Are IQ tests tilted in favor of Intuitive types - Page 13

Are IQ tests tilted in favor of Intuitive types

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ... 3 11 12 13 14 15 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 148
Thank Tree68Thanks

This is a discussion on Are IQ tests tilted in favor of Intuitive types within the Education & Career Talk forums, part of the Topics of Interest category; Originally Posted by Endologic Ti or Te? People only have 1 T, which is either i or e. One cannot ...

  1. #121

    Quote Originally Posted by Endologic View Post
    Ti or Te? People only have 1 T, which is either i or e. One cannot have both at the same time, and one cannot switch.
    NC Research Triangle Chapter

  2. #122

    Quote Originally Posted by ae1905 View Post
    I'm talking about mathematicians who work in academia...they're smarter than the average mathematician
    I did also refer to mathematicians who are active in the academic field of mathematics at some university.

  3. #123

    Quote Originally Posted by Scoobyscoob View Post
    That's an empirical fact. Plus I said most not all. If you're going to cite logic then at least be logical.



    I work in a profession where the average IQ of professionals is supposedly 130. For most aspects of life having a high IQ is meaningless on its own. Someone with an IQ of 150 who doesn't want to apply themselves or to take any risks likely won't become successful by society's standards. Achieving material success mostly requires a lot of work, ambition and in some cases serendipitous luck. Having a high IQ only plays a modest factor when it comes to achieving material success.
    My point is about self-made millionaires vs those who inherited wealth.I agree with millionaires in U.S[especially ones who have invested in Science and technology like Elon musk]It depends on your definition of most.Self-made millionaires might have an IQ around 117-118 or even higher.If you look at countries like India,pakistan,Sri Lanka...Most millionaires(politicians and government officials) have earned by not investing into Science and technology but through corruption and scams(might not even cross IQ 95).And moreover,Success is a relative term.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    PersonalityCafe.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #124

    Quote Originally Posted by Madman View Post
    I did also refer to mathematicians who are active in the academic field of mathematics at some university.
    you don't need an iq of 170 to be a math prof, but that wasn't my point...my point was that you need an iq higher than the typical doctor or lawyer has (an iq around 120)

  6. #125

    Quote Originally Posted by Sangam swadik View Post
    It's crack.

    5-8 is impossible.

  7. #126

    Quote Originally Posted by Scoobyscoob View Post
    Did you look up the average IQ for each of the subjects you were talking about? They're all about the same. You citing a general estimation based on education to try to prove anything is just grasping at straws now.
    yeah, I did...for example:

    Quote Originally Posted by http://www.religjournal.com/articles/article_view.php?id=82
    Intelligence and Religious and Political Differences Among Members of the U.S. Academic EliteAuthor: Edward Dutton (University of Oulu) and Richard Lynn (University of Ulster)
    Download/Printing is only available to registered users. Please login.
    ABSTRACT
    Many studies have found inverse correlations between intelligence and religiosity, intelligence and political conservatism, and intelligence and political extremism. Other studies have found that academics tend to be significantly less religious and more liberal than the general population. In this article, we argue that interdisciplinary differences in religiosity and political perspective among academics are predicted by interdisciplinary differences in intelligence between academics. Once personality factors correlating with religiosity have been substantially controlled for, physicists, who have higher average intelligence, are less religious than are social scientists, who have lower average intelligence. Physical scientists are also less politically extreme than are social scientists.
    gre scores of grad students in different disciplines also supports my thesis:



    and the idea physicists have higher iqs than other academics is also corrorbarated by the correlation between iq and mbti type that's been discussed here and elsewhere...NTs, and INTPs and INTJs, in particular, are overrepresented amongst academic physicists (and mathematicians)

    if you were a strong Ti user you would've connected these dots...but you are a weak Te user whose knowledge is fragmented and unconnected and is, therefore, riddled with internal inconsistencies, like your concurrent beliefs that academic physicists have no higher iqs than the average doctor or lawyer and INTXs have higher iqs than any other types (you thanked me for posting those correlations in this thread earlier)

    this, btw, is one reason why Te users can appear to be quite dense..trump is an excellent example of this intellectual incoherence...I believe this is one the reason why the dumbest people are often weak Te users, why so many people can fall for fake news at the same time they more or less successfully manage life's mundane routines

    Yet IQ scores among the professions don't support what you're saying. Look, no one is saying top research professors aren't an intelligent group. Most top research professors of science are indeed very intelligent. It's simply that your comparison isn't equivalent. You're comparing a relatively small elite group of researchers from around the world to an average professional. Compare the best from each field and you'll find the differences are negligible. No one at the highest levels of achievement are engaging in the intellectual equivalent of a pissing contest. That's not only counter-productive but kind of dumb.
    no...even when you compare the average physics professor, they still have higher iqs than the average doctor or lawyer...and when you compare the elite, physicists still have an advantage...the fact they have a higher average iq means it is more likely there are more physicists (as a percentage of the group) with the highest iqs; it also means the highest iqs of physicists probably surpass the highest iqs of other disciplines...physicists are also more likely to be thought of as "geniuses" than doctors or lawyers...most people can name einstein and newton as examples of genius...how many can name or would even think of a doctor or lawyer in that vein?...both einstein and newton were widely hailed as the "smartest men in the world"...when was the last time a doctor or lawyer was called a "genius", much less the "smartest man in the world"?...that notoriety is typically reserved for scientists...and rightly so...science is concerned with creating knowledge...medicine and especially law are primarly concerned with applying knowledge (medical researchers being an exception)....it takes a lot more smarts and creativity to create something new than to apply somethng that already exists...the best physicists stand head and shoulders above the best doctors and lawyers

    Just like how most academic physicists and mathematicians perform any research at all, let alone original research.
    you are really showing your ignorance, now...research universities expect their faculty to conduct research...it's how junior faculty earn tenure and how tenured faculty earn promotions and professional reputations...and research doesn't have to be "original" to be important...in fact, most research is concerned with the mundane task of applying the prevailing paradigm to new problems...discovering how quantum mechanics and evolution theory apply to the full range of problems in physics and biology is just as important as discovering quantum mechanics and evolution theory themselves...one discovers new intellecutal fields the other fully explores and habits...only by working together in his way does science fully lay claim to new intellectual domains

    I actually have but that's really beside the point. You have an unrealistic view of academic research. Not every professor is a star researcher and most don't conduct any research at all, which you don't seem to be understanding. So compare apples to apples. If you want to compare elite researchers in science then compare them to the best and brightest among any given profession. They'll all have a global audience and you're not going to find any bickering over who's the most intelligent of them all. That honestly just sounds silly writing that out. lol
    see above

    The most competitive aspect of academia is gaining a tenure seat as a professor. Research itself tends to be very collaborative, which was the opposite of what you were originally claiming. Although I would agree that collaboration is great as that leads to a greater pooling of resources toward a problem.
    LOL....where did I "claim" anything about "collaboration"?!...it was you who first said "collaboration is a sign of unimportant, uncompetitive research"...now, you're contradicting yourself and admitting it's not only the modus operandus of many researchers today but it helps to produce more fruitful results!

    My point is, that it's the academic equivalent of a lawyer owning a small practice or a doctor being a family physician. It's not glamorous but very much important.
    again, no...the physicist works on problems that concern his colleagues around the world...he also, more than likely, has a higher iq than the family doctor or lawyer
    Last edited by ae1905; 04-18-2017 at 01:08 PM.

  8. #127

    if you were a strong Ti user you would've connected these dots...but you are a weak Te user whose knowledge is fragmented and unconnected and, therefore, is riddled with many internal inconsistencies, like your concurrent beliefs that academic physicists have no higher iqs than the average doctor or lawyer and INTXs have higher iqs than any other types (you thanked me for posting those correlations in this thread earlier)

    this, btw, is one reason why Te users can appear to be quite dense..trump is an excellent example of this intellectual incoherence...I believe this is one the reason why the dumbest people are typically weak Te users
    Speaking of connecting the dots, just look at that poorly veiled insult, bolded above. Wasn't this sort of thing just warned against in this thread? How much longer is this user going to get away with "typism", trolling, and insulting others?

  9. #128

    Quote Originally Posted by Sangam swadik View Post
    My point is about self-made millionaires vs those who inherited wealth.I agree with millionaires in U.S[especially ones who have invested in Science and technology like Elon musk]It depends on your definition of most.Self-made millionaires might have an IQ around 117-118 or even higher.If you look at countries like India,pakistan,Sri Lanka...Most millionaires(politicians and government officials) have earned by not investing into Science and technology but through corruption and scams(might not even cross IQ 95).And moreover,Success is a relative term.
    The 120 IQ range was in reference to a study on self-made millionaires. I was referring to the US since the person I was speaking to and I both live in the US.

    Quote Originally Posted by ae1905 View Post
    yeah, I did...for example:

    gre scores of grad students in different disciplines also supports my thesis:

    Sad really. How hard you're trying to prove an incorrect point when the numbers doesn't support your claims. Somehow I think all of those genius academic physicists and mathematicians won't be too bothered.

    and the idea physicists have higher iqs than other academics is also corrorbarated by the correlation between iq and mbti type that's been discussed here and elsewhere...NTs, and INTPs and INTJs, in particular, are overrepresented amongst academic physicists (and mathematicians)
    Obviously that was the typist sentiment you were going for when referring to academic physicists and mathematicians.

    if you were a strong Ti user you would've connected these dots...but you are a weak Te user whose knowledge is fragmented and unconnected and, therefore, is riddled with many internal inconsistencies, like your concurrent beliefs that academic physicists have no higher iqs than the average doctor or lawyer and INTXs have higher iqs than any other types (you thanked me for posting those correlations in this thread earlier)
    Hm, not going to put up with your insulting attitude when I've been nothing but polite this entire time.

    this, btw, is one reason why Te users can appear to be quite dense..trump is an excellent example of this intellectual incoherence...I believe this is one the reason why the dumbest people are often weak Te users, why so many people can fall for fake news at the same time they more or less successfully manage life's mundane routines
    Trump is an ESTP. Your rants aren't even coherent anymore.

  10. #129

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiver View Post
    Speaking of connecting the dots, just look at that poorly veiled insult, bolded above. Wasn't this sort of thing just warned against in this thread? How much longer is this user going to get away with "typism", trolling, and insulting others?
    Seriously. What a poor display of judgment.

  11. #130

    Quote Originally Posted by ae1905 View Post
    gre scores have been shown to be strongly correlated to iq...this link includes a conversion table between the two measures:

    http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/greiq.aspx

    physics grad students had an avg combined gre score of 1275 (740 math + 535 verbal) which translates to an iq of 133...math grad students had the next highest score of about 1235 for an iq of 130...using biology grad students as a proxy for medical students, they had a combined gre of 1125 which converts to an iq of 121, close to the 125 value reported in the study I cited above...as another check on the table, the average gre score for all subjects is about 610 math and 490 verbal, or a combined 1100 points; this translates to an iq of 119...given that not all grad students study for phds and knowing masters students have somewhat lower iqs, 119 is consistent with the reported iq for all phd students of 125

    for the record, I wrote the gre many years ago and got a combined score of about 1550 which gives me an iq of 155...not bad

    ;)
    Last edited by ae1905; 04-18-2017 at 03:42 PM. Reason: math students had 2nd highest score, not philosophy


     
Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ... 3 11 12 13 14 15 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Noob here. Taken a lot of tests, could be any intuitive type, please help
    By galaxysword in forum What's my personality type?
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-16-2017, 09:35 PM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-21-2015, 06:25 AM
  3. Do Sensing Types Think That All Intuitive Types Need to Be Spazzy???
    By sierranoelpratt in forum Myers Briggs Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-04-2015, 03:08 PM
  4. [INTP] Fellow intuitive types
    By QuestofOrigin in forum INTP Forum - The Thinkers
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-09-2013, 09:59 AM
  5. [INFP] What Other Types Did You Get On Tests?
    By ForsakenMe in forum INFP Forum - The Idealists
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 11-28-2010, 04:31 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:32 PM.
Information provided on the site is meant to complement and not replace any advice or information from a health professional.
© 2014 PersonalityCafe
 

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0