# How much do you rate your intelligence?



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

I just said 6. It seems like I'm smarter than most I encounter in day to day life but seeing how much smarter a lot of people are out there, I'd say I'm slightly above average. Most people I know think I'm insanely smart but most of the time I don't feel that way.


----------



## auburnstar (Mar 22, 2013)

That's interesting to see what intelligence is to people. 

Does anyone (asides me) consider that we're all geniuses at the basis but it simply needs "unlocking" as it were and finding the Element?


----------



## Aquamarine (Jul 24, 2011)

I would say 6 or 7. 6.5 would be more accurate.


----------



## Chaerephon (Apr 28, 2013)

About a 1. I have too much I don't know, and I don't know what I don't know.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

NameUser said:


> About a 1. I have too much I don't know, and I don't know what I don't know.


The socratic route. Kind of.


----------



## Chaerephon (Apr 28, 2013)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> The socratic route. Kind of.


Socrates once looked around Greece and saw people acting if they were zombies following money, power and fame. That is basically when he decided the unexamined life is not one worth living. You could say I have had a similar revelation.

edit: So far, 36/54 are greater than or equal to 8 and 43/54 are greater than or equal to 7. Yet only 11/54 are less than 7 and 7/54 are below 5 (the average intelligence.) Seems a bit skewed lmao.


----------



## GingerRoot (May 10, 2013)

It depends on the kind of intelligence. I didn't have the patience or attention span for succeeding in school. I do think I'm strong with life knowledge though and on the things I like. I'll say 6.


----------



## Northcrest (Sep 21, 2012)

I would say a 5. I've been told since I was kid that I was smart, but I never really felt smart. I just had a bigger drive and would do my work. Now I don't care as much and the things I learn tend to be things that aren't booksmart or really street smart. They are just stuff I guess.


----------



## Fear Itself (Feb 20, 2013)

3. I'm smart in certain fields, but overall I'd say there is a lot more that I am oblivious to.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

probably around the top 25% of the population. which is, to be honest, where I'd like to be. I know some NTs that are wayyy smarter than me and they don't even know how to function cuz they can't stop thinking or get out of their damn heads lol


----------



## auburnstar (Mar 22, 2013)

bump


----------



## Faux (May 31, 2012)

I'm torn between 5-6. My weaknesses _at least _make up for my strengths.


----------



## FlightsOfFancy (Dec 30, 2012)

Eh prob a 4-6, depending on the day.


----------



## FlightsOfFancy (Dec 30, 2012)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> probably around the top 25% of the population. which is, to be honest, where I'd like to be. I know some NTs that are wayyy smarter than me and they don't even know how to function cuz they can't stop thinking or get out of their damn heads lol


Really? From the NFs I've known, I'd say they overthink A LOT. It's just the orientation is different. It's not so much "Wow, I wonder what that equation means" or "How can I get this job done with X amount" but rather "Did I mean that?" "Am I a bad person?".

I would say overthinking is an N thing in general.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

FlightsOfFancy said:


> Really? From the NFs I've known, I'd say they overthink A LOT. It's just the orientation is different. It's not so much "Wow, I wonder what that equation means" or "How can I get this job done with X amount" but rather "Did I mean that?" "Am I a bad person?".
> I would say overthinking is an N thing in general.


nah, that's just superego NFs lol


----------



## I am me (Mar 4, 2013)

everyone has some form of intelligence so everyone is a 10


----------



## Moss Icon (Mar 29, 2011)

This is a website dedicated to MBTI psychological theory, thus anyone who is here (and not a pure troll who picked a random website) has some interest in human behaviour, self-discovery, and psychological theory. That in and of itself indicates an intelligence level of at least 6, I'd say.

I consider myself pretty intelligent, but unremarkably so. I went 7, like most people here.


----------



## DAPHNE XO (Jan 16, 2012)

I would choose minus a million. That seems right for me because I only count to potato.


----------



## GlobalUniverse5 (May 19, 2013)

What is intelligence?


----------



## auburnstar (Mar 22, 2013)

GlobalUniverse5 said:


> What is intelligence?


Excellent question. Well, first of all, dispelling the myths of "academia" and all that BS is a good start. Everyone has different forms of intelligence and uses them differently, and everyone has a unique fingerprint. What surprises me by this is that I read The Element and wanted to see if this came true that the majority scored themselves 7-8, and strangely, it did. But effectively, everyone should be a 10, since everyone is a genius. The problem is a lot of people don't realise it.


----------



## TheSunWay (Jun 8, 2013)

I think I'm a 7, I've been told to have an ok high intelligence, and I get okay scores in most tests. although I don't really trust online tests(I got a score on 130-140 in an English linguistic test, compared to the fact that English aren't my native language and I only get B's in my essays, it's problably quiet unlikely)


----------



## Number Six (Mar 4, 2013)

I'm as smart as I need to be. Isn't everyone?


----------



## Flatlander (Feb 25, 2012)

Number Six said:


> I'm as smart as I need to be. Isn't everyone?


I suspect you rated yours 6.


----------



## Number Six (Mar 4, 2013)

Flatlander said:


> I suspect you rated yours 6.




mhmhmhmhm


----------



## tangosthenes (Oct 29, 2011)

Number Six said:


> I'm as smart as I need to be. Isn't everyone?


Depends on what need means.


For ze question, I just said 7. I'm smart but no more than that. I'm not lightning fast proficient in everything I need to do, although I would say I'm more questing and self-aware than most. Really intelligent in big picture ways, dumb as shit here on earth.


----------



## Slider (Nov 17, 2009)

10


----------



## tangosthenes (Oct 29, 2011)

chloevalentine said:


> Intelligence is hard to rate yourself isn't it, even the stupidest of people don't see themselves as stupid do they


This is more than likely a kind of informal survey OP is using to compare subjective results to what results are already out there for the populace, be it for specific types or just people in general.


----------



## Number Six (Mar 4, 2013)

tangosthenes said:


> Depends on what need means.


Semantics...needs change from person to person, as does intelligence. When one desires something with enough focus, they will exercise everything at their disposal to achieve that which they need. First and foremost, their mind. Everyone has the potential, not everyone has the inclination, because they don't need it.


----------



## The Frozen One (Oct 10, 2012)

I'm constantly learning and don't believe that intelligence is objectively ratable on ones self. So I'd say zero.


----------



## tangosthenes (Oct 29, 2011)

Number Six said:


> Semantics...needs change from person to person, as does intelligence. When one desires something with enough focus, they will exercise everything at their disposal to achieve that which they need. First and foremost, their mind. Everyone has the potential, not everyone has the inclination, because they don't need it.


Nah that's not true. Plenty of people lose. And it's not exactly semantics, because you have to think of when people's needs are directly opposed, when someone might have a "need" that is not something traditionally recognized as such, like a need to travel 30 light-years, or a need to kill a man protected by an army when they only have their hands and feet and no training... etc.

I just disagree that "objective" intelligence is solely a function of willpower.. maybe if your needs are automatically conformed to what you can do, but then that's not realistic.


----------



## Number Six (Mar 4, 2013)

tangosthenes said:


> Nah that's not true.


If you want to go round in circles, I'll lead. I'm smart enough to know your opinion doesn't matter anymore than mine.




> Plenty of people lose


Mmm. Plenty of people 'give up' - losing is for people that expect to win. Winners are people who expect nothing. Try telling someone who just ran an Olympic marathon with only a few months training that 'they lost'. They'll probably not even hear you. Achievement is in the eye of the beholder.



> And it's not exactly semantics, because you have to think of when people's needs are directly opposed,


Needs are always opposed in some respect. It doesn't invalidate the intelligent required to transcend that resistance. It may make it seem obsolete...but that just seems like intellectual arrogance. I'm very guilty of it. I don't appreciate the intelligence a young mother needs to support her new baby, even if I'm aware that it's there, for example. 



> when someone might have a "need" that is not something traditionally recognized as such, like a need to travel 30 light-years,


This is stupidity - not intelligence. Expecting to advance at a certain pace is foolish, because you'll lose heart when you don't live up to your imaginary standards - Paving the way so that others may follow and continue your legacy, is intelligence. Isn't that what Einstein did? And Tesla, and Da Vinci and all those brainiacs who just did stuff without expecting to actually 'achieve'.

"People of accomplishment rarely sit back and let things happen to them. They go out in the world and happen to things." Leo Da Vinci, apparently
 


> or a need to kill a man protected by an army when they only have their hands and feet and no training... etc.


I do love hypothetical scenarios. Do you know that the most well protected men are often the most paranoid, and that paranoia is both predictable and exploitable in that you can trust him to make protection a priority, and thus infiltrate that priority with little more than knowledge, conviction and patience? After that, all you need is a plan of execution.

"Whatever one man can think of to defend himself, another can think of a way around" Jacque Fresco


----------



## tangosthenes (Oct 29, 2011)

Number Six said:


> If you want to go round in circles, I'll lead. I'm smart enough to know your opinion doesn't matter anymore than mine.


I'm not arguing contingency, and I don't feel like being trolled today.

Your words are loaded with bad logic...


----------



## Number Six (Mar 4, 2013)

tangosthenes said:


> Your words are loaded with bad logic...


That's the beauty of words. They can tell people different things depending on their ability to listen. If you want concrete data, get out your math book. I'm sorry you felt compelled to edit. I thought we'd reached an impasse. Lead on, brother.


----------



## enmity (Jul 14, 2012)

I said it, so it must be correct.


----------



## tangosthenes (Oct 29, 2011)

Number Six said:


> That's the beauty of words. They can tell people different things depending on their ability to listen. If you want concrete data, get out your math book. I'm sorry you felt compelled to edit. I thought we'd reached an impasse. Lead on, brother.


There is never an impasse, only misunderstanding. Comprehension is available to all, with unlimited time and interest on their hands 

Anyway, it's just hard for me to dissect your statements without an essay. But I will write such an essay if you promise to listen with open ears and an open heart(no INFP can resist :wink.



Number Six said:


> If you want to go round in circles, I'll lead. I'm smart enough to know your opinion doesn't matter anymore than mine.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My opinion has no ground for being stronger than yours unless we agree on a method to go about forming an opinion- I have chosen consistent logic and principles I have derived over my life.

You argue negation when you refer to achievement being in the eye of the beholder. It is not a far stretch to say that people fail to meet their goals. Now, I believe what you are kind of getting at throughout your post is that everybody is automatically a winner, they just need to reach deep enough within themselves to realize such. I agree. I agree. But this has zero to do with intelligence.

But, until the people recognize they even HAVE this capability, clear standards need to be brought in the meantime. People do not automatically have the self-knowledge a wiser person has- it is fairer and easier to establish clearly felt and seen grounds for people to establish confidence and success with. In a way, actively talk about and persuade others to see the intrapersonal(introverted) side of life- but you cannot assume they will all fall in line. Thus, a need is established in giving these people a way to measure their confidence.

I generally agree with what you've said, otherwise, and the previous paragraph of mine is besides the point. But the statement that "intelligence changes from person to person" and "everyone has potential, if not the inclination" is where I disagree. Intelligence is bred and raised, among other multitudes of factors, but not solely forced in a moment of need(this can be compared to a burst whereas overall intelligence is more accurately represented by the mean level).

My problem was your logical inconsistency- it was confusing. But I think I established where your actual opinion lies, stripped of inconsequential tangents.


----------



## Chaerephon (Apr 28, 2013)

Flatlander said:


> 10 for teh lulz.
> 
> Really I don't think you can rate intelligence like this and expect to get a meaningful result outside of a whirlwind of subjective thinking.


I chose 1 for the same reason lmao.:kitteh:

Edit: Although on the most objective scale I can imagine, I am actually a 1. Who knows on a relative scale.


----------



## Number Six (Mar 4, 2013)

tangosthenes said:


> People do not automatically have the self-knowledge a wiser person has


I don't disagree, but I think this gives people too little credit. Self knowledge is innate, from my experience. Some spend more time uncovering it than others; if you feel this means one is smarter than another that is understandable, I think it's just a matter of time prioritization. They say one man's genius is a layman's idiot. I agree - the most agile minds can sometimes find the most mundane tasks intellectually mind boggling.

I feel nekkid without my inconsequential tangents :shocked:


----------



## tangosthenes (Oct 29, 2011)

Number Six said:


> I don't disagree, but I think this gives people too little credit. Self knowledge is innate, from my experience. Some spend more time uncovering it than others; if you feel this means one is smarter than another that is understandable, I think it's just a matter of time prioritization. They say one man's genius is a layman's idiot. I agree - the most agile minds can sometimes find the most mundane tasks intellectually mind boggling.
> 
> I feel nekkid without my inconsequential tangents :shocked:


But that's my point! Not everyone lies at those extremes. Most people do not think of themselves as extremely practically intellingent/dumb or extremelly abstractly intelligent/dumb.


----------



## personalityp (Jun 14, 2013)

This poll could be remade so that
10 = much above average (1/1000)
.
.
5 = Average
.
.
1 = Much below average 1/1000

This way we could perhaps reduce the roof effect?


----------



## tangosthenes (Oct 29, 2011)

tangosthenes said:


> But that's my point! Not everyone lies at those extremes. Most people do not think of themselves as extremely practically intellingent/dumb or extremelly abstractly intelligent/dumb.


Good lord my perpetual tiredness as of late is showing off... typos galore. I can't even take myself seriously with that shit.


----------

