°F Vs °C
People are proud of being ignorant in the us
Thanks a lot polish German Dutch scientist that came up with Fahrenheit
I hate this insult… if you are going to tell someone they are dumb just tell them they are dumb.
Why do we have to dance around with fancy concepts like temperature and IQ to throw an insult?
What even is temperature?? Little electrons vibrating for some reason and at a macro scale can be sensed as some energy level? I don’t even know but you know who else vibrates? Your mom.
Yeah that’s right, we don’t need science to insult people here.
It’s a shame that European-room-temperature IQs are so prominently visible in the states.
More than just Europe. 99 % of the world’s countries use Celcius.
I use Rankine to confuse everyone.
In that case room temperature IQ means you’re by far the smartest person who’s ever lived.
Esoteric! I dig it
if you ain’t american you’re european that’s just how it is.
If you’re not American you’re “world”.
The only reason that is is because of racism nej. By only seeing the world as the places that are filled w white people while I don’t think u mean to at all and its not your fault its the rich peoples fault but the language creates a world view where black and Asian and brown people aren’t people only white people are.
Africa and asia are just parts of europe
Arguably Eurasia is actually a thing.
Well there is the third world, that’s why it’s called “third” :p
I don’t even know the Fahrenheit room temperature
Few do
72
For anybody wondering: that’s 70-75 degrees Fahrenheit.
No one was wondering. In the USA we have intelligence quotients that are high enough to convert, even at room temp. Its surprising I know, but room temperature I.Q.'s don’t operate on metric here. It takes a little more effort you see… Very smart.
It seems halfway through your attempted burn you realized I was speaking to non-USians…
I would think a room temperature IQ in °C would mean virtually unable to function, much less take an IQ test.
Edit: looked it up and an IQ below 50 means you probably can’t ever live independently, and below 25 means you’re pretty much a vegetable.
Which s perfect for an insult. Insult is better when it’s caricature like.
So you are saying you have a future in goverment.
looked it up and an IQ below 50 means you probably can’t ever live independently, and below 25 means you’re pretty much a vegetable.
Nah man, not even close…
Besides, at the extremes if either side of the scale the overall number becomes pretty meaningless because the individual scores are going to have high variance.
I did an internship working with people with learning disabilities from “passable” to me having to change adult diapers for clients who were completely nonverbal and thought it was game.
I don’t know where you looked it up, but you’re way off.
But for this:
much less take an IQ test.
A normal test only covers 3 standard deviations. So if you’re over 145 or below 65, on a normal you take a specialized test if you want to actually know. There’s just not enough outliers to make the normal test able to cover everyone
I sometimes wonder what the kids iq would be… He is 12 physically but I would put at 3 max mentally. Not saying anything negative but being honest.
He can use the bathroom but can’t put his underwear on. He knocks on the door till someone comes put his underwear back on.
Eating a bowl of cereal is 50/50 if he can do it himself.
He likes watching blues clues, Thomas and friends, paw patrol. He yells the answer to most questions but I don’t know if he knows the answer or just knows they say this so I should say that.
He is severely autistic and epileptic among other problems. He is sweet and loving but how to measure what his actual intelligence I have no idea.
Huh?
IQ testes only test logic puzzle solving skills (& memory sometimes), so there is no way for you to measure your own actual intelligence, let alone your autistic kid’s
It seems to me like if you got 25, you were able to answer some questions at all, some of which you actually got correct
So not vegetative, I don’t think.
But I suppose I’m not exactly an expert on how the tests are administered, so maybe just showing up is enough to get 25.
IQ tests don’t define IQ, they’re a tool to measure IQ. Standard tests have a “floor” (say 70 or 50) below which they don’t give an accurate number, just a general “below the floor” indication. Similarly, they would have a ceiling.
A professionally administered test can maybe identify a more specific IQ at low levels, and would be used for someone who maybe can’t function at the level of taking a standard test.
I mean that if you participated in a test at all, even if your result wasn’t accurate, then you’re not vegetative, even if you required assistance.
I know that the test score isn’t your IQ, because the IQ is relative to the scores of the other participants.
But surely to score at all you need to be responsive, even if you need a special test with special assistance. So surely an IQ of 25 couldn’t be vegetative? Although I truly have no idea how such an IQ would present itself.
Casuals, I measure in K.
300 iq moment!
IQ has been discredited as a measure of capacity for intelligence anyway. The real insult is having a serious belief in that pseudoscientific bullcrap (as opposed to just the colloquial use).
Sincerely, A >175 IQ former MENSA member from England.
My mother told me the murder of the intelligentsia is one of the first steps of a fascist regime and that the Mensa roster is a hit list. Then ten years later she voted for trump.
Edit: Hint for the low EQs out there: they’re not getting downvoted because they’re wrong; they’re getting downvoted because they’re exactly the kind of pompous ass Mensa is famous for.
Given that IQ is profoundly racist and white people score much higher than any other race (not because white people are smarter but because the tests are racist), I very much doubt it’d ever be used as a hit list.
Maybe a shit list.
to those downvoting this comment -
your IQ test results might as well be your zip code
for a proper explanation, check out Bell Curve by Shaun
for a personal interpretation & in large part summary of the above material:
IQ tests are not a general smartness tests, that is impossible to measure. IQ testes measure your ability to solve logic puzzles, and that supposedly measures your logic itself (at least the tests that have no cultural bits, the ones that include cultures also have some testing of your memory based largely on your country’s school curriculum. more on why that’s a problem later)
can someone be naturally amazing at logic? of course, they can, but that skill needs to be nurtured, or at least allowed to flurish. and this is supposed to happen in schools.
now what happens when a person with the potential to score high in an IQ test doesn’t enjoy the privilege of peaceful learning? what happens when their family life is difficult? what happens when during their schooling years they have to focus on surviving, instead of learning and nurturing their skills? well, they score lower, of course. their potential doesn’t disappear, but it gets used in a different direction, to help them survive in life. and logic puzzles don’t play a big role in survival so that particular skill is not tended to and therefore doesn’t develop as well as it could in ideal circumstances.
now let’s look at racism. we’re not talking about day to day racism, though that also plays a part, but institutionalised racism - the one that keeps pushing minorities into poverty, and keeps them there harder than white people, because as we know, poverty is a trap that’s difficult to get out of even for those not pushed into it with institutional racism.
add the two together - IQ tests measure your logic puzzle solving skills, which develop only if you have access to decent schools & you’re allowed to learn without interruptions, without having to worry for yourself or your family. institutionalised racism pushes minorities into poverty, which means they lose access to good schooling, and have to worry for themselves and their families from an early age.
this in turn results in minorities scoring lower on those tests, but not because they are stupid, but because their intelligence has to be used for surviving, and they are not allowed to comfortably indulge in solving logic puzzles to develop the skills that IQ tests look at to “measure intelligence”
A lot of what you’re describing isn’t related to IQ or IQ tests. What I think you may be referring to are some IQ test scams from facebook. Not exactly sure.
First of all, while I personally can’t definitely judge whether IQ is a perfectly accurate measure of intelligence or not, it is one of the best documented and fundamental parts of psychology. It’s covered in great detail in any psychology textbook or class.
There are different types of intelligence, meaning five people with the exact same IQ score may or may not have similar capabilities. Some are great at ‘logic puzzles’, while others excel at more literary puzzles such as debates. Fundamentally pretty much the same concept, but for one reason or another there’s a divide there. It does not appear to be directly influenced by personal background or upbringing.
(at least the tests that have no cultural bits, the ones that include cultures also have some testing of your memory based largely on your country’s school curriculum. more on why that’s a problem later)
IQ tests are supposed to be designed in a way that is accessible to everyone, regardless of ethnicity or culture. That’s why they usually consist of very simple concepts, such as general shapes. A square is a square, whether you’re from Europe or Africa, and doesn’t require any significant knowledge to be distinguished from a circle. If a test relies on any outside knowledge (e.g., you need to know what a cat is vs what a dog is) - it’s not an IQ test, or it’s a very poor one.
what happens when during their schooling years they have to focus on surviving, instead of learning and nurturing their skills? well, they score lower, of course.
The core issue here is not about ‘nurturing skills’, because as countless studies have shown, it does not appear at all possible to raise your IQ (i.e. become more intelligent). All attempts at training people to get more intelligent either brought no results, or turned out to be false.
What’s happening in the situation you described is mostly access to healthy food, healthcare, etc. The biggest predictors of IQ are general health and nourishment. This is basically why poor people score lower. A brain can only utilize all of its capabilities when it’s supplied with sufficient nutrients and is not significantly impaired by sickness.
Of course, as many different traits, IQ can and is being used for eugenics. Basically what you said about poorer groups. It’s nothing inherently to do with IQ itself, but the result is the same.
Also, as already mentioned by some commenters, Mensa is just a degenerate group of soft, wannabe Nazis.
fair points Mr AssTits, but there’s one thing i’ll nitpick - if you are always given a culturally neutral test - how are you supposed to check the various types of intelligence, when the culturally neutral test is just a bunch of logic puzzles, it only tests for logic. it’s impossible to test for debate ability, or musical abilities, or any other abilities with culturally neutral methods. even for a debate skill you need linguistic skills and langauges are heavily influenced by cultures they function in.
i took an IQ test with a licensed psychologist, WAIS for adults to be specific, and it was indeed based on the polish school curriculum. it supposedly measured 3 metrics: logic, language, emotion (not exact names of those metrics, forgot those). logic was just logic puzzles & memorising stuff, langauge was word definitions, and i assume an analysis of how i expressed myself, and emotion was honestly dumb and included sayings and idioms which??? i’m neurodivergent i get these wrong all the time, but i can read emotions and behave maturely quite well. then an average of these was taken and presented as my general IQ
i came out of there thinking how it’d be impossible for me to score well if i didn’t have the privilege of attending good schools, or just being lucky (there was a section of culturally important figures, one of whom was Maria Skłodowka-Curie who also happened to be a patron of my primary school so, yeah i kinda knew a lot about her)
People can downvote my posts all they like, I can’t see them because my instance doesn’t have downvotes. My post’s on +6, and yours is +1 (+2 now)
it was at -1 when i saw it, which is what prompted me to attempt to give a step by step process leading to the conclusion you gave as it seemed to me folks just lacked context
Nuance? On the Internet? How optimistic :)
T–T
if even one person learnt something new today i’ll consider that a win
What’s mensa like? What do you do there? I’ve always been curious. Surely there will be some interesting conversations/ideas?
Joining was fun. I hit the ceiling on the test so they invited me down south for an invigilated test. Then I sat another one because I hit the ceiling on that one too. My final score was high 170s, which made me feel really good about myself.
After that, it was downhill. I only ever went to one annual meeting. It was predominantly white men who think scoring in an abnormal range on certain standardised tests makes them somehow better than everyone else - the sense of entitlement was through the roof. I came home early.
I stayed in the society, I subscribed to a couple of special interest group mailing lists for a few years. Then I cancelled.
I occasionally got letters for a few years afterwards inviting me to rejoin, saying I don’t need to take a test again, then they gave up.
mensa always sounded like it was just a scam for people who think they’re smart
It was started as a eugenics dating club. There’s a reason that Mensa and Σ4 are primarily white dudes.
i never joined mensa, though i had the option to. and yeah you just confirmed all the reasons why i hadn’t lol. entitled dudes who believe so hard that results of a test make them better than others that they are approaching actual delusions of superiority, having to sit among people like that would make my blood boil
well, i suppose it’s a logic puzzle skills test, not an emotional intelligence test.
i despise how IQ is almost revered by the overall society, and i hate how, despite everything, that stupid result does make me feel good about myself, tempting me to feel better than others
Bridge and tea on Wednesdays.
I don’t think people using the phrase as an insult need to believe in IQ.
as opposed to just the colloquial use
Who discredited it?
Scientists
You can’t just say scientists and not name any or cite any sources
IQs are for losers.
S Hawkings
I thought you were the grammar police, not the sources police.
Unless it’s -40
I suppose that this would be relevant in the Arctic region.
As someone discovering their IQ might be room temperature, I forgot we were talking about room temperature. Maybe there’s arctic mushrooms to back me up? Or an ice fishing bathroom with the door left open
or eastern Europe in winter
“You’ve got a room temperature IQ.”
“Yeah, so do you, but mine is in Kelvin and yours is in Celsius.”
Nerds are usually intelligent
“I don’t think an IQ approaching absolute zero is the brag you think it is”
How cold is your room?
Improbably cold judging by their response.
“You might want to look up what room temperature actually is in Kelvin bud, couple dozen standard deviations above average when you translate it to IQ scoring on something like a WISC test. What do I know though? I use Fahrenheit.”
true but murican measurements are an overall bigger insult to humanity
Not only because of the units, also prevalence
