INTP's And High IQ

[Kiosk_GW]

I am wondering how many INTP's here are, or have ever been, members of any High IQ Societies. Does the Introspective and Perceptive aspects of our personality cause us to be more intelligent than other types.

 

[Decaf]

I am wondering how many INTP's here are, or have ever been, members of any High IQ Societies. Does the Introspective and Perceptive aspects of our personality cause us to be more intelligent than other types.

I don't want to squash the discussion with my strong opinion, but I don't believe IQ is a useful tool in determining intelligence. Due to the mentality of its advocates the test is not designed to analyze equally the broad spectrum of intelligence available, but rather by definition looks at what the creator assumes to be the most important form it can take.

In the case of modern IQ tests there is only one right answer and you are timed, which favors the perfectionist (Dominant Judging). Questions are almost entirely logical or pattern based (Thinking, Intuition). You can not discuss the questions and all work must be your own (Introvert). That basically describes an INTP. That's my problem with the test. It is written by INTPs to query what they value about themselves, and go figure if other INTPs tend to score best.

One last thing to note. INTPs don't score best simply because we're naturally better at that kind of analysis. MBTI is about preference, and what that means is that we are better because most of us spend our entire lives working of the skills that IQ tests attempt to measure, even if we don't do it consciously. If you're competing in a contest against someone who does that activity day in and day out for decade after decade, you shouldn't expect to win. People are a spectrum so this is not universally true about any type, but its an important thing to keep in mind.

Again, I don't mean to be an opinionated boulder rolling around squishing ideas, but I believe pretty strongly, as per usual.

NOTE: I tested on the MENSA site and scored 148. I think that should count as a "Kinda" instead of an "Yes" considering the tendency toward inaccuracy on internet tests.

 

[Artifice Orisit]

Damn, got me by one point

Note: That was a joke and I'm not revealing my IQ; it could be lower or higher than Decaf’s, the joke was just making fun of the tests perceived importance.

 

[flow]

I think all INTPs can agree we are the greatest thinkers in society. I don't think other personality types would agree, however. : (

 

[Inappropriate Behavior]

I would imagine most on this forum would score well on IQ tests (evidence to support Decaf's assertion). I never tried to join a group like Mensa, it seemed like too much work

 

[Decaf]

I would imagine most on this forum would score well on IQ tests (evidence to support Decaf's assertion). I never tried to join a group like Mensa, it seemed like too much work

lol... I took the test during one of my more self-absorbed phases. I decided not to join because I didn't like the idea of paying dues. Joining anything often feels like I'm over-committing. Even forums.

 

[Jules]

I only once did some kind of test when I was in my early teens just for the heck of it. It was some kind of Mensa admission test which was printed in a scientific magazine. Can't remember the exact result but it said I could apply for Mensa...
Then I figured, why wouldn't it give me such a result. I'd prolly need to pay for extra tests and whether or not I'd have passed those the intention of the test was clear to me.
Never did any serious IQ tests after that. I honestly can't be bothered with whatever my IQ might be. Would a high IQ make me a better human? Would a lower IQ make me a failed human?
For me such a test only proves one can answer a given amount of questions correctly at some point in his/her life. So what?

 

[zxc]

I've never actually done an IQ test, though I've done those types of questions before. The whole idea of IQ to measure 'intelligence' is absurd to me. Nevertheless, I'm interested in the relationship between 'giftedness' and personality types.

 

[Inappropriate Behavior]

I had this link in my cluttered favorites files. At least anyone interested can read how these tests are formulated. They offer 2, the hard one is just that....hard.

http://www.highiqsociety.org/

 

[ElectricWizard]

I measure intelligence by whether people believe in the reliability of IQ tests or not.

 

[Agent Intellect]

IQ is certainly subjective for the different types. there are things that an ESFJ would be able to do that i never would. and any sensing type would probably look outwardly more smart then i do, as i often have my head in the clouds and am constantly forgetting things. compared to a driven Judger, i probably look pretty unintelligent sitting on my ass and wasting my time.

 

[Fleur]

IQ tests is almost pure gamble - it`s sure that your score will be highter if you`ll lucky enough to have questions you`re good at; it`s quite similiar to school tests, where 89% of success is determined by luck.

 

[grey matters]

Intelligence is measured by what criteria someone views as important. It is subject to how one defines intelligence. Scientists now believe that their are several different kinds of intelligences. One theory states that there are 7 different kinds of intelligences, IQ being one of them, but EQ (emotional intellegence), and some sort of visual spatial intellegence (like the kind that fighter piolets might have), are others. I can't remember the rest of the 7 intellegences but I think you get the idea. Anyway those who score high in IQ often score low in EQ (sound familliar?)

It's a shame,.. this theory, I was rather enjoying the delusion that INTP's were the smartest people in the world. Shit, now what am I going to do.

 

[Waterstiller]

Last year I almost took an IQ test at my college but then decided I didn't want to know.

 

[Reverse Transcriptase]

There's a correlation between intelligence (whatever that word means) and reaction time.

The classical test would be to have a yard stick being held by a tester, who will let it go. The testee's hand is at the bottom end of the stick. The tester drops it, the testee grabs the stick, and then you can calculate how long it took by where the testee grabbed the stick.

The key is to pray not to get splinters.

 

[Jennywocky]

I think all INTPs can agree we are the greatest thinkers in society. I don't think other personality types would agree, however.

Hee - Define "thinker."



The IQ tests are geared towards certain styles of thinking. That's why other "forms" of IQ have entered the public discussion over the last 20 years or so.

I know some INFPs who were in Mensa, but they got bored with the sedentary interactions and wanted to get out more and do things rather than just talk ideas all the time...

 

[Reverse Transcriptase]

I know some INFPs who were in Mensa, but they got bored with the sedentary interactions and wanted to get out more and do things rather than just talk ideas all the time...

My parents met at Mensa. My dad explains that half of Mensa are smart singles looking for other smart singles. The other half are socially inept guys who think they don't get along with the general population because they're smarter than everyone else.

 

[James Black]

I'd be the "taken, socially inept guy who thinks he's smarter than everyone else" type.

 

[Artifice Orisit]

A little from column "a", and a little from column "b" -Grandpa Simpson

I'm not socially inept; I just ignore people who bore me, so technically I have a poor attention span, for people anyway. And I'd never say I was smarter than somebody else, but sometimes I can't help thinking it. (And I feel rightly ashamed when I do)

 

[James Black]

I'd never say I was smarter than somebody else, but sometimes I can't help thinking it. (And I feel rightly ashamed when I do)

I'm in the same boat as you, tbh. I'm a bit too humble (Although calling yourself humble is sort of awkward and to some hypocritical) to say I'm smarter than anyone.

 

[zxc]

I'm in the same boat as you, tbh. I'm a bit too humble (Although calling yourself humble is sort of awkward and to some hypocritical) to say I'm smarter than anyone.

None of my close friends call me 'smart', because we're all very smart, and we know it so well that it's obvious, and we don't state the obvious. But when someone (that doesn't know me well) calls me smart, I feel a bit awkward, because although I know that they're right, I also know that they can't possibly know that I'm smart. They're just making assumptions, eg. when they see top test scores.

 

[Kuu]

None of my close friends call me 'smart', because we're all very smart, and we know it so well that it's obvious, and we don't state the obvious. But when someone (that doesn't know me well) calls me smart, I feel a bit awkward, because although I know that they're right, I also know that they can't possibly know that I'm smart. They're just making assumptions, eg. when they see top test scores.

I know what you mean. They are not in the same level, don't even know what they are talking about. You could be talking utter BS and they would still say "oh you're so smart". I only accept compliments from equals.

 

[ElectricWizard]

None of my close friends call me 'smart', because we're all very smart, and we know it so well that it's obvious, and we don't state the obvious. But when someone (that doesn't know me well) calls me smart, I feel a bit awkward, because although I know that they're right, I also know that they can't possibly know that I'm smart. They're just making assumptions, eg. when they see top test scores.

I just point out that test scores and such have nothing to do with intelligence.

 

[grey matters]

E.W. There are many reasons why this is true. I won't get into the reasons.

It is interesting that test score don't easily measure how much you have studied. I am good at b.s.ing (bullshitting) on tests. I don't know the information or I just have minimal knowledge because I didn't study, but I know how the teacher thinks and I use this to guess the answer. At other times I can detect some other pattern and I use it to make more accurate guesses. Seeing patterns and understanding systems are, as I recall,an INTP trait but I may be remembering this wrong. I also don't know how many other MBTI personalities have this trait. The point is that this is another possible reason why test scores (be they IQ tests or academic tests) don't measure what they are supposed to measure. I.E. my teachers were measuring my ability to figure them out, or the test was measuring my ability to find and use a pattern to my advantage, more then they were measuring my knowledge on the subject.

My step-sister (who is 2 days younger then me and took many of the same classes as me) studied hard for all her tests and did all her homework yet I would get the better grade. It pissed her off to no end. I happen to know that she knew the information but the test suggested she didn't. In that case I don't know what the test really measured. It was not the degree to which test anxiety hampered her ability to perform (as it could for those who have test anxiety). I don't know what her problem was. In school she was often too pissed off at me to talk to me about it.

 

[James Black]

I've put some thought into this and disagree slightly. Intelligence isn't how smart you are. Intelligence is different from wisdom, knowledge, "smarts," etc. One can be intelligent, and not wise, nor knowledgeable. The IQ tests do actually do their job decently well... although, yes, they could still be improved.

Intelligence is your capacity to learn, to acquire new knowledge.
Knowledge is what you know, what you've learned.
Wisdom is your capacity to apply, to use the knowledge you already have.

So, all in all, there are three different variations of "smarts," the one most people think of, being knowledge. "Wise" and "intelligent" are often misunderstood as knowledgeable.

Although INTPs might not be the most wise, nor most knowledgeable group, I would say we rank rather high on the intelligence spectrum. We are very sponge-like with what we learn, often soaking it up with ease. This is due mostly to how our brains work. Introversion, Intuition, Thinking, and Perceiving, help us quickly grasp new ideas, dwell on them, and quickly formulate patterns and such within our heads. If it seems like IQ Tests are tailored for INTPs, it's because technically -- they are. Other types have advantages in IQ tests as well, but the INTP, I believe, is best suited for learning, and as such, best suited to score well in an IQ test.

The tests were made, most often, to test your logic, your critical thinking, and your ability to see (and continue) patterns -- all skills INTPs excel in, and all skills that are useful for learning. Although these skills may not say "Hey, I'm smart," to believe that they don't say "I'm adept at learning," is both negligent and foolish.

 

[Decaf]

Intelligence is your capacity to learn, to acquire new knowledge.

An elegant definition, but does it stand up to verification?

Is a fantastic athlete, by virtue of their skill at the game, intelligent? To be a top notch running back you obviously need to be able to think very quickly, predict your opponents moves, plan a route that exploits your opponents weaknesses, all in an evolving field of battle. Does that translate to an IQ test?

Or we could take the opposite approach. Is a scientist, highly regarded in their field, necessarily intelligent even if social conduct proves to be beyond their grasp? Does the seeming inability to socialize with others in other than ideal circumstances bear out on an IQ test?

To answer those questions we would need to examine what we mean by knowledge. Often times it is tempting to place somewhere in our chain of meaning a hidden caveat. Somewhere the idea sneaks in that knowledge represents things you know about things that are worth knowing.

I think the definition you have is good, but it needs qualifiers, or it becomes all too easy to make those mental adjustments to favor what we prize.

 

[grey matters]

The issue of intelligence has problems on both ends. On one end is the definition. What is intelligence? What is knowledge? There are theories about multiple intelligences. According to some of those theories, Decaf, Your athlete would have a high physical intelligence or a high P.Q. . On the other end is how do we measure the thing we want to measure (in this case intelligence) without corruption from extraneous variables? In other words how do we create a test that just measures what we want to measure. In my last post I mentioned what my teachers tests measured, and it was not how much information on the subject I had learned.

 

[Dissident]

I quoted this in the "Definition of being smart" thread, sadly the page is no longer working, but here it is:

1. Intelligence is a very general mental capability that, among other things, involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from experience. It is not merely book learning, a narrow academic skill, or test-taking smarts. Rather, it reflects a broader and deeper capability for comprehending our surroundings--"catching on," "making sense" of things, or "figuring out" what to do.

2. Intelligence, so defined, can be measured, and intelligence tests measure it well. They are among the most accurate (in technical terms, reliable and valid) of all psychological tests and assessments. They do not measure creativity, character personality, or other important differences among individuals, nor are they intended to.

9. IQ is strongly related, probably more so than any other single measurable human trait, to many important educational, occupational, economic, and social outcomes. Its relation to the welfare and performance of individuals is very strong in some arenas in life (education, military training), moderate but robust in others (social competence), and modest but consistent in others (law-abidingness). Whatever IQ tests measure, it is of great practical and social importance.

10. A high IQ is an advantage in life because virtually all activities require some reasoning and decision-making. Conversely, a low IQ is often a disadvantage, especially in disorganized environments. Of course, a high IQ no more guarantees success than a low IQ guarantees failure in life. There are many exceptions, but the odds for success in our society greatly favor individuals with higher IQs.

The following professors-all experts in intelligence an allied fields-have signed this statement:

50 names followed.

Lets be realistic, that Einstein (for example) had an IQ of 140 is not a coincidence, someone who scored 95 couldnt possibly do what he did. Whatever it is that IQ tests measure, it does mean something.

 

[grey matters]

IQ is important in that there are correlations between IQ and certain abilities. IQ tests do measure something. Over the past few decades the IQ test has improved, and I can make a fair guess that an IQ test now measures more of what the creators of the test set out to measure without as much corruption from extraneous variables (I.E. test accuracy has improved).

We need to take the blinders off and look at the big picture when considering intelligence (for example considering multiple intelligences) and to also take into consideration other factors which may measure as intelligence but are actually something else. With this big picture we might be able to understand things like how the brain works and how this applies to our daily interactions to our environment.

 

[Agent Intellect]

i'm wondering if there is a physical affect in intelligence? is someone of higher intelligence able to make neural connections in the brain faster or more efficiently (or at least in the parts of the brain in control of their specific kind of intelligence)? could there be a physical test of a brains chemical makeup, or neuron mapping, or a way to calculate the ion channels that could show how "intelligent" somebody is? does having intelligence in one thing cause people to lose intelligence in another area (ie, an INTP being great at thinking abstractly, but being socially retarded)? in the case of Einstein, didn't he have a problem with the speech center of his brain or something, allowing other parts of his brain to become stronger?

 

[Aphasia]

I think I remember it being mentioned somewhere that people with higher IQ have sections of their brain being liquid (noticed when they undergo brain scans). This may be a misquote, but I'm pretty certain I got it from somewhere reliable.

 

[grey matters]

A.I. There has been a lot of research done in the areas of brain usage, structure, chemicals and things like that. It is all very fascinating. The best thing is that this research is as close to hard science that psychology usually gets. One of the things that frustrates me the most about psychology is it is too theoretical.

I remember seeing something on tv where they were studying a man with a 160 IQ and compared him to other people. The difference between his brain and the brains of others was that his brain had a lot of connectivity (as I recall they said he had a lot of neural pathways between different parts of his brain).

There has been research for some 30 years on how the brain retains knowledge. The more parts of your brain you use when trying to remember something the better you can remember it. On Yutube there is a technique called mind mapping which explains some of this idea. Mind mapping is not the only way to memorize using different parts of your brain. When I was a psychology student I used some of these other memorization techniques and they worked for me.

I seem to recall research that suggested that the more parts of the brain that are used in whatever mental activity you are doing, the better the result. I could be remembering this wrong.

I have been pondering the concept of open vs closed consiousness and I wonder if there are connections or correlations between this and brain usage, IQ or other types of intellegences, brain structure, and how, if at all, personality effects this. Anyway To satisfy my curiosity I went out and bought some books on the subject. Yes I know, that the nerdy thing to do. But I hate to watch tv, and I don't play video games, and I don't shop for shoes, so what else is there to do in my spare time?

 

[Agent Intellect]

interesting. i wonder what IQ the final product of Project Blue Brain will have.

 

[grey matters]

Looks like project blue brain is quite a daunting project. No doubt that whatever happens success or failure wise with the project they will learn something about the brain.

 

[NeverAmI]

There's a correlation between intelligence (whatever that word means) and reaction time.

The classical test would be to have a yard stick being held by a tester, who will let it go. The testee's hand is at the bottom end of the stick. The tester drops it, the testee grabs the stick, and then you can calculate how long it took by where the testee grabbed the stick.

The key is to pray not to get splinters.

I remember that test, I had taken it and I am pretty sure I completely missed the ruler all together...

Thanks to some who gave some insight into Mensa.

Does anyone on here actually participate in Mensa? I could care less about pissing matches, I want to surround myself in conversation with others that have a broad range of knowledge and I want to find the best place for that. If it is just people arguing to get their jollies (ego, entertainment, etc.) without actual substance then I have no interest. I just want to know if Mensa is full of a bunch of egomaniacs or if there are a lot of people that like to learn.

I joined up for the High IQ Society and I am hoping that there are some people that genuinely enjoy a good conversation, hopefully I can find that there.

 

[QSR]

Maybe I could find some like-minded folks in MENSA, but I find people with high IQs to be horrible bores most of the time, either because they lack personality or they are so busy trying to impress everyone that it wears you out.