<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sorry, you don&#8217;t have a 200 IQ</title>
	<atom:link href="http://chile.galangal.org/sorry-you-dont-have-a-200-iq/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://chile.galangal.org/sorry-you-dont-have-a-200-iq/</link>
	<description>a website by liza daly</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 02:25:53 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Daniel</title>
		<link>http://chile.galangal.org/sorry-you-dont-have-a-200-iq/comment-page-1/#comment-24268</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 18:16:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chile.galangal.org/?p=245#comment-24268</guid>
		<description>I love it when people continually spout misconceptions about what IQ really is. Usually it comes with people talking about &quot;oh well I had a high IQ and high test scores on the SAT&quot; implying a correlation or causation that simply is not there.

You won&#039;t be able to tell someone&#039;s IQ by talking with them, viewing their interactions, viewing test scores or achievements. The best I&#039;ve been able to understand IQ is it&#039;s more akin to horsepower. IQ means you can get from thought A to thought B quicker, or you might be able to juggle more abstract concepts, but doesn&#039;t imply you ever even made it to thought B.

Frankly I love IQ because it&#039;s an instant sign when someone touts their IQ as a badge of honor they&#039;re probably not the brightest or at least very arrogant. I like to laugh inside when people quote me their IQ&#039;s.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I love it when people continually spout misconceptions about what IQ really is. Usually it comes with people talking about &#8220;oh well I had a high IQ and high test scores on the SAT&#8221; implying a correlation or causation that simply is not there.</p>
<p>You won&#8217;t be able to tell someone&#8217;s IQ by talking with them, viewing their interactions, viewing test scores or achievements. The best I&#8217;ve been able to understand IQ is it&#8217;s more akin to horsepower. IQ means you can get from thought A to thought B quicker, or you might be able to juggle more abstract concepts, but doesn&#8217;t imply you ever even made it to thought B.</p>
<p>Frankly I love IQ because it&#8217;s an instant sign when someone touts their IQ as a badge of honor they&#8217;re probably not the brightest or at least very arrogant. I like to laugh inside when people quote me their IQ&#8217;s.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brady Yoon</title>
		<link>http://chile.galangal.org/sorry-you-dont-have-a-200-iq/comment-page-1/#comment-19917</link>
		<dc:creator>Brady Yoon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 06:54:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chile.galangal.org/?p=245#comment-19917</guid>
		<description>Oh yeah...one more thing.  When women say that they look for confidence, sense of humor, that is the outward manifestation of intelligence.  Our world is set up so that intelligent people will find life &quot;easier,&quot; and hence life is a confidence builder (don&#039;t believe this?  everything in life requires thinking and reasoning at some level, it is because you&#039;re intelligent that you don&#039;t realize how much intelligence permeates every aspect of our world, as those with traumatic brain injury or stroke, Alzheimer&#039;s realize).  Sense of humor comes from seeing connections between seemingly unrelated things and connecting them in a new (and funny) way.  Why has intelligence developed?  Natural selection, yes.  But also sexual selection.

Intelligence was of huge survival value, but it has evolved to such a staggering extent, and that was probably due to sexual selection as well.

Do you know why women say that they don&#039;t like nerds?  It&#039;s because they are TRYING to sound smart.  Nerds are people who act according to a stereotypical &quot;smart&quot; person.  It&#039;s just like the person who tries to be funny but isn&#039;t.  The funny person is like the smart person and the &quot;nerd&quot; is like the person who is trying to be funny.  Trust me, intelligent people are well-adjusted, confident, are fun to be around.

I&#039;m not venting here.  I&#039;m trying to say that there are so many stereotypes of intelligent people that apply to the people who try to mimic intelligence rather than actually intelligent people.  Smart people don&#039;t try to come across as smart just like funny people don&#039;t try to be funny.  Mimicking intelligence is obviously a very valuable evolutionary strategy, simply because it works.  Think about what differentiates us from animals, what is our defining trait - intelligence.  People keep talking about emotional intelligence, social intelligence, analytical intelligence, etc.  Those things are PERSONALITY.  And I&#039;m not sure of this, but I&#039;ll make a big bet that &quot;personality&quot; arises as variations in the cerebral cortex, the center of intelligence.  Do animals have rich personalities?  No.

Intelligence is like knowing how to talk, or being able to see clearly in full color and depth perception, or being able to walk bipedally.  It&#039;s such a defining characteristic of Homo sapiens that it&#039;s easy to dismiss and downplay.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh yeah&#8230;one more thing.  When women say that they look for confidence, sense of humor, that is the outward manifestation of intelligence.  Our world is set up so that intelligent people will find life &#8220;easier,&#8221; and hence life is a confidence builder (don&#8217;t believe this?  everything in life requires thinking and reasoning at some level, it is because you&#8217;re intelligent that you don&#8217;t realize how much intelligence permeates every aspect of our world, as those with traumatic brain injury or stroke, Alzheimer&#8217;s realize).  Sense of humor comes from seeing connections between seemingly unrelated things and connecting them in a new (and funny) way.  Why has intelligence developed?  Natural selection, yes.  But also sexual selection.</p>
<p>Intelligence was of huge survival value, but it has evolved to such a staggering extent, and that was probably due to sexual selection as well.</p>
<p>Do you know why women say that they don&#8217;t like nerds?  It&#8217;s because they are TRYING to sound smart.  Nerds are people who act according to a stereotypical &#8220;smart&#8221; person.  It&#8217;s just like the person who tries to be funny but isn&#8217;t.  The funny person is like the smart person and the &#8220;nerd&#8221; is like the person who is trying to be funny.  Trust me, intelligent people are well-adjusted, confident, are fun to be around.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not venting here.  I&#8217;m trying to say that there are so many stereotypes of intelligent people that apply to the people who try to mimic intelligence rather than actually intelligent people.  Smart people don&#8217;t try to come across as smart just like funny people don&#8217;t try to be funny.  Mimicking intelligence is obviously a very valuable evolutionary strategy, simply because it works.  Think about what differentiates us from animals, what is our defining trait &#8211; intelligence.  People keep talking about emotional intelligence, social intelligence, analytical intelligence, etc.  Those things are PERSONALITY.  And I&#8217;m not sure of this, but I&#8217;ll make a big bet that &#8220;personality&#8221; arises as variations in the cerebral cortex, the center of intelligence.  Do animals have rich personalities?  No.</p>
<p>Intelligence is like knowing how to talk, or being able to see clearly in full color and depth perception, or being able to walk bipedally.  It&#8217;s such a defining characteristic of Homo sapiens that it&#8217;s easy to dismiss and downplay.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brady Yoon</title>
		<link>http://chile.galangal.org/sorry-you-dont-have-a-200-iq/comment-page-1/#comment-19915</link>
		<dc:creator>Brady Yoon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 06:32:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chile.galangal.org/?p=245#comment-19915</guid>
		<description>Yeah, a 200 IQ is really unreasonable.  Pretty much, if someone says that they have an IQ of 145, and they really do, you won&#039;t be doubting them.  An IQ of 145 is like a height of 6&#039;7&quot;.  Everyone will soon find out that you&#039;re really intelligent.  So I guess I&#039;d revise your statement and say that if someone quotes a 145+ IQ and you look at him with a raised eyebrow, you&#039;re probably right.

I personally have an IQ that is high enough that I hit the ceiling at virtually every standardized test (SAT, GRE for example).  To me, the idea that these tests are actually &quot;standardized&quot; is hard to conceive because I&#039;ve always scored at 99th percentile, and I&#039;ve become very used to seeing that 99...I&#039;d say that my IQ is 155.

From personal experience, this is how you can tell if someone has an IQ of 155: Sense of humor, both depth and breadth of knowledge.  You&#039;ll be able to talk to him about anything and he&#039;ll hold an intelligent conversation and hold up his end of the argument.  I hate it when people say that intelligent people are bad conversationalists.  The difference between smart people and not so smart people in conversation: the smart person will recognize when the other person has said something intelligent, and that he needs to reassess his beliefs or rethink his position.  The not-intelligent person will not respond to your statement, but will simply act as if &quot;not listening.&quot;

A huge complaint that people have is people &quot;who don&#039;t listen.&quot;  Listening = understanding.  Understanding means intelligence.

If someone tells you that smart people are bad communicators, that person is not smart, and he&#039;s not a good communicator because he&#039;s spewing BS.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, a 200 IQ is really unreasonable.  Pretty much, if someone says that they have an IQ of 145, and they really do, you won&#8217;t be doubting them.  An IQ of 145 is like a height of 6&#8242;7&#8243;.  Everyone will soon find out that you&#8217;re really intelligent.  So I guess I&#8217;d revise your statement and say that if someone quotes a 145+ IQ and you look at him with a raised eyebrow, you&#8217;re probably right.</p>
<p>I personally have an IQ that is high enough that I hit the ceiling at virtually every standardized test (SAT, GRE for example).  To me, the idea that these tests are actually &#8220;standardized&#8221; is hard to conceive because I&#8217;ve always scored at 99th percentile, and I&#8217;ve become very used to seeing that 99&#8230;I&#8217;d say that my IQ is 155.</p>
<p>From personal experience, this is how you can tell if someone has an IQ of 155: Sense of humor, both depth and breadth of knowledge.  You&#8217;ll be able to talk to him about anything and he&#8217;ll hold an intelligent conversation and hold up his end of the argument.  I hate it when people say that intelligent people are bad conversationalists.  The difference between smart people and not so smart people in conversation: the smart person will recognize when the other person has said something intelligent, and that he needs to reassess his beliefs or rethink his position.  The not-intelligent person will not respond to your statement, but will simply act as if &#8220;not listening.&#8221;</p>
<p>A huge complaint that people have is people &#8220;who don&#8217;t listen.&#8221;  Listening = understanding.  Understanding means intelligence.</p>
<p>If someone tells you that smart people are bad communicators, that person is not smart, and he&#8217;s not a good communicator because he&#8217;s spewing BS.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TERRY FRASER</title>
		<link>http://chile.galangal.org/sorry-you-dont-have-a-200-iq/comment-page-1/#comment-16873</link>
		<dc:creator>TERRY FRASER</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 00:37:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chile.galangal.org/?p=245#comment-16873</guid>
		<description>The newer tests only go to 135+</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The newer tests only go to 135+</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lucian Smith</title>
		<link>http://chile.galangal.org/sorry-you-dont-have-a-200-iq/comment-page-1/#comment-15719</link>
		<dc:creator>Lucian Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2009 19:14:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chile.galangal.org/?p=245#comment-15719</guid>
		<description>I thought I remembered that there were two competing methods of measuring IQ, one of which had a much higher standard deviation, so if you scored 115 on one, the same percentile would rank a 140 or something on the other.  I assume the more generous scale was created to make people feel better about themselves.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought I remembered that there were two competing methods of measuring IQ, one of which had a much higher standard deviation, so if you scored 115 on one, the same percentile would rank a 140 or something on the other.  I assume the more generous scale was created to make people feel better about themselves.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: liza</title>
		<link>http://chile.galangal.org/sorry-you-dont-have-a-200-iq/comment-page-1/#comment-15710</link>
		<dc:creator>liza</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jan 2009 22:50:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chile.galangal.org/?p=245#comment-15710</guid>
		<description>Sure, the Stanford-Binet is a real test and it would&#039;ve been administered by an actual trained psychologist.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sure, the Stanford-Binet is a real test and it would&#8217;ve been administered by an actual trained psychologist.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam Cadre</title>
		<link>http://chile.galangal.org/sorry-you-dont-have-a-200-iq/comment-page-1/#comment-15706</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam Cadre</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jan 2009 13:13:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chile.galangal.org/?p=245#comment-15706</guid>
		<description>Oddly enough, while after nearly 35 years on this planet I still don&#039;t know my frickin&#039; blood type, I actually did have my IQ tested as a child by a psychologist in Bala Cynwyd.  &quot;Stanford Binet,&quot; these records say.  Is that any good?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oddly enough, while after nearly 35 years on this planet I still don&#8217;t know my frickin&#8217; blood type, I actually did have my IQ tested as a child by a psychologist in Bala Cynwyd.  &#8220;Stanford Binet,&#8221; these records say.  Is that any good?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J. Robinson Wheeler</title>
		<link>http://chile.galangal.org/sorry-you-dont-have-a-200-iq/comment-page-1/#comment-15705</link>
		<dc:creator>J. Robinson Wheeler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jan 2009 12:36:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chile.galangal.org/?p=245#comment-15705</guid>
		<description>Excellent. Thanks for posting this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent. Thanks for posting this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
