complete distraction
it isn't a complete distraction. you cut every word of my reply in order to make the claim it is. You literally cut out, 7 words and quoted them as if it was meaningless. And every other word you ignored, proves it isn't meaningless. It's fine to assume he would have had a high iq.btw as we're getting far off it now, that 'wall of text' you refused to engage with is summarized as such: Every intellectual we have tested, had a high iq. All of them. Thousands of them. And the best example you could think of of one that didn't was in the 95th percentile for iq. Your opinion is it shows NOTHING and if you know the first think about statistics you should know that is rock solid evidence it can predict intelligence. Which means we can say with certainty, hegel would have had high IQ
if you abandon this argument now and go silent instead of admitting you were wrong, you're a bluepiller, protecting yourself from the uncomfortable truth
@SoycuckGodOfReddit as soon as you had no way of arguing back, you dipped. Coper. Bluepiller. Refuse to accept something that makes you feel bad; losing. JFL
btw as we're getting far off it now, that 'wall of text' you refused to engage with is summarized as such: Every intellectual we have tested, had a high iq. All of them. Thousands of them. And the best example you could think of of one that didn't was in the 95th percentile for iq. Your opinion is it shows NOTHING and if you know the first think about statistics you should know that is rock solid evidence it can predict intelligence. Which means we can say with certainty, hegel would have had high IQ
all of this is so you can believe that iq means NOTHING in order to write off that a foid had 226 iq
tbh all of your hifalutin longposts about 'bluepillers' and 'logic' were just a facade, that has now given way to reveal you randomly name-calling and saying 'omg I got the last word omg I won'
This. Memorizing shit or solving puzzles is not intelligence, at least not how I would personally define it. It's more about being unbiased, being able to see patterns, correlations, to be able to think abstractly, come up with solutions to complex shit, being able to see when you're wrong, being able to gather information, structure it in your brain and make correct conclusions and observations from it, a lot of stuff.
You really think this is the case for every female? How is believing something this elaborate more rational than just uncomfortably accepting that intelligent females do exist. I refuse to believe you havent met or noticed an intelligent female anecdotally but even then, the world isnt black and white. I agree with laanda
you cannot disprove this message I quote below. You won't even try. Claim you don't want to if you wish. But if you did want to, you could not. You're coping to walk away comforting yourself you weren't wrong.
but IQ tests actually do cover pattern recognision and iirc that is what most of the test is
you are a foid, but you're not intelligent, GrAY
good luck holding the opinion that IQ tests mean nothing about intelligence im sure it will be very easy to defend oh wait yes it will in your mind because you're bluepilled and that makes it easy to believe in copes
there's nothing to disprove, you're just pointlessly insisting on made-up scores which you didn't do due diligence on, then distorting what I was saying and writing essays arguing with some shit you also made up
One specific type of it, yes. What about all the other shit I mentioned? Come on. Intelligent is not just that. @GeckoBus is a good example, if you ever read his stuff, his reading comprehension and analytical capabilities are at the top, along with the other intelligence attributes I mentioned in my previous post, meanwhile his IQ is self-reportedly not that high.
Read the text. It proves this ^ message wrong too
say one fucking thing about why i'm wrong;
so.... you do think IQ potrays an accurate representation of intelligence as you just stated with the bell curves? Your confusing me. Im very tired so sorry if i misunderstood
You're just spamming nonsense, common tactics used by midwits, as well as strawmaning and cherrypicking, along with authority biases and ad hominems, You shouldn't be judging anyone's intelligence. We can't have an intelligence conversation this way, so I won't even bother.
'spamming nonsense' you didn't reply to a single thing I said and I made 4 points, with questions for you to answer.
It's ok brocel. I'll re-phrase:
the only thing I said to you was that if you want to believe that IQ doesn't suggest intelligence, then good luck holding that opinion in the future. That's the point I was arguing with him about. He literally SAID in his own words, he thinks it doesn't. That is his opinion. You think he's right and I'm wrong, and you admitted you think so. How is that 'spamming nonsense'?
Stfu foid infiltrator
With my limited socialisation i cant really say that i have seen evidence that the IQ distributions of men and women reflect reality but what i will say (which would point towards women mostly being in the middle) is that i noticed that women are very very much conformists. Interesting thing i havent really seen talked about alot but maybe i havent looked alot
@SoycuckGodOfReddit
the word 'rationality' explains this perfectly. Could be, like IQ suggests, their cognitive function can possibly be (not even confirming it is half the time or is even anything more than RARELY) higher than average, and they're not rational towards things. That explains this. Perfectly.
This is correct, once you look deeper into genders and politics you'll quickly see they tend to hold onto status quo and what's currently socially acceptable, while men are the ones who challenge stuff and create revolutions.Yes what im mainly concerned about is the argument that females "cant be intelligent" which was this guys original argument which reveries then seemingly agreed with. That is avoiding the painful truth. Iam probably around average IQ and i have definitely met females who are much more intelligent than me.
sounds like irrationality/rationality
Plenty of foids believe it or not are intelligent.
Why is there a complete lack of this response on the thread?
come on bro they are 50% of the population
well worded argument, you convinced me. None of them were coping the 3-4 foids as well as guys, they went to class with every day who topped the class every test prove nothing.
If you think that getting good grades in school is a sign of intelligence, you need to seriously reevaluate your line of reasoning and critical thinking skills. That is not, and never will be, a sign of an intelligent person. Good grades is a result of merely working hard. Any kid that works hard will always have straight A's (unless you have a mental disability).
you know this is false. Some people don't try at all and get good grades then fail uni due to poor development. Other retards try super hard and get straight Cs
@SoycuckGodOfReddit, How do you have consistently good & objectively correct takes on everything?
I have consistently scored ~80 on every IQ test I have ever taken. It matters far less than you make it out to.
every accepted intellectual of our society scores above 120
And yet they've never achieved anything of note. Just more proof that they don't exist JFL
Your sentences genuinely give me a headache to read. It's genuinely a puzzle trying to figure out what your saying.
because you have 80 iq and low intelligence
'It's false because... well... it just is because of this annecdotal evidence!'
also correlation not equaling causation doesn't prove it is not the cause
