IQ 148 here. Found 1 girl smarter than me and we lived together for a couple years. She worked as a biogeneticist and we got along pretty well. Great conversations. Didn't work out though in the long term. She wanted kids, I don't.
>>657938459 I'd like to. But how would you define smarter? Like a GF who knows everything better than you, or a GF who is better at solving logical problems, or a GF who has a better memory, or just a GF with a higher IQ score than you, which doesn't necessarily have to mean anything in daily situations.
>>657938459 My partner and I are both engineers in the same discipline (materials science) with slightly different specializations. I enjoy that we are both good at different things and our intellectual strengths complement one another. I've dated guys smarter than me and I've dated guys dumber than me.
To be honest, I think what matters most is comparable work ethic and drive. You don't want someone who you think drags you down, and you don't want someone who indirectly pressures you into pushing yourself so hard you can't enjoy life.
ya'll think too much, unless you're getting into the same career field too they're going to have experiences that you don't have regardless of how smart you are. sure you're great at being an engineer or what ever all of 4chan is but i bet they can bag my groceries better or bake me a better cake haha
She could have a high IQ, and you'd still be able to manipulate her. Manipulation is skilled-based, and I think if she has a very high IQ she is not as socially calibrated and therefore easier to Jedimindtrick.
>>657938459 I dated a girl that was a lot more book smart than me. >graduated hs at 15 >already has her Drs in psych >other misc degrees Lasted like 4 months, most things were great but she was a feminist and had a problem with pretty much anything id say. She was vanilla in bed but I turned her into a freak. Broke up with me after finding out about my past. She always made everyone know she was the smartest in the room, she would try to break you down mentally every chance she got. Was a total cunt but I think I loved her.
>>657941182 >playing chess against someone who is absolutely awful is pretty hilarious though No it is not. It stops being hilarious after 90 seconds or so. I prefer to play chess for a while. My Elo is about 1900.
>>657941151 Lol no, Just a lot of bullshit. I'm 6'5 230 at 21 so when I played football there were a lot of girls. A lot. I told her it was a lot and she said she didn't care. Then she started like digging shit up and talking to my friends. Needless to say she was disgusted at my number and other misc things I had done. But I really don't know the real reason we even broke up shit was going great. Like I was going to propose then we got distant so on so forth until we just stopped talking.(apparently wanting her to reply to my texts on a daily basis was hard for her)
>>657942236 Well we knew each other pretty well. And yes there were bad days where someone would lose all the games, but overall we progressed together and no one really got an advantage over the other with was nice.
>>657938459 You mean "a girl with an IQ higher than yours" not a girl smarter than you.
Bear in mind that women find comfort in a man being better than them in almost every capacity so that ultimately they aren't burdened with many responsibilities, so it often doesn't come down to whether or not you'd date a girl with a higher IQ than you but rather if she'd date a man with an IQ lower than her own. In a rather awful way, it's a lot like how women dislike dating men shorter than themselves in general.
Not that any of it matters if you're both just in it to fuck for a while.
>>657939383 Yes. >>657939692 liar. Using 50cent words doesn't prove higher intellect. It proves higher autism, since in general we don't communicate that way in daily life. The word "phallus", for example, which seems to be the basis to substantiate your claim to higher intellect, is not used in normal conversation. It would be used when describing the male genitalia of say, insects, between biologists. But you would be 100 times more likely to tell your biologist friend "I have a large penis" than you would say "Phallus". In fact, the word phallus is much more often used as an adjective to describe things as have a "penis-like" shape Note the example: That pencil is rather phallic.
You see, language is used for the purpose of communication, not complication. Throwing around big words to beat your chest and show off your intellect actually shows how dim you really are, since you lack ability to communicate effectively. But let me put it into martian for you so you can have fun puzzling it out:
Eloquacious speech is not so much the art of using euphemisms that complicate ordinary speech, nor requires a thesaurus. It is the proper use of words, in context, that best relay the meaning you wish to convey. Levy your words against your audience and you will elaborate upon your meaning much more effectively. By brow-beating your intended recipients, you only alienate them.
So how does your higher potential affect your social life?
I'll start >school was hel because of me thinking too much >older friends ftw with 14 >graduate from school >did okay for skipping literally years of school >work in shipayment job >bored by everyone since they are toopredictable >meet othet underdogs >no more proving my iq needed >still socially awkward but pretty alright
Intelligence is a problematic concept. There is one girl who is about at the same percentile of achievement (as measured by quality and quantity of publications) but she is 2 years older than me. I'm 29 and she's 31. I'd hit it because she appears smart but I'm worried about what she'l look like in just a few years.
Girls who don't choose the easy life do have it tough. They need to compete with men while being more anxious and they need to invest a lot more in their looks.
There's more to intelligence than IQ, for example it's very possible that someone could be a skilled mechanic and not have a high IQ, but it doesn't make sense to say that they are not intelligent because they can perform a complicated, important task that the vast majority of the population can't.
>>657944083 >that someone could be a skilled mechanic and not have a high IQ, then he is a mechanic, not intelligent >>657944083 >they can perform a complicated, important task a monkey can perform a complicated, important task if trained. the point about intelligence and IQ is that high IQ people can do certain things, no one else can do, even given all the training in the world and all the time in the world. This is why top level mathematicians and physicists are all high IQ folks.
>>657943779 People far smarter than you would disagree. There are, according to sources, multiple intelligences. Labeled under that very name (you can google it). There are supposedly 9 now. I'm not sure I completely agree with each of them being an intelligence, but the very very brief of the theory is this:
By addressing a person's individual intelligence you can more effectively communicate with and teach them things if you can tie the lesson into their specific intelligence. That is to say, that someone who is very physically adept learns best through physical activity. If you could then, say, tie math into a physical activity (think sports games and keeping scores) then you will be more effective in teaching that person math.
I also find it funny that you said : > ain't "intelligence" because "ain't" wasn't even a word until recent history when the intellectuals gave into the general autism of the nation and said "fine, we'll give the uneducated their word". It might now be recognized as a word, but its still not recognized as used by intelligent people.
>>657944457 IQ is a meaningless number unless the alleged skill is leveraged towards success. I'd rather be low IQ, with good money than high and unemployed. That being said, high and unemployed is a good way to waste a couple of years.
>>657939383 Yep. The worst thing is when you meet a hot girl, maybe she's even fun, but then she just opens her mouth, and ugh.... dumb as fuck. I mean, part of me wishes I could date a dumb girl, as long as she were super nice, sweet, fun, etc., but I just don't think I could do it. No matter how hot she were.
>>657944738 That's an absolutely meaningless statement. Not all Nobel prize winners have been tested for IQ. There is no way to prove a person's IQ who hasn't been tested. I bet there are high performing, Nobel prize winning scientists who are hovering about the 110 IQ point, who succeed because they leverage their skills and learning, not because of 'raw talent.'
>>657945224 >Not all Nobel prize winners have been tested for IQ. >There is no way to prove a person's IQ who hasn't been tested. You have absolutely no idea what IQ is, right? And you have absolutely no idea how you can actually estimate someone's IQ without testing him or her, just by watching him lecture or in a conversation? Do you even know what an IQ test tests?
>>657944738 Except of course an idiot like for instance Feynman.
Also notice how you try to justify IQ tests by some other measure? That is because all IQ-scores do is correlate. Specifically they correlate with future success in education and they have been adjusted to do exactly that. Note that they have not been adapted to test for 'genius'. The people making them are not smart enough to devise such a test. All IQ scores above 2.5 to 3 sigma simply indicate 'high probability of academic success', which is useless since this ofc is obvious to any teacher of such a kid. already.
>>657945298 and how many of those scientists either gave stock to IQ, or even got tested? If they didn't get tested, prove to me that they have a high IQ. Richard Feynman himself had an IQ of 125, and he's one of the most important physicists of the 20th century.
>>657945224 >Nobel prize winning scientists who are hovering about the 110 IQ point, who succeed because they leverage their skills and learning, In literature or peace, ok, but not in physics or economics or chemistry. Just impossible, sorry to say. If you do not understand basic physics (because your IQ is average), then you can't excel in the field. You could work 24 hours a day, it won't help.
>>657945224 to add to that, Einstein...without argument said to be the smartest man in history to date, was initially thought to be of very low IQ and failed in mathematics in school.
IQ is a meaningless number. As we learn more and more about the brain, even modern psychologists don't rely on it much anymore. Its becoming more of a novelty than an actual tool. Its been proven to be culturally biased as well, meaning that people in Northernmost America are the average range, southern America tend to score about 5 points lower, Asians tend to score about 5 points higher.
>>657945718 >Richard Feynman himself had an IQ of 125, and he's one of the most important physicists of the 20th century. Please, what? Do you even know what he worked in? He has done shit that is cutting edge. Nothing that is important for anything.
>>657946030 >was initially thought to be of very low IQ and failed in mathematics in school. Because he was relatively stupid with an IQ of 125 to 130. He was pretty thick when talking to people and needed to write everything down to visualize. People hated to work with him, because he was so slow following. After the "basic physics breakthroughs" he stumbled upon when he was young, he was doing shit nothing for 40 years.
>>657945298 >Gödel or a Schrödinger or a Heisenberg or a Fermi or a Yukawa or a Mössbauer So, assuming this is true, which I'm too lazy to check, it's 6 supposedly high IQ people among literally hundreds of Nobel prize winners. You sound more and more like a retard who is clinging as it's IQ like a sailor as a piece of wood in a shipwreck.
Anyway, pic related was given to me when I was 13, I found it interesting and not that complicated.
Also, I work in computer science now, and I'm doing fairly well thank you.
>>657946351 >Feynman's calculations were crucial to Manhattan, 95% of the Manhattan project was an engineering challenge. The physics of it wasn't much of a challenge. And Feynman was just a junior assistant at Manhattan.
>>657946039 when I grew up, the saying "ain't" ain't a word was used whenever somebody said it and they were generally teased for being stupid. Then sometime around in the 90's I think it was, it was announced in the news that due to large popular use, it was being added to the dictionary. Talk about complete cringe moment.
Anyone who engages in Einstein bashing to support 'IQ' as a valid measure of anything must have some deep-rooted issues. That is some special pleading right there. You sound like neckbeard who only has his high IQ in online tests to support his ego. Protip nigger: no-one cares.
>>657947275 I don't care how. Unless you can prove it, you're a limp dick little teenager lying on 4chan. Not even worth my time interacting. I'm smarter than the average American, but I can't prove this. I can prove my dick is bigger, though.
>>657946281 actually, he was posthumously diagnosed with Asperger syndrome. Your assessment on working with him is correct, but he wasn't exactly slow in the classical sense. When he worked alone he was actually quite brilliant.
A quick synopsis of what happens to someone with Asperger is like taking a computer and then making it run multiple tasks to the point that it slows down to inefficiency. If the computer can operate on a single task, it handles it better than any other system. An Asperger patient suffers similarly from the stimulation in the environment. When able to be in a closed environment they function quite well. When there is lots of stimulation, they have a lot of difficulty focusing. But this is not a discussion thread on Aspergers.
Actually, Einstein wrote his initial theories, revolutionized physics and did a great many things afterwards. Including helping to create the atomic bomb, which was his greatest regret in life. He sat around for 40 years after he retired, but he didn't do "nothing". He continued to discuss and advise throughout his life. And yes, he was a rather "eccentric" personality.
>>657946879 >At that age I was technical studying physics in university Sure why not.
So you got into university a bit earlier than me. Good for you! But what was it for ? Easy question: What did you accomplish that I didn't ? Harder question: What did you accomplish that I can't ? Tick question: Can you achieve what I have ? Unverifiable question: Will you ever be able to understand what I understand about computers and logic ?
Unless you can answer all this questions, I repeat: what's the point of having a high IQ and going to university at 13 ?
>but then again, your probably just a redneck living a fantasy, so whatever.
>>657946705 I live in Germany and it got worse here. The new Geberation of pretend to be intellectuals is using language no longer as a form to express their thougts but to follow somemoral code. A dialect is okay but it is possible to rape the ability to form words. I was lazy but I still educated myself out of boredom and I somehow manage to outsmart most of the people I meet. Only when it comes to music, math and physics Ican only sit and silently follow a conversation since I prefered to work instead getiing a higher education.
>>657938916 IQ tests are extremely subjective. they essentially tet for one type of intelligence. it would make more sense if it put more of a focus on critical thinking but i suppose thats difficult to test. lazy ass test makers
>>657947830 >actually, he was posthumously diagnosed with Asperger syndrome. Asperger's is not a disease, so can't be "diagnosed". Asperger himself just labelled it a special form of mind and character. It is not autism, which is an actual disease which can get "diagnosed".
>>657947573 >It's not like he came up with the photoelectric effect and specific relativity out of thin air anyway. >It's not like he came up with the photoelectric effect and specific relativity >It's not like he came up with
Um...its not like YOU came up with anything your whole life. And you call the theory of relativity, being a "Got Lucky" moment? Are you fucking serious? You gotta be trollin. The Theory of Relativity revolutionized physics and nearly all of science. Its given the world a better understanding of the universe at large. Saying this is like saying "Well, after the apple fell, Newton didn't really contribute anything worthwhile to science". Einstein may have been something like a one-hit wonder, but he was productive his whole life. How many normal physicists are ever heard from on a daily basis? By what standard are you measuring Einstein as a stupid and lucky?
>>657938459 I actually currently dating a girl who is smarter than me on paper. She is better at Algebra, Geometry, or maths in general. But I am better at manipulating people. It's all about balance in relationships and it is because she is so good at maths and I'm a bit more of a smooth talker that we keep about three steps ahead in any challenge.
>>657949897 >By what standard are you measuring Einstein as a stupid and lucky? Facts. Look at his work and the circumstances that they were made. Read his papers published in 1905 and the work he has done subsequently. There is a reason for all of this. He was lucky like winning the lottery in 1905, and it showed later on.
>>657939259 Why only 9/10 ? Why don't you have a 10/10 gf like all of us on the internet ?
The funny thing that i've learned from such thread is that if you'd think that people with high IQ would have hobbies like reading, or theatre, or things like that you are wrong. The most common hobby for people with IQ over 130 is posting on 4chan about how smart they are.
And oddly, it's a shared hobby with people who have lots of money, a perfect body, or a huge dick.
It feel good to share the place with such gifted people...
>>657938459 GUYSSS GUYSSS I HAVE A IQ OF 190 GUYS 190!!!!!! GUYS I NEEED ATTENTION GUYS PLEASE LOOK AT ME I AM VERY REALLY SMART LOOK GUYS IQ 190 IM NOT EVEN KIDDING PLEASE GUYS RESPOND PLZ IM SO SMART I WOULD DATE A GIRL WHICH IS SMARTER THAN ME BUT IM SMARTEST HOOMAN ON EARTH LOLOLOL GUYS 190 IQ NO KIDDING PLZ RESPOND
>>657950212 circumlocutious would imply the need to get around a topic, whereas eloquacious is the art of beautiful speech. Since I was responding to a post where the person was using words bigger than his mouth could handle in an attempt to sound intelligent, I was explaining how to do so. Not explaining how to circumvent the topic, but expound upon it beautifully.
I need a girl who is smart enough to do anything I can. And I'm what we call "exceptionally gifted" or "genius" intellectually. So I need a woman who is brilliant, really. I don't care if the IQ is higher as long as she isn't a know it all (at least no more than I am.) I don't know if a girl exists like that, who is also attractive enough to strike my fancy. I might be left to a life of manipulating hoes instead. For now I can keep coming on dumb bitches' faces
>>657950971 SATs are NOT IQ tests. Holy fuck you don't even understand basic things. Of course there is a correlation between the 2, it sure as shit doesn't make them equivalent. And more to the point, NEITHER OF THEM ARE ACTUALLY ADEQUATE MEASURES OF FUNCTIONAL INTELLIGENCE. They measure your ability to take a fucking test.
The irony is that anybody who cites their IQ score to prove how smart they are has just confirmed how fucking desperately average they actually are.
>>657950844 Eloquacious - Created by marrying "eloquent" and "loquacious." Specifically meaning: "the ability to create brand new words, that sound as if they've always, truly existed, and mean exactly what you think they would."
Circumlocutious - roundabout and unnecessarily wordy; "had a preference for circumlocutious (or circumlocutory) rather than forthright expression"
My good sir, what words did he make up? None, he was just being unnecessarily wordy in an attempt to sound smarter than he really is.
>>657938459 >>> > Anonymous 12/17/15(Thu)14:24:42 No.657951239▶ >>>657950486 I would marry a girl who was smarter than I. And have babies with her. But you have posted pretty girls. It's hard to find pretty and smart in the same girl.
>>657951776 Not really. Pretty and smart is somewhat common. Say you've got a 1/3 chance of being smart, 1/3 to be pretty and 1/3 to have a likeable personality. So, 1/9 girls would be either smart and pretty, pretty and likeable or smart and likeable. But what you're not finding is smart likeable and pretty, which would be 1/27. I realise people don't have a 1/3 chance of being smart or whatever but that's basically the reason for all the let-down girls out there
>>657951697 Dear sir, again, I fear you misunderstand me. As you eloquently put it. The original poster I responded to said >IQ 204 here, the thought of sticking my phallus into a woman never comes to mind but in any case I froze sperm to carry on a legacy
and I was only explaining to this poster that the use of the word "phallus" is no proof of intellect, since although proper use grammatically, has no business in daily speech.
>>657951239 High IQ is a risk factor for having shit social skills. Shit social skills is a risk factor for being some sort of fag on /b/. I never buy all this shit about 6'5" with a 9" dick and knockout wife, but the percentage of high iq's should be a lot higher than the general population
>>657938459 Yep, kinda want a woman to challenge me intellectually, otherwise the relationship is one sided small talk, that is dull, I'm above average intelligence, currently going for STEM associates degree. I hate to sound like a hipster faggot, but a girl who's not afraid to be herself and if she will not conform to other people's ideologies is perfect Tl;dr Yes, smarter than me and steadfast in her values
>>657952492 this guy understands. this is why some niggers are still known to do well on SAT and ACT tests. IQ is completely different than learning whatever amerifag professors decided you should know.
>>657952441 Iq of 204? So you're telling me that when you were 8 years that you were literally smarter (like, would have done better on the math section of the SAT) than the average 16 year old? Because that's what that means. And I doubt it
>>657953401 >>657952002 here, but it proves nothing >>657952266 I don't get the newspaper nor do I buy it. My Chinese is not that good. In fact, most of the Chinese I "write" is via pinyin with my phone from text messages. I can read far more than I can write.
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5 If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.