Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

I wish there was a low IQ society.

Ryo_Hazuki

Ryo_Hazuki

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
4,614
Online
22d 1h 43m
Basically like mensa but for people with IQs below 85.  It would be nice to be a part of a community where everyone personally understand how difficult life is with extremely low intellectual bottlenecks.  People with average IQs and higher can't comprehend what life is like with such limited cognitive abilities.  It's especially horrible when you're hyper-aware of how dumb you are and how much it limits you.
 
universallyabhorred

universallyabhorred

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
6,175
Online
71d 4h 50m
Can you give me some reasons you believe you have a low iq, along with the ways it negatively affects your life? I'm surprised by this since you seem quite articulate and capable of expressing complex ideas and concepts online.
 
Deleted member 1499

Deleted member 1499

Self-banned
-
Joined
Nov 13, 2017
Posts
393
Online
36m
universallyabhorred said:
Can you give me some reasons you believe you have a low iq, along with the ways it negatively affects your life? I'm surprised by this since you seem quite articulate and capable of expressing complex ideas and concepts online.

This.
 
I

incel

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
711
Online
4d 14h 38m
universallyabhorred said:
Can you give me some reasons you believe you have a low iq, along with the ways it negatively affects your life? I'm surprised by this since you seem quite articulate and capable of expressing complex ideas and concepts online.

doubt anyone here has an IQ over 125. but I do believe most people here aren't borderline stupid (aside from the mentalcels)
 
rickvanderhammer

rickvanderhammer

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Posts
859
Online
0
i'd support this, a society for high sentience low IQ people could thrive, the people would need to be functional though so no niggers/aspies/people with genetic conditions and personality traits would need to be taken into account. my IQ is 80-85 but i have a high level of self awareness due to HPPD, so it's like observing somebody else live their life and cringing at their every action but there's nothing you can do about it. i wish people could see things from my perspective. the only things that matter are your looks, your brain, and your parents net worth, if you have even one of these you have a chance, but some of us aren't so lucky
 
Deleted member 60

Deleted member 60

.
-
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
16,974
Online
2d 17h 17m
there's this one place called IncelTears or something like that...

Seriously though, I don't think you're low IQ. I struggle with the same problem as you. I think prolonged depression/isolation causes some kind of dementia.
 
rickvanderhammer

rickvanderhammer

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Posts
859
Online
0
fukmylyf said:
there's this one place called IncelTears or something like that...

Seriously though, I don't think you're low IQ. I struggle with the same problem as you. I think prolonged depression/isolation causes some kind of dementia.

dementia is necrosis, depression/isolation wouldn't directly cause it
 
universallyabhorred

universallyabhorred

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
6,175
Online
71d 4h 50m
Large parts of the world have low average IQ, low iq societies already exist, just move to sub saharan Africa, parts of the Caribbean or middle east and you will fit right in.
 
Deleted member 60

Deleted member 60

.
-
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
16,974
Online
2d 17h 17m
rickvanderhammer said:
dementia is necrosis, depression/isolation wouldn't directly cause it

has there been any actual research on this?
 
rickvanderhammer

rickvanderhammer

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Posts
859
Online
0
fukmylyf said:
has there been any actual research on this?

nobody really understands the root root cause of dementia, or most brain related afflictions for that matter. the fact there's no treatment for 99.9% of brain diseases reflects this
 
blackcel

blackcel

BBC
-
Joined
Nov 17, 2017
Posts
4,938
Online
52m
Low iq society will be full of literal retards. I'm sure they have homes for these types of people.
 
fagotonabike

fagotonabike

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
513
Online
0
incel said:
universallyabhorred said:
Can you give me some reasons you believe you have a low iq, along with the ways it negatively affects your life? I'm surprised by this since you seem quite articulate and capable of expressing complex ideas and concepts online.
doubt anyone here has an IQ over 125. but I do believe most people here aren't borderline stupid (aside from the mentalcels)
I was officially tested in high school and had a score higher than 130. I skipped 1 class and my math teacher always gave me problems from higher classes.
Funny how I ended up being a KHV NEET that cheats the system to collect welfare
 
blickpall

blickpall

O T L
-
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
4,626
Online
10d 15h 45m
Wouldn't that be fucking terrible tbh? At some point in every field and company, someone has to be smart enough to keep shit together. If everyone was low IQ, then there would be many many more issues in just everyday shit like buying groceries or driving.
 
I

incel

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
711
Online
4d 14h 38m
fagotonabike said:
I was officially tested in high school and had a score higher than 130. I skipped 1 class and my math teacher always gave me problems from higher classes.
Funny how I ended up being a KHV NEET that cheats the system to collect welfare

highly doubt you're over 130. that's smarter than the average college professor. 

I also skipped 2 years of math but claiming 130 is nonsense.
 
Framecel222

Framecel222

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
4,246
Online
0
blickpall said:
Wouldn't that be fucking terrible tbh? At some point in every field and company, someone has to be smart enough to keep shit together. If everyone was low IQ, then there would be many many more issues in just everyday shit like buying groceries or driving.

High-IQ societies aren't physical places, it's just an online group like this one. I agree though, if there was a literal low-IQ society it would probably burn to the ground within a week.
 
fagotonabike

fagotonabike

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
513
Online
0
incel said:
fagotonabike said:
I was officially tested in high school and had a score higher than 130. I skipped 1 class and my math teacher always gave me problems from higher classes.
Funny how I ended up being a KHV NEET that cheats the system to collect welfare
highly doubt you're over 130. that's smarter than the average college professor.
I also skipped 2 years of math but claiming 130 is nonsense.

I only stated what I got in my supervised high school test. I read that IQ changes over time anyway so I'm probably lower now than I was before, but I wouldn't be surprised if I were still close to 120.
 
I

incel

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
711
Online
4d 14h 38m
fagotonabike said:
I only stated what I got in my supervised high school test. I read that IQ changes over time anyway so I'm probably lower now than I was before, but I wouldn't be surprised if I were still close to 120.

assuming your IQ really is 120+

what do you plan on doing with your life with intelligence in the 94th percentile?
 
fagotonabike

fagotonabike

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
513
Online
0
incel said:
fagotonabike said:
I only stated what I got in my supervised high school test. I read that IQ changes over time anyway so I'm probably lower now than I was before, but I wouldn't be surprised if I were still close to 120.
assuming your IQ really is 120+
what do you plan on doing with your life with intelligence in the 94th percentile?
Continue to fake being a schizophrenic to receive over 2000 euros in benefits every months in welfare, watch anime, play vidya, shitpost and probably kill myself sooner or later. I was studying medicine (medschool in europe) for more than 2
years but dropped out, not because it was hard (i was actually a pretty decent, student) but because the thought of wageslaving 60 hours a week as an MD made me want to kill myself.
 
idkwattodowithlife

idkwattodowithlife

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
7,519
Online
0
incels.is= gentlemen with high i.q. that can't be touched.

because no one is on our level.
 
I

incel

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
711
Online
4d 14h 38m
fagotonabike said:
Continue to fake being a schizophrenic to receive over 2000 euros in benefits every months in welfare, watch anime, play vidya, shitpost and probably kill myself sooner or later. I was studying medicine (medschool in europe) for more than 2
years but dropped out, not because it was hard (i was actually a pretty decent, student) but because the thought of wageslaving 60 hours a week as an MD made me want to kill myself.

oh. of course

will your benefits from faking mental illness stop after as certain number of years? do they make sure your making progress to treating your illness?
 
weservenomsg

weservenomsg

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
394
Online
0
lots of countries are boarderline retarded
https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country
 
blickpall

blickpall

O T L
-
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
4,626
Online
10d 15h 45m
weservenomsg said:
lots of countries are boarderline retarded
https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country

IQ tests are practically a pseudoscience, and looking at them internationally is even more fallacious. Even if you translate the English IQ tests into other languages, there is no way that some tribesman in the Amazon will be able to complete an analogy that uses purely Western urban elements such as trains and conductors. As such, you have to make the IQ test culturally sensitive to the people which you are testing; at that point, the issue arises of comparing the scores from one test to another as there is no practical way to test the validity of any equivalency you try to create between them. What would need to happen is for each culturally sensitive IQ test to be stratified relative to the culture within which it is administered, meaning that the average IQ of every country would have to be 100 by definition. For a nation to be truly below 100 IQ on average, you would need to actively take people who scored less than 100 in one nation's IQ tests and deport all those people to a new country; however, if you were to re-administer an IQ test within that country in a vacuum, the average IQ would again be 100.

TL;DR This is all hogwash.
 
fagotonabike

fagotonabike

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
513
Online
0
incel said:
fagotonabike said:
Continue to fake being a schizophrenic to receive over 2000 euros in benefits every months in welfare, watch anime, play vidya, shitpost and probably kill myself sooner or later. I was studying medicine (medschool in europe) for more than 2
years but dropped out, not because it was hard (i was actually a pretty decent, student) but because the thought of wageslaving 60 hours a week as an MD made me want to kill myself.
oh. of course
will your benefits from faking mental illness stop after as certain number of years? do they make sure your making progress to treating your illness?

There is no cure for schizophrenia So they don't expect me to get any better. They used to do some checkups every 6 months or so but they have already stopped with it. I am probably a „lost cause“ in their book. I will receive welfare until I die lol.
 
modus_coperandi

modus_coperandi

Veteran
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
1,488
Online
4d 3h 32m
Ryo Hazuki said:
Basically like mensa but for people with IQs below 85.  It would be nice to be a part of a community where everyone personally understand how difficult life is with extremely low intellectual bottlenecks.  People with average IQs and higher can't comprehend what life is like with such limited cognitive abilities.  It's especially horrible when you're hyper-aware of how dumb you are and how much it limits you.

I really doubt that you would fit in there well tbh. I have worked with low IQ/borderline retarded people and they were completely incapable of comprehending complex thoughts, unable to discuss certain topics detached from their extremely subjective and narrow-minded perspective and most of them lacked any form of self awareness. Do you think that's the kind of demography you can relate to?
 
C

chadorincel

Greycel
Joined
Nov 21, 2017
Posts
11
Online
0
True high IQ people can make a lot of money and are successful.

You're not above average unless you're rich.
 
modus_coperandi

modus_coperandi

Veteran
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
1,488
Online
4d 3h 32m
chadorincel said:
True high IQ people can make a lot of money and are successful.

You're not above average unless you're rich.

Not true at all. If you have a high IQ but no social skills and some aspie behaviour there will be only a limited amount of opportunities for you to prove that you are actually employable. It's way easier to become rich and successful with an average IQ but chadlite looks like Steve Jobs than for someone with a genius IQ but incel looks and social retardation like Steve Wozniak, who would have been a basement dweller without his chaddy door opener.
 
retarded_dumbshit

retarded_dumbshit

hi
★★
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
1,153
Online
1d 5h 22m
a low IQ society wouldn't think about having a low IQ, they'd just live life. I live in a country with a (supposedly) average IQ of 88, and nobody cares about IQ. people just live their life to the best of their abilities.

IQ is not the best way to measure cognitive abilities; you being aware of your supposed stupidity should be enough to make you actually wonder whether you're actually dumb or not, compared to other people. being this self aware should be a sign that you're not that bad.

most stupid people don't care about being stupid.
 
Ryo_Hazuki

Ryo_Hazuki

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
4,614
Online
22d 1h 43m
universallyabhorred said:
Can you give me some reasons you believe you have a low iq,

1) I have extreme difficulty comprehending and following basic instructions even when I'm intensely focused and completely undistracted.
2) Simple tasks such as just typing this post take me much much longer than they should
3) When I was little my parents suspected I was a LITERAL retard
4) Poor performance academically in high school despite a lot of effort.  Barely graduated.  I honestly shouldn't have even graduated it's just that the school I went to pushed EVERYONE through.
5) I've lost jobs due to incompetence.  MINIMUM WAGE jobs.
6) I have extreme difficulty understanding people when they're talking to me.  
7) There have been tons of situations where someone was giving a set of instructions to a group of people and EVERYONE understood everything except for me.  I was either the only one who needed everything dumbed down or I was the only one who messed up whereas everyone else carried out the task flawlessly and unassisted.



universallyabhorred said:
along with the ways it negatively affects your life?

I could go on and on but above everything else is the fact that I am a 30 year old man still doing minimum wage shit.  



universallyabhorred said:
I'm surprised by this since you seem quite articulate and capable of expressing complex ideas and concepts online.

That's because online I can not only use a spell checker and look up words I don't know, but I also have essentially unlimited time to construct my thoughts into coherent sentences.  Writing even a short reply takes me much longer than you probably think it does.

But in real life (and in voice chat and on the phone) these advantages are all stripped from me.  Trust me when I say this, but in real time interactions, it's extremely obvious that my IQ is way below average.  

There have been times when I have done voice chat with people who had previously only interacted with me via text and many were shocked at how dumb I sounded compared to my writing.  Many attempted to rationalize this by assuming that was actually false to justify this disparity.  Examples include:

1) "You sound like you're distracted" when the reality was I was intensely focused and they had my undivided attention.

2) "You sound tired" or "you sound like you just woke up" when I was actually wide awake.

3) "You sound like you're drunk/high" when I was completely sober.

4) "Are you trolling?  Is this how you actually talk?!"  when I wasn't pretending to be stupid or anything like that
 
idkwattodowithlife

idkwattodowithlife

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
7,519
Online
0
Well, OP... You're not alone; I have something to admit...

I too have low IQ and I'm an absolute brainlet; as I've always struggled with school growing up, just barely past my high school exams, and failed two years worth of my uni's course...
 
Oodar

Oodar

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Posts
265
Online
0
Ryo Hazuki said:
1) I have extreme difficulty comprehending and following basic instructions even when I'm intensely focused and completely undistracted.
2) Simple tasks such as just typing this post take me much much longer than they should
3) When I was little my parents suspected I was a LITERAL retard
4) Poor performance academically in high school despite a lot of effort.  Barely graduated.  I honestly shouldn't have even graduated it's just that the school I went to pushed EVERYONE through.
5) I've lost jobs due to incompetence.  MINIMUM WAGE jobs.
6) I have extreme difficulty understanding people when they're talking to me.  
7) There have been tons of situations where someone was giving a set of instructions to a group of people and EVERYONE understood everything except for me.  I was either the only one who needed everything dumbed down or I was the only one who messed up whereas everyone else carried out the task flawlessly and unassisted.




I could go on and on but above everything else is the fact that I am a 30 year old man still doing minimum wage shit.  




That's because online I can not only use a spell checker and look up words I don't know, but I also have essentially unlimited time to construct my thoughts into coherent sentences.  Writing even a short reply takes me much longer than you probably think it does.

But in real life (and in voice chat and on the phone) these advantages are all stripped from me.  Trust me when I say this, but in real time interactions, it's extremely obvious that my IQ is way below average.  

There have been times when I have done voice chat with people who had previously only interacted with me via text and many were shocked at how dumb I sounded compared to my writing.  Many attempted to rationalize this by assuming that was actually false to justify this disparity.  Examples include:

1) "You sound like you're distracted" when the reality was I was intensely focused and they had my undivided attention.

2) "You sound tired" or "you sound like you just woke up" when I was actually wide awake.

3) "You sound like you're drunk/high" when I was completely sober.

4) "Are you trolling?  Is this how you actually talk?!"  when I wasn't pretending to be stupid or anything like that

That's interesting. I'm not very smart myself, but slightly above average. I had very low test scores in some subjects, barely completed HS, and failed college. It was like my mind repelled certain subjects and my writing was so horrible that even if I knew the subject, failed the paper.

I could never figure out why I was able to understand the basic concepts of calculus, do well in chemistry, accounting, but not understand how to disassemble a shake machine at my first job at Burger King after being shown repeatedly how to do it. I can't tie basic knots no matter how hard someone tries to teach me.

I'm the same way on a lot of your points, but take your word for it that you're low IQ.

Edit: I also think you sound smart in your writing, but know that's not a big indicator of it. I wonder what your tested IQ would be if you got a professional test from a psychologist
 
cavsinone_lbjdagoat

cavsinone_lbjdagoat

Recruit
★★★
Joined
Nov 12, 2017
Posts
235
Online
19m
universallyabhorred said:
Can you give me some reasons you believe you have a low iq, along with the ways it negatively affects your life? I'm surprised by this since you seem quite articulate and capable of expressing complex ideas and concepts online.

I too would like to hear this
 
C

CopingGymcel

poop
★★★★★
Joined
Nov 12, 2017
Posts
7,534
Online
1h 31m
Ryo Hazuki said:
Basically like mensa but for people with IQs below 85.  It would be nice to be a part of a community where everyone personally understand how difficult life is with extremely low intellectual bottlenecks.  People with average IQs and higher can't comprehend what life is like with such limited cognitive abilities.  It's especially horrible when you're hyper-aware of how dumb you are and how much it limits you.

How the fuck are you stupid? A stupid person wouldn't be as articulate as you are. Have you seen how stupid people write and the stupid shit they do?
 
TheIncelStaresBack

TheIncelStaresBack

Officer
★★★★
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
831
Online
9d 36m
retarded_dumbshit said:
a low IQ society wouldn't think about having a low IQ, they'd just live life. I live in a country with a (supposedly) average IQ of 88, and nobody cares about IQ. people just live their life to the best of their abilities.

IQ is not the best way to measure cognitive abilities; you being aware of your supposed stupidity should be enough to make you actually wonder whether you're actually dumb or not, compared to other people. being this self aware should be a sign that you're not that bad.

most stupid people don't care about being stupid.

Wow, this is me. I know how you feel man.

Sometimes I'm not sure if being ugly or a brainlet is worse.
 
TheIncelStaresBack

TheIncelStaresBack

Officer
★★★★
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
831
Online
9d 36m
Ryo Hazuki said:
1) I have extreme difficulty comprehending and following basic instructions even when I'm intensely focused and completely undistracted.
2) Simple tasks such as just typing this post take me much much longer than they should
3) When I was little my parents suspected I was a LITERAL retard
4) Poor performance academically in high school despite a lot of effort.  Barely graduated.  I honestly shouldn't have even graduated it's just that the school I went to pushed EVERYONE through.
5) I've lost jobs due to incompetence.  MINIMUM WAGE jobs.
6) I have extreme difficulty understanding people when they're talking to me.  
7) There have been tons of situations where someone was giving a set of instructions to a group of people and EVERYONE understood everything except for me.  I was either the only one who needed everything dumbed down or I was the only one who messed up whereas everyone else carried out the task flawlessly and unassisted.




I could go on and on but above everything else is the fact that I am a 30 year old man still doing minimum wage shit.  




That's because online I can not only use a spell checker and look up words I don't know, but I also have essentially unlimited time to construct my thoughts into coherent sentences.  Writing even a short reply takes me much longer than you probably think it does.

But in real life (and in voice chat and on the phone) these advantages are all stripped from me.  Trust me when I say this, but in real time interactions, it's extremely obvious that my IQ is way below average.  

There have been times when I have done voice chat with people who had previously only interacted with me via text and many were shocked at how dumb I sounded compared to my writing.  Many attempted to rationalize this by assuming that was actually false to justify this disparity.  Examples include:

1) "You sound like you're distracted" when the reality was I was intensely focused and they had my undivided attention.

2) "You sound tired" or "you sound like you just woke up" when I was actually wide awake.

3) "You sound like you're drunk/high" when I was completely sober.

4) "Are you trolling?  Is this how you actually talk?!"  when I wasn't pretending to be stupid or anything like that

[font=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]Wow, this is me. I know how you feel man.[/font]

[font=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]Sometimes I'm not sure if being ugly or a brainlet is worse.[/font]
 
Fontaine

Fontaine

Overlord
★★★★★
Joined
Nov 15, 2017
Posts
5,432
Online
18h 23m
Misanthropy and depression gave me brain damage too, but it is actually mostly reversible. Only your neuron connections are fucked up, not your actual neurons.

How did I reverse it? By getting my body to grow new connections. Long-distance running is the best way according to many studies. Don't ask why, probably some evolutionary shit. Put on trainers and go running at least 15 min every day for a week and your IQ will have very noticeably increased. I'm not bullshitting you.
 
blickpall

blickpall

O T L
-
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
4,626
Online
10d 15h 45m
Fontaine said:
Misanthropy and depression gave me brain damage too, but it is actually mostly reversible. Only your neuron connections are fucked up, not your actual neurons.

How did I reverse it? By getting my body to grow new connections. Long-distance running is the best way according to many studies. Don't ask why, probably some evolutionary shit. Put on trainers and go running at least 15 min every day for a week and your IQ will have very noticeably increased. I'm not bullshitting you.

The best way to create new connections is by constantly learning, actually. You grow neurons constantly, but they die within 2 weeks if they are not used; it is by learning new information that these neurons gain purpose and are added to the web, keeping them alive.
 
D

Deleted member 1546

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Posts
121
Online
16m
Much of sub Saharan Africa, especially Botswana is extremely low IQ. The trade off is the high rates of HIV/Aids.  
[img=931x625]https://brodoland.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/worldiqmap.jpg[/img]
 
blickpall

blickpall

O T L
-
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
4,626
Online
10d 15h 45m
Dingus_Incel said:
Much of sub Saharan Africa, especially Botswana is extremely low IQ. The trade off is the high rates of HIV/Aids.  

blickpall said:
IQ tests are practically a pseudoscience, and looking at them internationally is even more fallacious. Even if you translate the English IQ tests into other languages, there is no way that some tribesman in the Amazon will be able to complete an analogy that uses purely Western urban elements such as trains and conductors. As such, you have to make the IQ test culturally sensitive to the people which you are testing; at that point, the issue arises of comparing the scores from one test to another as there is no practical way to test the validity of any equivalency you try to create between them. What would need to happen is for each culturally sensitive IQ test to be stratified relative to the culture within which it is administered, meaning that the average IQ of every country would have to be 100 by definition. For a nation to be truly below 100 IQ on average, you would need to actively take people who scored less than 100 in one nation's IQ tests and deport all those people to a new country; however, if you were to re-administer an IQ test within that country in a vacuum, the average IQ would again be 100.

TL;DR This is all hogwash.
 
D

Deleted member 1546

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Posts
121
Online
16m
[quote pid='40679' dateline='1511252370']
IQ tests are practically a pseudoscience, and looking at them internationally is even more fallacious. Even if you translate the English IQ tests into other languages, there is no way that some tribesman in the Amazon will be able to complete an analogy that uses purely Western urban elements such as trains and conductors. As such, you have to make the IQ test culturally sensitive to the people which you are testing; at that point, the issue arises of comparing the scores from one test to another as there is no practical way to test the validity of any equivalency you try to create between them. What would need to happen is for each culturally sensitive IQ test to be stratified relative to the culture within which it is administered, meaning that the average IQ of every country would have to be 100 by definition. For a nation to be truly below 100 IQ on average, you would need to actively take people who scored less than 100 in one nation's IQ tests and deport all those people to a new country; however, if you were to re-administer an IQ test within that country in a vacuum, the average IQ would again be 100.
TL;DR This is all hogwash.
[/quote]

They aren't a pseudoscience. They're probably one of the most reliable things psychologists have actually created and have been around for about 1 century now. They are far too well correlated with life outcomes like longevity, income, family stability, sexual deviance, and crime. 
They aren't culturally biased either. You don't need to translate them at all because the majority of questions are puzzles and matching shapes and looking for patterns. Much of an IQ test is based on the ability to rotate objects in ones mind or seek out patterns. If they were culturally biased in favor of "whites" then East Asians and European Jews shouldn't outperform white people. In fact white people shouldn't outperform other white people in the Balkans or the Mediterranean. The tests are meant to be as universal as possible, I have yet to see anyone point to specific examples of modern how IQ tests are culturally biased. I have only heard allegations. 

Every nations already has an IQ of 100. Each test has its score normalized to that that by default. If a nation is shown to have an average IQ of 85, thats the score relative to the white mean. Globally, all the international IQ tests average 85-90, assuming relative to the white European mean. 
Ask yourself this. If IQ is a pseudoscience, would you rather have your child be able score a 70 on an IQ test, or a 130?
 
D

Deleted member 1546

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Posts
121
Online
16m
blickpall said:
Dingus_Incel said:
Much of sub Saharan Africa, especially Botswana is extremely low IQ. The trade off is the high rates of HIV/Aids.
blickpall said:
IQ tests are practically a pseudoscience, and looking at them internationally is even more fallacious. Even if you translate the English IQ tests into other languages, there is no way that some tribesman in the Amazon will be able to complete an analogy that uses purely Western urban elements such as trains and conductors. As such, you have to make the IQ test culturally sensitive to the people which you are testing; at that point, the issue arises of comparing the scores from one test to another as there is no practical way to test the validity of any equivalency you try to create between them. What would need to happen is for each culturally sensitive IQ test to be stratified relative to the culture within which it is administered, meaning that the average IQ of every country would have to be 100 by definition. For a nation to be truly below 100 IQ on average, you would need to actively take people who scored less than 100 in one nation's IQ tests and deport all those people to a new country; however, if you were to re-administer an IQ test within that country in a vacuum, the average IQ would again be 100.
TL;DR This is all hogwash.

They aren't a pseudoscience. They're probably one of the most reliable things psychologists have actually created and have been around for about 1 century now. They are far too well correlated with life outcomes like longevity, income, family stability, sexual deviance, and crime. 

They aren't culturally biased either. You don't need to translate them at all because the majority of questions are puzzles and matching shapes and looking for patterns. Much of an IQ test is based on the ability to rotate objects in ones mind or seek out patterns. If they were culturally biased in favor of "whites" then East Asians and European Jews shouldn't outperform white people. In fact white people shouldn't outperform other white people in the Balkans or the Mediterranean. The tests are meant to be as universal as possible, I have yet to see anyone point to specific examples of modern how IQ tests are culturally biased. I have only heard allegations. 

Every nations already has an IQ of 100. Each test has its score normalized to that that by default. If a nation is shown to have an average IQ of 85, thats the score relative to the white mean. Globally, all the international IQ tests average 85-90, assuming relative to the white European mean. 

Ask yourself this. If IQ is a pseudoscience, would you rather have your child be able score a 70 on an IQ test, or a 130?


modus_coperandi said:
chadorincel said:
True high IQ people can make a lot of money and are successful.
You're not above average unless you're rich.
Not true at all. If you have a high IQ but no social skills and some aspie behaviour there will be only a limited amount of opportunities for you to prove that you are actually employable. It's way easier to become rich and successful with an average IQ but chadlite looks like Steve Jobs than for someone with a genius IQ but incel looks and social retardation like Steve Wozniak, who would have been a basement dweller without his chaddy door opener.

These days its a little different. Around the turn of the 20th century ll someone like that could do is probably tach math. Nowadays you could probably work in Silicon Valley, or on Wall street. People with social autism can do a lot more these days in tech and finance.
 
anon_899

anon_899

Ragie Wagie
★★
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
645
Online
1h 22m
I'm low IQ. I'm stuck in a basic programming exercise for weeks and while I studied for hours a day, I didn't had any progress.

Fuck my life man, not only ugly but also dumb as fuck.
 
Deleted member 60

Deleted member 60

.
-
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
16,974
Online
2d 17h 17m
rickvanderhammer said:
dementia is necrosis, depression/isolation wouldn't directly cause it

rickvanderhammer said:
nobody really understands the root root cause of dementia, or most brain related afflictions for that matter.


uhhhh.gif
 
blickpall

blickpall

O T L
-
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
4,626
Online
10d 15h 45m
Dingus_Incel said:
They aren't a pseudoscience. They're probably one of the most reliable things psychologists have actually created and have been around for about 1 century now. They are far too well correlated with life outcomes like longevity, income, family stability, sexual deviance, and crime.

They aren't culturally biased either. You don't need to translate them at all because the majority of questions are puzzles and matching shapes and looking for patterns. Much of an IQ test is based on the ability to rotate objects in ones mind or seek out patterns. If they were culturally biased in favor of "whites" then East Asians and European Jews shouldn't outperform white people. In fact white people shouldn't outperform other white people in the Balkans or the Mediterranean. The tests are meant to be as universal as possible, I have yet to see anyone point to specific examples of modern how IQ tests are culturally biased. I have only heard allegations.

Every nations already has an IQ of 100. Each test has its score normalized to that that by default. If a nation is shown to have an average IQ of 85, thats the score relative to the white mean. Globally, all the international IQ tests average 85-90, assuming relative to the white European mean.

Ask yourself this. If IQ is a pseudoscience, would you rather have your child be able score a 70 on an IQ test, or a 130?

They absolutely are a pseudoscience because there isn't even a consensus on what intelligence is, so how can one create an objective measuring tool for it? You can't. What you cited - the "complete the pattern" and rotating objects mentally are testing two aspects of intelligence (specifically logical/mathematical and spatial) and ignore many others. One of the more prominent theories of why this is inadequate is Gardener's Multiple Intelligences: there are nine of them, according to him. Others have gone as far as 13 if I recall correctly. In order to accurately measure all of them you would have to complete a wide arrange of tasks, not all of which are culturally intersectional (like the example I listed with the Amazonian chief and the public transportation analogy, which measures a different type of intelligence - logic/mathematical in combination with linguistic). Yet others believe that there are only three types of intelligence, and your proposed format doesn't satisfy even those. What you're testing with the metrics you described can predict whether someone would be well-suited for an education in engineering or physics, but not if they would make a good philosopher, or writer, or historian, or many other professions, each of which can contain what would be considered very "intelligent" people. By your definition of intelligence, a blind person couldn't be intelligent, because you are basing intelligence and its metrics purely on visual recognition. That is pure hogwash.

As such, a truly universal IQ test would measure all of the various types of intelligence, which includes culturally-sensitive issues. Even if such a test were constructed, the demands of certain cultures have made it such that different peoples need to be better at different things in order to succeed. Of course an Amazonian warchief will suck at things that first-world white capitalists designed, just as they would suck on a test of hunting patterns, tracking, and plant identification that is designed by the Amazonian warchief. Trying to use the IQ tests designed to be taken by Americans and Europeans to measure the intelligence of other cultures makes the already questionable practice of measuring "intelligence" and grading it on a normalized curve even more suspect; comparing to the "European mean" is scientifically dishonest. Even if the Amazonian warchief scored highly on the metrics you proposed, that doesn't help make him more successful in his immediate surroundings and thus is a completely pointless metric to his life and abilities.

Remember that correlation is not causation. There are confounding variables which are far more likely to contribute to the metrics you listed - for example, people with higher IQ scores are likely to come from wealthier families. Also, using the argument that they've been around for 100 years is no argument at all. Flat-Earthers have been around for thousands of years, doesn't make their bullshit any more valid. Reliability is not validity, anyone who has taken any statistics ever will be able to tell you this.

But if you don't believe me, take it from the experts who in the past few decades have been discovering the culturally sensitive nature of IQ tests and thus their lack of validity as a comparative tool:

"On the one hand, mindless application of the same tests across cultures is desired by no one."

"Some cultural differences in intelligence play out on a global scale. In "The Geography of Thought" (Free Press, 2003), Richard Nisbett, PhD, co-director of the Culture and Cognition Program at the University of Michigan, argues that East Asian and Western cultures have developed cognitive styles that differ in fundamental ways, including in how intelligence is understood."

"practical and academic intelligence can develop independently or even in conflict with each other, and that the values of a culture may shape the direction in which a child develops."

"They also agree with studies in a number of countries, both industrialized and nonindustrialized, that suggest that people who are unable to solve complex problems in the abstract can often solve them when they are presented in a familiar context."

"Are "culture-free" or "culture-fair" intelligence tests possible, or is success on a test inevitably influenced by familiarity with the culture in which the test was developed?

Moreover, is it desirable--or even possible--to adapt Western tests to non-Western cultures, or should new tests be designed from the ground up to measure skills and abilities valued by the culture in which they are to be used?

Many psychologists believe that the idea that a test can be completely absent of cultural bias--a recurrent hope of test developers in the 20th century--is contradicted by the weight of the evidence. Raven's Progressive Matrices, for example, is one of several nonverbal intelligence tests that were originally advertised as "culture free," but are now recognized as culturally loaded.

Patricia Greenfield, PhD, of the University of California, Los Angeles, argues that nonverbal intelligence tests are based on cultural constructs, such as the matrix, that are ubiquitous in some cultures but almost nonexistent in others. In societies where formal schooling is common, she says, students gain an early familiarity with organizing items into rows and columns, which gives them an advantage over test-takers in cultures where formal schooling is rare.

Similarly, says Greenfield, media technologies like television, film and video games give test-takers from cultures where those technologies are widespread an advantage on visual tests, while test-takers from cultures where the language-based media are more common have advantages on verbal tests."

http://www.apa.org/monitor/feb03/intelligence.aspx

"Sternberg, in contrast, has taken a more direct approach to changing the practice of testing. His Sternberg Triarchic Abilities Test (STAT) is a battery of multiple-choice questions that tap into the three independent aspects of intelligence--analytic, practical and creative--proposed in his triarchic theory.

Recently, Sternberg and his collaborators from around the United States completed the first phase of a College Board-sponsored Rainbow Project to put the triarchic theory into practice. The goal of the project was to enhance prediction of college success and increase equity among ethnic groups in college admissions. About 800 college students took the STAT along with performance-based measures of creativity and practical intelligence.

Sternberg and his collaborators found that triarchic measures predicted a significant portion of the variance in college grade point average (GPA), even after SAT scores and high school GPA had been accounted for."

"Should we even be using intelligence tests in the first place?

In certain situations where intelligence tests are currently being used, the consensus answer appears to be "no." A recent report of the President's Commission on Excellence in Special Education (PCESE), for example, suggests that the use of intelligence tests to diagnose learning disabilities should be discontinued.

For decades, learning disabilities have been diagnosed using the "IQ-achievement discrepancy model," according to which children whose achievement scores are a standard deviation or more below their IQ scores are identified as learning disabled.

The problem with that model, says Patti Harrison, PhD, a professor of school psychology at the University of Alabama, is that the discrepancy doesn't tell you anything about what kind of intervention might help the child learn. Furthermore, the child's actual behavior in the classroom and at home is often a better indicator of a child's ability than an abstract intelligence test, so children might get educational services that are more appropriate to their needs if IQ tests were discouraged, she says.

Even staunch supporters of intelligence testing, such as Naglieri and the Kaufmans, believe that the IQ-achievement discrepancy model is flawed."

http://www.apa.org/monitor/feb03/intelligent.aspx

As to your final question, it is ludicrous in nature. Of course every parent wants their child to be a 200+ IQ-on-every-metric genius Chad who gets straight A's and is an all-star athlete with the world for their taking. However, realistically speaking, your question is flawed on an even more fundamental level: you never specified the IQ test that is taken (much like your misleading infographic failed in the same department). If my child doesn't score well on visual pattern recognition and spatial rotation (the latter of which has been proven to be more favorable to male test-takers, what if my child is female?), then I don't care - as long as they have some other skills that they are driven to improve. If my daughter is a brilliant writer, charismatic, and has a good social life with many connections, then I'm happy. Fuck, if my daughter is happy, then I'm happy. I don't care if she can't spin a lego block mentally. This all presuming I'd ever have children, which was another fallacious element of your leading question but I'm willing to entertain the hypothetical.

TL;DR: Research says you're wrong.


fukmylyf said:

lmfao
 
rickvanderhammer

rickvanderhammer

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Posts
859
Online
0
fukmylyf said:

nobody can conclusively say what causes Alzheimer's, and nobody will know for another century at least, retard
 
ordinaryotaku

ordinaryotaku

Rotting collegecel. Women hate me for existing.
★★★★★
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
13,278
Online
95d 10h 10m
I used to have an extremely high IQ, to the point where I could've been accepted into Mensa.

Anything below 90 and anything above 130 sucks, an IQ of 91-129 is ideal.
 
blickpall

blickpall

O T L
-
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
4,626
Online
10d 15h 45m
rickvanderhammer said:
nobody can conclusively say what causes Alzheimer's, and nobody will know for another century at least, retard

Saying, "nobody will know for another century at least," is truly retarded. 100 years ago we had just learned how to fly, what kind of medical expert are you to say what won't be discovered in the next 100 years? We may not know exactly what causes the ONSET of Alzheimer's, but we know plenty about the disease itself:

  • Plaques are found between the dying cells in the brain - from the build-up of a protein called beta-amyloid (you may hear the term "amyloid plaques").
  • The tangles are within the brain neurons - from a disintegration of another protein, called tau.
    The abnormal protein clumps, inclusions, in the brain tissue are always present with the disease, but there could be another underlying process that is actually causing the Alzheimer's - scientists are not yet sure.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/159442.php

Interactive guide:
https://www.alz.org/braintour/alzheimers_changes.asp
 
rickvanderhammer

rickvanderhammer

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Posts
859
Online
0
blickpall said:
Saying, "nobody will know for another century at least," is truly retarded. 100 years ago we had just learned how to fly, what kind of medical expert are you to say what won't be discovered in the next 100 years? We may not know exactly what causes the ONSET of Alzheimer's, but we know plenty about the disease itself:


https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/159442.php

Interactive guide:
https://www.alz.org/braintour/alzheimers_changes.asp

lmao progress with these things isn't linear dumb ass, i bet you also think we will have flying cars and be colonizing other solar systems
 
ObitoCel

ObitoCel

Recruit
★★
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Posts
185
Online
1d 2h 40m
Being a Low IQ-cel absolutely sucks. You can't do good in school, so money will never come your way. You can't maintain friendships because you can't start intellectual conversations.

My only cope is that I get neetbux from the government, win the lottery or rope.
 
blickpall

blickpall

O T L
-
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
4,626
Online
10d 15h 45m
rickvanderhammer said:
lmao progress with these things isn't linear dumb ass, i bet you also think we will have flying cars and be colonizing other solar systems

You're right, advancements in medicine and technology have been exponential, which means we stand to accomplish exponentially more in the next 100 years than the previous.
 

Similar threads

yez
Replies
53
Views
2K
SlayerSlayer
SlayerSlayer
HateCurry
Replies
11
Views
254
HateCurry
HateCurry
NowItsSlimeTime
Replies
19
Views
330
bigantennaemay1
bigantennaemay1
shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape7
shape8
Top