^^ very true - if you are from a normal family a high IQ is actually a detriment, and it has been calculated that you need a 155 or above to overcome the effects of poverty.

George W Bush became president of the USA. Rich supportive family matters more than anything else, then raw ambition and work ethic, then talent, then intelligence.

absolutely nothing you are saying is true. further, there is little to no agreement on what an IQ test measures or what IQ even is. modern neuroscientists argue that all an IQ tests measures is your ability to take an IQ test.

clearly, people have a very poor understanding of how a skill is learned in the brain.

IQ, as it's currently measured, has ZERO correlation to success later in life. IQ has no correlation to success in chess, in winning a Nobel Prize, publishing scientific papers or anything else (relative to peers). IQ doesn't automatically grant you skill in anything. Skill is learned. All skills are learned. There is no such thing as a "prodigy" in anything. There is only our perception that it "came out of nowhere" because we don't stop to consider the 1000s of hours of practice someone put in before they were noticed as being a "prodigy".

Like anything we do, playing chess is a skill that only comes after countless hours of learning and practicing chess. Chess grandmasters, on the whole, (as repeated studies have proven time and time again) tend to be average or below average intelligence. playing a musical instrument at a world class level is a skill that only comes after 1000s hours of learning and practicing. painting at a world class level is a skill that only comes after countless 1000s of hours of learning and practicing... etc etc. that someone can do several of those things only means they've spent 1000s of hours practicing those things, nothing more.

As above :2 cents::thumbsup

Wow you're delusional, or butthurt because of low IQ test results. I vote both... based on your previous post history.

Let me help you.

Along with IQ there's EQ and eight other categories of intelligence; Bodily kinesthetic Intelligence, Spatial intelligence, Interpersonal intelligence, Musical intelligence, Intrapersonal intelligence & Naturalist intelligence.

Since the discussion is not about any of those things and specifically the Stanford–Binet IQ test which is the de facto, world wide standard when mentioning "IQ" and "IQ Test", I think it's safe to say that you need help as you even have no idea what anyone is saying.

Further, I read about the brain and learning DAILY. I practice what I learn daily in teaching. I train people daily. From casual books to text books... while you read nothing but Trump tweets.... and you didn't know about any of those rather new supposed categories of "intelligence" until you googled them.

Additionally, i am more than happy to prove you wrong in anything you have to say on the subject as I generally know what studies will debunk whatever crap you'll post and consider myself to be up to date on anything related to learning and particularly motor learning as it's my personal obsession as someone who trains people to fight.

Unlike you, i'm not googling furiously to make a point. Take "musical intelligence" which is something that i've never heard of. Why? Because it is never mentioned in neuroscience or books on the brain or books on learning. Why is it never mentioned? Because its bullshit. Having "perfect pitch" as its called as an example is not an innate trait. It's learned just as anything else is. It's something more common in children under 6 and fades as we age. it's something easily learned in adults or children.But it is learned. It's far easier when people speak a tonal language. it's not an innate trait. Adults can learn "perfect pitch" in a couple weeks with the right learning process.

Music related skills are BY FAR the most misunderstood of any learned skill and most often attributed to a "personal gift"... .but from Mozart to Michael Jordan to Michael Jackson to Tiger Woods to any 12-year-old violin "prodigy", behind their skill, is countless 1000s of hours of practice (except that most of Mozarts early work is plagiarized, being other known works pieced together, or written in his father's hand - also a composer/music teacher) and the intense efforts of crazed parents living through their kids to achieve the fame they felt they deserved by forcing their children into insane amounts of practice, coaching and learning.



The worst thing about attributing learned skills to being an innate gift is that it
1) totally diminishes, dismisses and ignores the years of very very hard work of the performer put in to attain that level of skill
2) it suggests to others that they shouldn't try to excel if they don't possess some "gift" already... which then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and one not rooted in any kind of fact or even reality

:1orglaugh

You "train people daily" and I "read nothing but Trump tweets". How'd your shift at McDonalds go today? hehehe There's a lot of misinformation in your post, but I did read all of it. Keep trying. Don't give up.

Yeah equating comprehension and brain horsepower with knowledge or wisdom is ridiculous. I've always thought that. Just like not all ignorant people are actually stupid. But most stupid people are ignorant.
I was always in so much trouble at all times in school- they had what was called ISS and at some junctures they would make me go to that most mornings without even going into class
We had a sexy azz lady who worked in the principal's office
Her and I use to spend a lot of time together and there were all kinds of puzzles and things
I liked that part of school
She was so sexy
To this day I still can't understand or learn much about anything I don't care about. If I care about it I can take the information how ever it is. Reading, listening, film, anything. If it's simple and I don't like it I can't even make myself learn it
So college was out
I wanted to go to Devry back then but said fuck it
I left school when I was twelve and began hustling cable television equipment full time
Fuck everything

Having garbage trash on both sides of my blood line definitely makes me predisposed to doing bad things. I have propensities and proclivities (for crime for excessive women for excessive use of anything for excessive anything else) and that's not even the beginning of the compendium on THAT

While I'll agree that IQ tests are more abstract than they are definitive - IQ should be a measure of brain horsepower and storage capacity. Many high IQ people could give a fuck LESS about YOUR definition of success. When you factor in HOW MANY PEOPLE HATE US EXTREMELY and what that does to our VIEW OF SOCIETY WHEN WE LOOK OUT AT IT you can imagine that many of us do not want or give a FUCK about visibility, fame, or even fortune

You got a lot of points with me when you mentioned music skills and then you seem to have lost them. Music and numbers are important. Look at the guy whose hippocampus was all but destroyed by disease and yet he can seem to function as if it were partially there while playing piano
Anyway I'll not argue that musical talent is some innate ability. I will however say that I believe that musical prowess and talent VERY LIKELY equates to a VERY powerful and strong mind and anyone who disagrees with that is probably confused

One other thing I can say for SURE is that when you're being lab ratted it's not so much like the internet "IQ test"
They have written sort of aptitude tests but that is only the beginning
They want to know if you understand conceptual perception or whatever it is called, they want to name 9399085905309853 numbers at you and see how many you can repeat back to them, all KINDS of shit like that
Assuming that it is a quantifiable at all thing I was told that I'm supposedly in the mid one sixties
I don't think I would EVER have been enough of an egghead to make it into MENSA or the other one but I wasn't stupid back then- that's for sure. Another weird ass thing was, I knew everything already. All of the shit they were teaching me in grade school, I just knew
It was eerie at times
Except math
I was always weak on math
I was always afraid of math
I am still very afraid of numbers and their power and I've had some horrifying number experiences in my drinking days. I could have been a very powerful math genius if I could have overcome some certain things, I believe that.

My grandfather was a mad genius - never met the guy but he could COMPOSE MUSIC right out of his mind
If you ask me, that equates to raw brilliance
If you disagree about the importance of music- especially instrument music, you don't get this

Procedural memory is not related to the hippocampus. You are talking about automated, learned skills which are performed automatically. The brain is not a computer which stores and recalls information. That's similar to saying "he can't remember what he reads at all but he can ride a bike".

Besides, the question in such examples is not "what was destroyed", the question is "how and where did the brain compensate"

Further, your brain is highly "plastic" or adaptable. Meaning that when a lesion impairs some pathway, yet you persist in training the affected task/skill etc, your brain will figure out how to compensate for the impairment. A child (generally under the age of 6) can have 1/2 the hemisphere of their brain removed and develop full brain function to the extent that there are no outward signs of impairment. A simple example of this is the fact that autopsies show people with advanced Alzheimers all the time, yet they never showed a single symptom because they kept forcing their brain to work and find new pathways to accomplish a task... vs laying down and dying (teachers, scientists or whatever - people who place a high cognitive load on their brain daily). This is extremely common and never talked about except within science.



and this is where the trouble begins.... what is "mind", what is a "strong mind"?

The original studies on short term memory i believe date back to the 50s with the first being a famous one called something like '7 plus or minus 2" which said that our short term memory can hold 7 pieces of information on average. This became the basis for telephone numbers being 7 digits.

One who took this further is K Anders Ericsson (leading expert on the development of Expertise) - where he began to do studies with a gentleman - reading out a series of numbers at 1-second intervals (so it can't be transferred to long term memory). He could initially do 7 easily. After some practice could reliably recite 8 digits back. After much more, he could do 9. The progress continued until he stopped i think of somewhere around 80 digits read to him at 1-second intervals.

Others continued his work, passing 200.

The world record now is i believe well beyond 400. That's listening to someone call out numbers at 1 second intervals for almost 7 minutes and then reciting them back. All learned. Not an innate gift.

The point is that even something such as this which seems like a miraculous gift is nothing more than a learned skill that comes with intense practice. In particular, its simply about developing memory retrieval structures to organize and group the information in a meaningful manner so that it might be recited back correctly. The original guy used running scenarios - such as "on this date, at this time, xxxx people ran an xxx race and the best time was xx.xx.xx.xxx". Those tactics have to change as the strings of digits increase in length and the individual has to figure out new methods to organize, group and successfully retrieve the information.

The point which you are missing is not "what can he do" which seems utterly amazing to you, the question to ask is "how did he get there?".

You will never find an example of such a skill which wasn't developed with many 1000s of hours of practice of composing music (this also assumes a certain level of quality of the music).

Further, these are typical myths which discount the effort which was invested in developing the skill of composing. It doesn't happen without hard work.

Our brains all learn the same. If you could find such an example where someone was simply born to compose music and could compose great musical pieces "in their mind" and without a period of intense practice which directly correlates to the skill level... you'd be famous.

pretty easy to get a high IQ ;) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dz6kLBKTyNk

Let's agree to disagree, Monsieur Squealer

Depends on the year of your test, and the test, but, for most years, as I recall MENSA's cutoff would be 150.

If you want to join a support group for being intelligent.

This thread is reminiscent of groups of guys you get high with that, after you get high, start going going off on these deep random tangents :smoking

I'm too bored with this subject to take the effort to write a serious comment...

LoL
You're probably the smartest one here

Or wait

It would maybe be someone who didn't even post

So you're 2nd that we know of

Wow.. you do actually know a lot more about this than I do
What I meant about wearing is that I've seen films where it looks as if his hippocampus may be functioning as he's playing music

Neural plasticity IS amazing and I have read that many wizzled old bastads can come out of being all inane and addled by forcing their brain to do simple math and things before

We don't know what mind or consciousness means or is really so you make another good point
You are not as ridiculous as I thought that you were

I should have joined that when I was still brilliant - LOL
I thought that MENSA was 170 or above but I think there are other factors
I wasn't interested in the whole thing I didn't even love being lab ratted - I was 11

I can't remember much of shit but they do some pretty fucking seemingly arbitrary tests to you
This one makes a lot more sense to me now than it did when I was young
I COULD NEVER do 200 or 400 that I am aware of
I think I did close to 20 two digit ones

You should read up on the original memory studies on Henry Mollison (sp?) "Patient H.M." - who had his hippocampus removed - if I recall it was with the mistaken belief it would relieve his seizures or something similar. He was studied for well over 30 years and could not form new memories. The doctor had to introduce himself every day for decades.

I was just telling my GF about this woman in Toronto and it occurred to me to go to her website. She has a fantastic story but only touches on about 20% of it in this video as to her impairments which were quite severe.



Yes, these conversations rely on a huge number of assumptions that often have no basis in fact and which are usually quite wrong. :)

Though I am fascinated with the brain and really enjoy stuff like the work of VS Ramachandran and similar doctors - my obsession for the last 2 years has been motor learning and the acquisition of skill and expertise with respect to complex skills - and applying what i learn daily in our training, where we've seen incredible success and unbelievable rates of progress.

I'm obsessed with it.

there is still a universal hard limit on the pieces of information which can be stored and retrieved from short term memory WITHOUT PRACTICING TO GO FURTHER. Usually, 7. going beyond 7 to 9-10-11 etc requires practice. I think it took the original guy something like 50 hours to get to 11 or so. then something like another 100 hours to get to 20.

Going further than 7-8-9 digits means not only a LOT of practice but continually coming up with new retrieval strategies and methods of grouping and organizing the information in a manner in which it can be recalled without error. Usually relating it to something else or telling a story etc. To get to 200 pieces of information in short term memory and being able to recall it, i think it would take hundreds and hundreds of hours of practice and that assumes a strong dedication to doing it as well as successfully figuring out strategies to organize and group numbers in a manner in which they can be successfully recalled... though i'm sure the strategies of others can be searched online as a help.

and by the way "20 two digit ones" can be "10 four digit ones" or "5 8 digit ones" etc... so how many pieces of information it technically is and whether or not you can recall it successfully, depends entirely on how your brain groups the numbers together and organizes them.

Like a chessboard for example.

You can arrange pieces on a board in a "game like" manner and ask an experienced chess player to stare at it for 10 seconds, then recreate it and he can. That's because he's not remembering each piece and where it's at,... he's recalling a simple pattern of pieces which has come up a lot in many years of playing chess. So that could technically be "one piece" of information... yet we look at it and call it "genius".

Of course, when you put the pieces on the board in a random, non game-like manner... the experienced chess player does no better than any random person.

There is always a chasm between what we perceive to be the skill (or ability) and what it actually is. We misperceive whats happening and then attribute it to genius or some innate talent. Thats never the actual case, however.

Mensa doesn't measure in IQ. You can become a member if you scored better then 98% of the other people who did the test. That's what an "IQ" test is... subjective... Always in comparison to other people's score... If you have a 98% percentile score and you lay an IQ tabel next to it... it roughly means we're talking about an "IQ" of 131 and above...

The SQUEALER
You just gave me something interesting to take my mind off of how frustrated and infuriated and mad and angry and exasperated and PISSED OFF I currently am
I didn't know about billy joe
Thank you

Check this threads postcount... Maybe 98% of all gfy members didn't even post:1orglaugh:upsidedow

There was definitely more to it than the qt but I distinctly remember them talking about a certain number where those who scored below it generally would not be accepted. The number must matter or maybe it use to - I suppose.

If a rough estimation would be 131+, what are they, a bunch of slightly clever morons? As addled as I currently am by damage done by alcohol and other factors, even I MYSELF should probably still be able to score higher than THAT. A common corporate DRONE would come close to THAT if you think about it

Percentiles I remember but I can't remember if that was school or lab ratting
My percentile was ALWAYS a cunt hair off of 100 .. not 98 but a cunt hair off of EXCEPT for a couple of times in school where math dropped me down. I am afraid of math but I would be good at math

God damned closeted geniuses
We know full well that dumbfucks cannot HELP BUT POST ALWAYS
We can infer from that incomplete bit of information that the silent ones are the intelligent ones because a lack of water is just like fire
So there ya go
We found you out LURKERS

I am not sure that I agree with this because I did single digit numbers first and I could do a lot more than seven
Also when I did quite a few two digit ones I made everyone amazed

What you said about the cheese board made a lot of sense. No great memory expert person ever DOES NOT have some kind of a trick or a system as far as I am aware. So, that makes sense

I see what you mean about the longer numbers break down - Is that also meant to imply that twenty of the two digit ones would be the same thing as forty single digits?

Frankly it would scare me to find out how many I could do by now... I'd be willing to find out but, still, it would be a scary experience. The ground I have lost probably isn't coming back, neural plasticity or not
But I don't need ALL I had - I've seen people FAR DUMBER than I can EVER be who made it in business, and I've kept my woman handling ways, so I will be fine

Henry Molaison? I think is who it is from a cursory search I just did
Have you seen the fucktard who was a real regular scum bag ass hat dumb fuck and then he got his head beaten in and BAM he became a musical genius and far less stupid? THAT was interesting

I can not BELIEVE what doctors have done to people throughout history
You know, the through the eye socket lobotomy, shock treatment, etc

Wow, I didn't know that there were more of them
It sounds like the guy he's quoting is completely wrong
Who the fuck believes that explanation
Oh and he even suddenly is a synesthete (sp) all of a sudden
Nope no changes in THAT brain.. lol

Only 2% of all world population scores 131. Only 1% scores 162. The average IQ is around 100. The gap between 100 and 131 maybe seems small because of all Facebook tests where everyone scores 180++++ but in fact is a huge gap. Think about it... A person with an average IQ looking at a retard.. which means an IQ between 70 and 85... What does a person with an average IQ looks like to a person with 130+? Exactly...

I think you overestimate corperate drones...

The average IQ is around 100. It roughly means that this world was designed by, and thus implicit designed for... the average. I think that's the most frustrating aspect of being gifted... living in a world of structural retardness...

Does IQ supposedly work like decibels? Is it logarithmic or linear? I didn't know the word for what I meant and had to look it up so I don't know if what I'm asking makes sense.

Internet tests are a bunch of junk if you ask me
Being in the mid one sixties is supposed to be a BIG deal but even with your numbers - big deal, one in one hundred imbeciles still meet that

Mr maxwell

Then I think your pretty safe and normal