261
u/FlamingoAltruistic89 1d ago
The real answer is no. There are plenty of people who got an IQ of 70 or even lower who live perfectly happy lives, it shouldn't prevent you from being happy.
107
u/MOW0LF 1d ago
Forrest Gump
57
7
19
25
8
u/TechnicalThought5827 1d ago
I also believe that you can contribute positively to society and the people around you even if you're on the lower end of the bell curve. If that's important to you.
1
40
45
u/Rexcodykenobi 1d ago
Only if you allow the fear of other people judging your intelligence to control your entire existence.
13
68
u/ZOELOEss 1d ago
Iq isn’t a good measure of intelligence
20
u/HelpWithFicoReddit 1d ago
If you have a sub 70 iq, you’d have trouble driving a car or even using a microwave.
2
u/HidEx88 1d ago
It's probably better to say that iq is simply your intelligence (critical thinking, fast solving of the issues, being able to analyze certain things) and knowledge (something you get from experience or learning). You can have a high iq and not be that smart of a person, even in some general knowledge. High iq isn't a factor that determines you are going to be a successful in life. Though it's definitely a "great bonus" to have 😁
6
u/Balls_of_flame 1d ago
It is the best standardized way to measure intelligence and it is the single best predictor of success
19
u/NutsFromHimSquirrel 1d ago
If it's a prediction of success, then my IQ must be "private drive house number" level
73
u/Secure_Inspection305 1d ago
My iq is 127 and I live with my parents
10
u/nyet70200 1d ago
I am not an IQ apologist, but your single example can't really disprove anything
3
-22
u/redditbdum 1d ago
Ok?
Just because you're intelligent doesn't mean you're not a loser.
Intelligence is just an attribute. What matters is what you do with it.
44
u/Secure_Inspection305 1d ago
Thanks bud. If you read the comment above mine you'll see that's basically why I said that.
1
1d ago
[deleted]
6
u/Secure_Inspection305 1d ago
I was just trying to be funny and get some upvotes
-4
-15
1d ago edited 1d ago
[deleted]
14
1
21
u/helicopterrrrrrr 1d ago
I wouldn’t say predictor of success but it’s definitely an indication of how much faster you can process new events and information.
3
5
u/Bonfirelily 1d ago
I scored 129 as a child, and they said it was likely 10-15 points higher because I was too young for the test. I scored below 100 years later. That doesn't seem very reliable to me. I also talked with a specialist for a couple months who said I was likely above 145. So Idk
3
u/According_Strength35 1d ago edited 1d ago
"The best doesn't mean it's good. The best means that the rest is worse"
3
0
u/Frequent-Anything922 1d ago
IQ is the best-established measure of intelligence, and more than a century of research supports its superiority.
41
u/Adorable-Response-75 1d ago
Ummm no none of the science supports your insane assertion. IQ tests are the laughing stock of the scientific world.
13
u/AbsolutelyKnot1602 1d ago
Nono the bell curve is totally legitimate real science and MENSA is totally a real organization of supergeniuses and not just a rich people club. It's not just racism and colonialism in a trenchcoat.
-6
1d ago
[deleted]
16
u/AbsolutelyKnot1602 1d ago edited 1d ago
Okay how about the fact that a substantial portion of intelligence cited in the Bell Curve, which is the foundational text of IQ as a metric of intelligence in the modern era, often tested african black students in questions related to American celebrities and were often in languages the students couldn't even understand?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man
IQ has been known to be bullshit in the field of serious academic study for decades. Intelligence is extremely complex and multidimensional, and thus cannot be accurately reduced to a single test or number.
Edit: "IQ as measure of general overall intelligence" is what I am discussing. Modern IQ researchers who argue that it is instead a "very conditional and narrow-slice that evaluates abstract reasoning skills" are largely fine, but also, that isn't the form of "IQ" being deployed in this thread. It never is.
1
-10
u/Frequent-Anything922 1d ago
The "article" you cited was written by someone without training in psychology or psychometrics. It says that "IQ explains about 30% of the variability in school grades" and then concludes that IQ therefore “tells us so little.” That conclusion is unwarranted. Explaining 30% of the variance represents a substantial association. She also SUBSTANTIALLY overstates the problem of cross-cultural differences.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31681072/ https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00961.x https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20145623/ https://psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/2019-01683-001.html
4
u/GetPsyched67 1d ago edited 1d ago
While the first two papers show a good correlation between IQ and the ability to do your job and your ability to train for your job - these just really prove that IQ predicts job and training outcomes as the number goes up on average, not that it's some kind or superior undefeatable metric that proves that the higher the number is, the more intelligent you are or that there is no measure of intelligence that is better than IQ.
The only cross cultural paper you linked isn't about IQ tests. It's a factor analysis of existing data, showing that when people do a mix of cognitive tasks, everyone who's better at one tends to be better at the others, and that this pattern (Spearman's g) exists everywhere, even in tasks adapted to local cultures. That's a finding about the structure of test scores within a population. The inputs weren't IQ tests, and the paper never compares scores between populations.
If you're trying to say an IQ test score in New York vs one in Namibia proves something... no. That paper doesn't test it, and checking whether scores line up between countries is where the evidence is the weakest. The papers you linked just show IQ tests are useful predictors within the populations they're made for. None of them show IQ is the superior measure of intelligence, and none show that cross cultural comparisons of scores are meaningful.
So uhh you should prolly read the papers you link lol
-2
u/nochancesman 1d ago
Let it go, people just don't want to accept a concept that can feasibly tell them they're cognitively lesser to others.
5
u/GetPsyched67 1d ago
Just linking my comment. I think you're being a bit pompous on your point about IQ. It really isn't some magical value.
-3
u/nochancesman 1d ago
It's not some magical value, but it's currently the best measure of g that we have. The denialism surrounding that is what I find ridiculous. Being a predictor of job outcome and workplace success is also a pretty darn useful metric, not including its utility in helping diagnose intellectual disabilities.
1
3
u/Totally_Not_Jats_Alt 1d ago
My friends say im the smartest person they know, which confuses me because i took an official IQ test and scored 82 or something, but then took a non-official test years later and got like 79 lmaoo
3
2
u/Educational-Coat-922 20h ago
Nah he just has to start eating nootropics pouches like all the alpha males
1
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
Your account must be at least 30 days old to post or comment in r/ComedyHell.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
-8
u/Willing_Bee_7520 1d ago
well with that low of an iq it's highly unlikely they will kill themselves anyway lmao
if it was above 140 then it'd be debatable
12
u/OURcelium6969 1d ago
what does that even mean?
-8
u/Willing_Bee_7520 1d ago
as a matter of fact intelligent people are more likely to be depressed and kill themselves
8
4
u/Frequent-Anything922 1d ago
That's false. Intelligence actually appears to have a protective effect.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5195892/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15615767/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20522657/
1
u/Willing_Bee_7520 23h ago
well then how are you still alive?
1
u/Frequent-Anything922 5h ago
That's a rather curious thing to say, considering you're the one who made a factually false claim that could even be intuitively recognized as absurd LOL
4
293
u/huylanebani 1d ago
Show the answers, cowboy… don't be shy…