I'm a little dismayed by the self-deprecation in the comments so far.
I would think INTPs, being NT (rationals), would commonly score very highly on IQ tests (which mostly measure logic processing).
I know I do. My IQ is in the top percentile. That means it's statistically probable I really am the smartest person in a room (of <100 random people).
This has very real, often painful implications. Far more than being the richest or prettiest or best footballer in the room. It seems being a bit smart is valued but being a lot smart is despised.
Self-deprecation is a common and obvious defense, but surely that's not necessary on this forum?
Instead you could be discussing the social and academic damage done in your early education when your teachers effectively ostracised you by directing their efforts to the kids who needed assistance; or who scolded you for laziness or stubborness on those rare occasions you truly didn't grasp a concept first go.
You could be discussing the lifetime of self-consiousness inflicted on you by important people in your life who pounced on your slightest error when you were too inexperienced to understand that was their insecurity at work, not your own failing.
You could be discussing the spark of life you feel when you meet that other smart person in the room and sink into a fabulous, pointless analysis of some minute aspect of the universe; or the awful loneliness of having to walk away from that conversation because someone's friend or spouse is getting jealous.
Yeah yeah I know - I sound arrogant. I've given too much credence to IQ and disregarded other kinds of intelligence. I'm probably not as smart as I think I am. Blah blah blah.
I'm usually as self-deprecating as the rest of you.
I just thought perhaps there's no need for it here.
Aww, this is such a pretty post! *nudges GW*
Also, it really IS a pretty post. And the sentiments expressed, yum.
On topic:
I seem to be surrounded by people as smart as or smarter than I am. I don't know why. I don't have much esteem in the superiority of my intelligence. I just know it's there, and it's enough to get by with, and sometimes I'll be impressive because I have a few cognitive tricks up my sleeve developed while everyone else was playing footy. But other than that - I feel on equal footing with most people I can think of. (But maybe I forget the dumb ones?)
And I've found it to be very true that people with 'low intelligence' can be remarkably sharp and wise, about *people*.
*edit
Er - yes, I have considered the possibility I'm simply very average, many times, and I've decided I am, but not in terms of IQ. (I've had enough experiences with academic ease, especially relative to peers - though not to the level of a lot of the forumites - to know that, plus tests and stuff.) I've written about this elsewhere, but I think a lot of people conflate 'average intelligence' with 'average IQ', where the latter is talking about an IQ of 100 (that being the statistical average). Whereas when someone says 'intelligent', generally they don't mean a person who's 101, perhaps, even though that's 'above average'. They're probably talking more about someone in the ranges of at least 140 and above. An averagely intelligent person - an average person, in normal parlance - will be between 120 to 135, I'd guess. That's 'average intelligence'. They're intelligent, but not astoundingly so, and they're not significantly rare enough in daily experience - especially when your social set consists mostly of college grads - that they are considered 'above average'. I don't think we'd class 105 as 'smart', generally. And 135 may be approaching....something, I dunno what, but it's not amazing. It's pretty common. You don't hang out with a representative cross-section of the population every day. (I think.) But you'd have to for 1 out of 50, or 1 out of 100 or whatever to be accurate. (I think. Unless you're truly talking about random people, and not your friends/acquaintances.)
*editedit
Also, I'm very bad with math and stats especially so I may have done a doo-doo here.