to call an "idiot test" - which tests your attention to the deceptively simple terms of the question, rather than your ability to recognize a pattern.
I consider this sort of test a better measure of one's ability to deal with controversial questions in social science and philosophy (which demand a comprehension of the problem more than skill at devising a solution - since rarely is there a "solution" preferable to endurance of the "problem"). **
I did.
I got about 3/4 of them right, and could have kicked myself for not getting the others, which were pretty obvious.
I agree that this was a great test.
Walter
Walter Yannis
2003-06-25 11:23 | User Profile
Originally posted by Ruffin@Jun 22 2003, 02:08 * ** So are there any standards for these tests? I've only taken them online, like this, and I've scored in the 160s, the 140s, and now... gulp, 134. This one seemed* more like a real IQ test than others I've taken.... but I'm beginning to feel like Al Capone by the swimming pool. **
I got a 134 as well.
That result is quite consistent with results of other tests.
I'm quite good at verbal reasoning, but really bad at spatial reasoning.
Which is why I'm a corporate lawyer! Man, I could never have made it as a mechanic, that's for sure.
I should add that this places me in the top 3-4 percent of the population, which is really a scary thought. I never considered myself to be highly intelligent. I can do my job and make a good living, but I've always known or worked with people that were vastly smarter than me. I'm competent, but not much beyond that. I can perform, but it takes hard and sustained effort. I succeed, but not without a good deal of sweat and making a lot of mistakes that smarter people would avoid. Believe me, I know people who fit the bill. They just have an easier time of it. They can get more done in less time with less sweat and fewer mistakes than me. It's sad, really. And it's really scary to think that 95% of the population is less intelligent than me. I'm compelled to agree with Dr. Pierce that as a species we really haven't risen very far from the jungle.
For example, in my current job I work with a Swedish engineer who's just so damned smart. His blue eyes twinkle to his mind's crackling intelligence, even as he analyzes very complicated problems involving technical and economic considerations neatly and concisely, and all in beautiful English (he speaks six languages). I mean, this cat is just soooooo much smarter than me. Great guy, too.
I think that it's that phenomenon Bell Curve discussed, where the intelligent find themselves living and working with other smart people having passed through Dewey's social sifter. I was raised from the working classes where my family languished long by the meritocratic educational system (well, meritocratic at least in relation to us white males). I'm real humble about my own abilities because in the milieu I find myself in I'm really nothing to write home about, but it all looks different from my little home town in Wisconsin.
Walter