In the past I blogged about the seminal moment in my childhood when I was tested on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC), an experience that launched my lifelong love affair with IQ.
And what an odyssey it’s been.
Despite getting only a social science degree from an average Canadian university, I’ve had the best education in the World. I grew up corresponding with members of the Triple Nine Society, the Prometheus society, the Mega society. Some of the greatest minds in the World would send me emails, explaining their philosophy on life.
By my early twenties, I knew more than my university professors.
And now in my 30s, I look back at where it all began: When I took the WISC at age 12.
I spent all of this Sunday morning and afternoon rummaging through boxes at my parent’s house and my grandmother’s house. It was a treasure trove of childhood report cards (I got HORRIBLE grades), old photographs, and long forgotten mother’s day gifts created with my own hands, horror scripts I had written, drawings I had made… My whole childhood reduced to half a dozen cardboard boxes.
And then I found it.
Folded in half.
My childhood WISC results:
I haven’t seen these results in over twenty years.
The subtest scores vary a lot, but I’m very happy with the overall score. Not nearly as high as I used to tell my Promethean friends to fit in, but much higher than the most top bloggers, who probably average around IQ 120.
Seeing these results…
Holding them in my hand…
It was like going back in time over twenty years to the day that launched my life’s work and made me the man I am today.
I was flooded with uncontrollable emotion.
It was so intense.
I wanted to speak to that shy troubled depressed 12-year-old boy I once was and say:
You’re going to be okay
No matter how gloomy and dark the future looks now, your time will come.
You’re never going to be a psychometrician like you want to be, but, by the time you’re in your thirties, you’re going to acquire special skills that are in high demand in both our government and our economy and that will be your ticket to the life you’ve always wanted.
Just hang in there a little longer
Excellent, Pumpkin. Very moving ending.
dear God peepee is a loser.
note the:
“HUGE VERBAL PERFORMANCE GAP.”
scribbled at the end.
“SUGGEST NEUROLOGICAL EXAM.”
The way the psychoeducational consultant explained it to my parents was “the left side of my brain is very bright, but the right side of my brain is very brilliant”
However a neuroscientist from the Mega society told me that was nonsense.
The psychoed consultant also said that if I worked hard, my non-verbal abilities would pull my verbal abilities up to their level, but what usually happens is the weaker abilities drag the stronger ones down, because it’s much easier to give up
But if one believes the WISC-R measures innate abilities, her comment makes little sense
meanwhile Mugabe does not understand that this statement doesn’t make sense “I’d like to sing y’all a song I just wrote, sing along if you know the words.”
pumpkinperson,
please feel free to delete these. I was being stupid.
Meanwhile in Mugabe’s neighborhood;
I like that show…
I do too, I pretty much love all satire.
I think Chartreuse has a lot in common with Uncle Ruckus 😉
Never would’ve thought of that relation, but I think you”re right!
3 high average, 4 superior, 7 very superior.
Maybe: (3(+1SD)+ 4(+2SD)+7(+3SD))/14 at minimum
3SD+8SD+21SD=32SD/14
+2 and 4/14 SDs
15SD
So at least an IQ of 135 overall, on Canadian Norms?
I’m fond of this blog, and although that is a phenomenally great score I still expected a little higher 🙂
135 is typical of STEM professors. That’s an excellent score…
Indeed. The fact that he runs this blog FOR FUN, is a good indicator of his STEM capability, although he has said he doesn’t have a STEM degree.
I wonder what he does for a living.
As the high individual scores are combined, the amount who actually have such a great overall score are diminished because each category is very rare, that’s why it’s “at least”
I gather you were somewhat troubled growing up. Any particular reason why? (and no bullshit from Robert Mugabe/Jorge Videla, please)
I was just a very sensitive kid who did not share the same interests as other kids, and that made me somewhat isolated, which caused a lot of truancy and poor grades. I think it was just my genetically unique personality, but as I got older, I got better at feigning normality and saving my eccentric interests for the internet.
*”but as I got older, I got better at feigning normality and saving my eccentric interests for the internet.*”
Amen, brother, amen.
Interesting. It seems many of us in the HBD-sphere were/are outsiders to a degree.
Bravo… I still don’t get along with normal people. I don’t like how social they are.
not a single one of those tests was on my WISC.
as you will also see none of them is on the current WISC either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wechsler_Intelligence_Scale_for_Children#Test_format
i think peepee was a given a special form for retarded canadians.
*”retarded Canadian(s)”*
Like your long-lost twin;
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/amid-new-york-values-ted-cruz-hunts-delegates
(note picture, of course)
Good lord you’re clueless
The chart I posted can be translated into the following
Information 12
Similarities 13
Arithmetic 14
Vocabulary 14
Comprehension 14
Digit Span 12*
Picture Completion 19
Picture Arrangement 16
Block Design 19
Object Assembly 16
Coding 19
Mazes 18*
Verbal IQ 120
Performance IQ 154
Full-scale IQ 142
But WISC-R norms were well over 20 years old when I was tested so all of these numbers are inflated, plus they’re in American norms which are a bit more generous that white American norms.
*optional subtest not used to calculate IQs
I have the opposite performance. 155 verbal and 120 performance iq.
LOL! We should start a business. You handle all the verbal work. I handle everything else. 🙂
the verbal tests are far more g loaded and reliable.
in terms of pure g, peepee’s scores indicate high average.
the verbal tests are far more g loaded and reliable.
in terms of pure g, peepee’s scores indicate high average.
LOL!
It’s possible my best scores are unrelated to g, but then I’ve always thought g was overrated, and g is not the only part of intelligence that is biological or even genetic.
i wonder if you like Gf-Gc theory so much b/c of your huge advantage in PIQ?
Maybe subconsciously, but I’ve always liked the Gc-Gf theory because without Gf, IQ tests lose their magical ability to separate ability from achievement. They just become another test of acquired skill like the SAT
seriously, those scores are quite high, considerably higher than i had expected (i confess!) i suspect your information has regressed in the meantime because of the narrowness of your interests, which led me to underestimate your iq.
Keep in mind they haven’t been adjusted for the Flynn effect or converted to white norms. Doing so would shave nearly half an SD from the full-scale IQ and even more from the performance IQ.
As for my information regressing, it was already “only” around the 75 percentile at age 12, which is roughly average for a college grad
I do wish I knew more, though with the internet, you can look a lot of stuff up.
good lord you’re a liar peepee.
the very superior line starts at 16.
you have no scores of 19.
THERE’S NO WAY TO INDICATE SUCH A SCORE.
IT’S NOT CLEAR THAT YOU HAVE ANY SCORE OVER 17.
I’M STILL WEIGHTING.
Well obviously there’s a subjective component to reading off a chart, but the very superior range corresponds to scaled scores of 16-19
I’m assuming that any dots placed at the bottom of the very superior range are 16s and any dots placed at the very top of the very superior range are 19s, and dots placed just under the very top are 18s
the verbal section has similar names to the WISC subtests, but the performance section doesn’t even have that!
Keep in mind I took the WISC-R, which was replaced by the WISC-III, which was replaced by the WISC-IV, which was replaced by the WISC-V
It’s a very different test today.
1. a degree in soc sci
2. never studied statistics formally.
those two facts cannot exist in the same world peepee.
and your degree was can’t be in anthropology.
so now i’m thinking peepee is actually a 13 year old girl.
I did take a couple introductory stats classes in university but very basic stuff I already knew from my interest in IQ. A typical exam question would be “what is a standard deviation”
95% of my university training was non-STEM
You attended an Ivy League as a Canadian?
Oh God no! I barely got into any university at all, let alone an Ivy League one! LOL! Although had I gone to an Ivy League school, I would have had a much higher IQ than the average student, though a much lower verbal SAT score.
For some reason I thought you were one of the few Canadians who’ve attended an Ivy League Institution. Most Canadians who come to America are either in 2 scenarios. They are greedy for money and status or fame (usually in show biz).
I recently met a Canadian who graduated from McGill in Montreal and he’s now working in Finance, essentially what most people call Wall St. I thought he wasted his time at Montreal. I told him he should have attended an American business school or if he was lucky, an Ivy League.
Wtf man, are you really that mean or is it just a game ?
You seem to be a smart guy, so why dont you focus your intelligence on something else than reading a blog and eructate your hate toward the blogger ?
I know it’s a vain asking but…
”Wtf man, are you really that mean or is it just a game ?
You seem to be a smart guy, so why dont you focus your intelligence on something else than reading a blog and eructate your hate toward the blogger ?
I know it’s a vain asking but…”
Pump is a quintessential iq-tard, s(he)’s pride to be a organic pre-robot,
in this aspects he is very mechanicist, a pragmatic, (pseudo)rational (or logical) mind.
Or also s(he/it)’s a joker who are playing with all of us (the last comment directed to me was very suspicious…)
Pumpkin,
a very important fraction of the ”termites” who scored very higher in iq tests (Terman study) no had ”successful” lives,
the proportion of the creative achievements among ”termites” was very lower.
genius is creativity,
no have concessions about it,
or you are highly creative and a genius or semi-genius
or not,
you can understand it**
When fathers over-pamper your children, and their children no have self-awareness enough to fight back and try to understand what is happening, they may develop very narcisistic as seems happened with Pumpkin, or he just born like that.
Since early, psychologists and other people has told him that he is very clever.
Seems is relatively rare found a very narcisistic white above-average smart man. Most of them are ”working” in the leftist politics now.
the prototype of highly skilled white scientist tend to be more ”autistic-like” than a highly skilled or cognitive smart black man.
The tilt of verbal intelligence is very similar between blacks and whites
but not about mathematic intelligence where will be very common among whites than in blacks.
Pumpkin display
– obsession with black artists,
– obsession with Oprah (heterossexual man can be a Oprah fan, but he is likely that will be a black, specially in a racially/culturally atomized society like USA or even Canada),
– some demonstrations of lack of basic knowledge about something, for example, about abstractions-examples or when he buy the absurd idea that avg white american in 40’s had a iq at ”retarded” level compared today because Flynn Effect,
He can be a anomaly, i mean, a (white) free thinker with unusual types of interests, Oprah gossip to hbd stuff.
Scientists can be very good to manipulate the perception of the masses via ”scientific” (‘rigorous’ and ‘unbiased’) narrative.
Hbd community see itself as ”beyond the high brow” because they don’t deny some obvious/observable facts and today, don’t deny racial or gender biological diversity is becoming progressively cognitive-elitist (just ask for cognitive elites in Tel Aviv or in any other place where real astute people live). But this is just the beggining.
Most of hbds, seems, are iq-tards or iq-fetichists, they really don’t care about intelligence(s) concept and the reality of cognitive assymetries that made us diverse also in this aspect.
Make sense because this may mean that they would have to start all over again, ”may”…
Many-to-most hbds are
– against ”anti-semitism”,
but not against ”racism” or ”homophobia”
i don’t deny OTHER observable patterns, sorry!
People who are indeed beyond the high brow break up the imposed narratives and try to identify first the natures of elements that compose the scenario, second, the inter-relations of this elements, and so on
Why very smart people like many them deny the obvious fact that ”jews’ are in the power in western and very responsible for many events, read= extremely dangerous events that will reverberates in their own personal lifes** why***
still is politics…
pure science, pure philosophy,
still hard to see here in hbd-e-sphere.
– some demonstrations of lack of basic knowledge about something, for example, about abstractions-examples or when he buy the absurd idea that avg white american in 40’s had a iq at ”retarded” level compared today because Flynn Effect,
No I don’t believe that. The average white American in the 1940s had an IQ around 79 on today’s white norms, but I believe only a third of their deficiency was real, and that their actual biological IQ was 93, only 7 points lower than today, because of sub-optimum nutrition (including disease, which as Lynn noted, prevents the body from using nutrients)
Pumpkin,
I’m studying biology to eventually take nutrition.
I’ll do a bit of research tonight on it, but I don’t think the average American diet was **too different** from today. Yea lack of b vitamins, iron, zinc and protein deficiencies cause a drop in IQ, ESPECIALLY in vitro and ESPECIALLY the 2nd and 3rd trimesters, due to not getting the correct amount of nutrients for brain growth and development.
I’ll look into nutrition of mothers from the 40s and see if there in any stark differences compared to today. There may he trivial ones, ie more breast feeding, but it’s well-known that breast feeding raises IQ due n-3 (omega 3) fatty acids. Our brain loves those fatty acids.
so get this folks, according to peepee:
1. with a digit span score of 110 and a vocab score of 120 it is possible to have a FSIQ of 142.
BUT
2. with a digit span of 100 and a vocab of 145, it’s impossible to have a FSIQ greater than 127.
when does the lying stop peepee?
is lying your “special skill”?
No, you MISUNDERSTOOD!
I peg your IQ at 127, because your WORST scaled score (Digit Span) was 10 (IQ 100), and your BEST scaled score (Vocabulary) by definition was 19 at the most (IQ 145)
Once we know your best score, and your worst score, we can crudely estimate your median scaled score was between both extremes: 14.5
Someone who averages 14.5 on the WISC-R subtests has a full-scale IQ of 132, but assuming you took the WISC-R 10 or 20 years after it was normed, Flynn effect adjustments reduce your score to 126-129
But because the WISC-R was normed on all Americans, instead of just white Americans, and because white Americans averaged 102 (SD = 14.5) , on the scale where the white mean is set to 100 and the white SD is set to 15, your IQ becomes 125-128.
”with members of the Triple Nine Society, the Prometheus society, the Mega society. Some of the greatest minds in the World would send me emails, explaining their philosophy on life.”
Des-learn*
”I was just a very sensitive kid who did not share the same interests as other kids, and that made me somewhat isolated”
but now….
Dear Pumpkin Person Sir,
you once mentioned as to why East Asians inspite of being higher IQ than White Europeans never managed to match the technological progress of whites..you mentioned I guess regarding branching off ..I am not sure..I searched high and low for that article but never managed to find it again..It was your own version of High Equilibrium Trap and I totally loved it..Would you please be so kind to restate your observation,insight again or point me to the necessary article?You mentioned African Blacks also in relation to your point
You might be thinking of ideas expressed in these posts:
https://pumpkinperson.com/2015/03/12/are-east-asians-too-highly-evolved-for-their-own-good/
https://pumpkinperson.com/2014/12/07/high-iq-blacks-are-the-most-creative-people-in-the-world/
https://pumpkinperson.com/2015/02/24/race-autism-schizophrenia/
Yes EXACTLY your second link…about high IQ blacks where you fleshed it out the most..thanks once again..It is a very valuable insight
https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2016/04/10/bugs-versus-drift/
https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2016/04/19/such-a-thing/
@agniputraabhoy
What you mention in regards to East Asians has to do with creativity. Rushton says that brain size is correlated with IQ as is brain size. And that East Asians aren’t as creative due to social pressures to conform whereas whites are more individualistic.
He says with those social restrictions lifted, East Asians can be more creative than whites.
The father a profile is from 100, the less consistent it normally is..So, there is nothing “abnormal” in the profile above.
Fuck, PP, you are (were?) so fast.
actually such a lower V higher P is much much rarer than the reverse.
explanation:
not that V is cultural or acquired and P innate. the evidence is actually quite the opposite.
because the P tests are pure speed…except for the “picture completion”. and if you don’t give a fuck, you’ll take your time.
i punched my psychometrician in the cunt.
Wow, I guess I have a similar story, aside from the high IQ.
Didn’t have a lot of friends in middle school, so I spent too much time on the internet. High school friends were flakes, so I spent even more time on the internet.
Somehow I convinced myself to take IB classes, still ended up being a C student.
I hate being an introvert.
1. ya gets 3 minuteses.
2. ya get bonus points for finishin’ ahead of time.
3. it’s not a pure speed test.
WTF IS PEEPEE ON?
EUREKA! SHE’S ON BAD GENES. SHE’S A STEAMING PILE OF GARBAGE.
THE ONLY PERFORMANCE SUBTEST WHICH ISN’T A PURE SPEED TEST MIGHT BE THE “PICTURE COMPLETION”.
THE ARITHMETIC PART OF OF THE VERBAL SECTION MAY ALSO BE TIMED. IDK.
YOU’RE BELOVED (AND TOTALLY RETARDED) RON HEOFLIN’S TESTS AREN’T TIMED.
peepee dis-es g, yet still claims that one test is better than another, because it’s “designed” to measure IQ.
peepee has reached a whole ‘nother level of retarded.
THE ONLY CONCEIVABLE MEANING OF THE STATEMENT “X IS A BETTER IQ TEST THAN Y” IS THAT IN A BATTERY AS BIG AS ANY CAN THINK OF…X IS MORE G-LOADED THAN Y.
THAT’S
ALL
IT
CAN
MEAN!
BUT THEN AGAIN PEEPEE THINKS “PROMETHEANS” AND 999ers ARE SMART, RATHER THAN RETARDED, WHICH EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM IS.
THE ONLY CONCEIVABLE MEANING OF THE STATEMENT “X IS A BETTER IQ TEST THAN Y” IS THAT IN A BATTERY AS BIG AS ANY CAN THINK OF…X IS MORE G-LOADED THAN Y.
The above statement proves you’re not a first rate intellect.
X is a better IQ test than Y because it measures a wider range of problem solving abilities, more parts of the brain, the ability to adapt to more situations.
What you don’t get is that g (if you believe the theory) is just the variable COMMON to all mental abilities, but that doesn’t necessarily make g equal to the totality of mental abilities
You lack the subtlety to understand the difference between general cognition and cognition in general.
Most mentally retarded people do worst on g, but some retardation (i.e. fetal alchohol syndrome) is unrelated to g.
People with FAS have low IQs not because they are low in general cognition, but because they are low in cognition in general.
The great David Wechsler understood the difference.
The composite score on my report is not a measure of general ability, but a measure of overall, global ability
PEEPEE PROVES ONCE AGAIN HER ABJECT IGNORANCE OF THE TOPIC SHE KNOWS MOST ABOUT.
IT’S REALLY REALLY SAD.
IT’S AMAZING HOW FAR AN AUTISTIC CAN (CLAIM TO) GO WITH SUCH A LOW IQ.
SHOW ME THE SUPER DUPER BATTERY OF ALL “COGNITIVE” TESTS.
SHOW ME THAT ANY TEST LOADS MORE ON G THAN THE SAT, GMAT, GRE, LSAT, ETC.
YOU CAN’T.
BECAUSE THEY DON’T!
TAKE UP YOUR RETARDATION WITH THE BGI FOLKS “I AM EXPERT”.
“I AM EXPERT”!
THAT’S A HOWLER.
AND YOU’RE A CELEBRITY TOO PEEPEE.
AUTISM IS AMAZING.
SHOW ME THE SUPER DUPER BATTERY OF ALL “COGNITIVE” TESTS.
Of course that doesn’t exist, but the Wechsler samples a wider range of cognitive tests than the SAT does
SHOW ME THAT ANY TEST LOADS MORE ON G THAN THE SAT, GMAT, GRE, LSAT, ETC.
I am sure that the Wechsler loads more on g than the SAT, etc, among the general population of American adults, though it’s possible that the SAT may have a higher g loading in very academically homogeneous subgroups, such as college bound kids in good school with four years of advanced placement math.
But my point was that the Wechsler is a better measure of overall cognition,which is not the same as general cognition.
maybe it does. maybe it doesn’t.
maybe the greater sample range makes it LESS g loaded.
maybe MORE.
i really don’t see how any of the P subtests reflect everyday cognition at all.
and AS I’VE SAID BEFORE, as the battery gets bigger, if each subtest is weighted equally, the absolute difference between the average scores of the clever and the stupid gets smaller and smaller.
why?
because for every heavily g-loaded test, there are 100 weakly g-loaded tests.
i mean let’s include hand eye coordination and agility, musical ability, do i get points for my perfect pitch? etc.
if you haven’t you should hook up with this guy Prasanna Ranganathan.
he looks like he needs it in the butt.
you could peg him with a black strap on.
i think peepee.
1. if the better test is the one that measures more “kinds of cognition”…how the fuck do you even know that it does that?
2. without just a bucnh of introspective, subjective, theoretical bullshit, the only way you KNOW they test different abilities is that they correlate poorly with one another.
3. and how is a broader test more of an IQ test in the first place? if it’s not that it’s a better measure of g, then i could come up with another even broader test that was orthogonal to the wechsler and thus your wechsler score would tell me nothing about your score on this new broader test.
4. without g the very concept of “IQ” becomes TOTALLY meaningless. of course one may define g in a number of ways. but there must be some operationalization.
you do not think.
The way I see it is that humans have many different mental abilities. The purpose of IQ is to summarize overall cognition. No test could possibly measure all of those abilities, but you want a diverse sample.
If you asked people who had taken both tests, there would be a consensus that the Wechsler measures a lot more abilities than the SAT does.
Of course the few abilities that the SAT measures are very representative.
It’s like doing a poll, but instead of trying to find the average ability of people, you’re trying to find the average level of ability within a single person.
It’s analogous to finding out the average IQ in the World.
You could sample people from every continent, analogous to the Wechsler testing every major cognitive domain, or you could just sample the two most populated countries (india and China), analogous to the SAT only measuring reading and math
Both methods would work, but the first method would work better.
1. how do you KNOW that one sample is more representative than another?
2. if you’re taking a random sample of 11 “abilities” from the universe of all abilities for person X, and there’s no g, then you’ll learn nothing about the general ability of person X. because you don’t know how the big the universe of abilities is. you don’t even know if it’s finite.
3. if you take a random sample of 1,000 abilities you still haven’t gotten any closer to assessing “general ability”.
4. the only solution to this problem is g. sampling many abilities may actually get you farther from assessing g.
5. on the other hand you do KNOW that some tests are more g-loaded than others, so far as it is possible to know anything via induction.
imipramine is called “the gold standard” of anti-depressants, yet it’s not any more effective afaik.
“gold standard” doesn’t really mean anything. it’s just marketing/convention.
here’s a WAIS-III correlation matirx.
as you can see some of the subtests are orthogonal.
furthermore you can see how the FSIQ-subtest correlations are slightly different between the SA and UK samples.
information is highest for the SA sample. picture arrangement is highest for the UK sample.
I suppose the point is g changes. There’s no doubt that skills measured by the SAT (reading and math) are very g loaded in America today, but suppose Obamacare was scrapped and income inequality produced huge gaps in prenatal nutrition
There’s evidence that prenatal malnutrition lowers virtually only performance IQ and so in a society where prenatal nutrition differed enormously, performance subtests would emerge as the most g loaded. and reading and math would acquire trivial g loadings.
The problem with the SAT is they put all their eggs in a few baskets, so when the factor structure of cognition changes from one population or subgroup to another, it can become quite meaningless.
I suppose the point is g changes. There’s no doubt that skills measured by the SAT (reading and math) are very g loaded in America today, but suppose Obamacare was scrapped and income inequality produced huge gaps in prenatal nutrition
There’s evidence that prenatal malnutrition lowers virtually only performance IQ and so in a society where prenatal nutrition differed enormously, performance subtests would emerge as the most g loaded. and reading and math would acquire trivial g loadings.
I am quite lost here. Wouldn’t it be the opposite ? If prenatal nutrition differed enormously, the performance IQ of an individual would be much less representative of his genetic potential than it would be in a society were everybody have the same prenatal nutrition, and thus performance substest would be even LESS g loaded they actually are ?
May be my IQ is too low to understand what you were explaining… 😥
I am quite lost here. Wouldn’t it be the opposite ? If prenatal nutrition differed enormously, the performance IQ of an individual would be much less representative of his genetic potential than it would be in a society were everybody have the same prenatal nutrition, and thus performance substest would be even LESS g loaded they actually are ?
Performance IQ would be less genetic but at the same time more g loaded, because g itself would be much less genetic. g is just the single biggest source of cognitive variation. In an environmentally homogeneous and genetically heterogeneous society, most variation is genetic (in theory) and thus g is genetic. In an environmentally heterogeneous and genetically homogeneous society, g would be environmental.
But even when g is genetic, you get a very different g depending on your sample. If your sample consists of biologically normals, you might find vocabulary is the most g loaded. If your sample is 50% normal and 50% Williams syndrome, you might find vocabulary is the LEAST g loaded, entirely for genetic reasons.
That’s why I find full-scale IQ of a diverse battery to ultimately be a more meaningful metric than the elusive and ephemeral g.
what kind of fucking retard can’t do every block puzzle in under 20 seconds?
seriously.
especially as the puzzle is only to make one face iiuc.
it might be a bit of a challenge if one had to get the sides and the reverse face right too, and all 6 the faces of the blocks were random.
but then it would be more like a jigsaw puzzle, where’s you’d spend most of your time just looking for the right block.
the “official” IQ test only exists so that psychologists can make money.
drrr.
SAT,
$43, graded BY MACHINE, normed on MILLIONS vs
“official” IQ test,
$1,000? graded in part SUBJECTIVELY, much less reliable (despite claims of the test makers), normed on 2,500 people.
still waiting for you to get a job
no problem there.
i’ll retire long before i’m 45.
UNLIKE YOU!
and i won’t have to leave the country.
…
i think i should con my way into the 999 society. did it replace the old ISPI?
i remember a guy at ISPI wrote me back and claimed my GRE score was 1 in 10,000.
here’s its GRE requirement:
Graduate Record Exam (GRE), combined verbal and quantitative
(through September 2001) 1460
what a bunch of fucking retards.
but i would have to tell them peepee told me my “real” IQ was “only” 127.
but why is it only up to 2001?
i saw charles koch in a vid yesterday.
of course it was the usual libertardian or “classical liberal” bullshit.
but he did say something i agree with 100%.
he was asked why he was still working at age 80.
he said that it’s what he did. he went on to paraphrase aristotle to the effect that “happiness doesn’t come for drinking (he’s wrong about that, but…) and consuming it comes from fulfilling your nature.”
he said asking him such a question would be like asking an 80 y old writer why he was still writing.
and my nature is cynical. just enough is always the right amount. lagom ar bast. balu is my heroe.
meanwhile you have people spending like it was going out of style. mostly an anglo-sphere thing. these people will always make more than me, but when we’re both old, i’ll be much much richer than most of them, and i’ll have worked far less.
still waiting for you to get a job
LOL! I think he has a job but it’s obviously not a very demanding one, since he gets drunk every night and is up half the night.
But like a lot of mentally ill people who come from upper class backgrounds, he’s been given just enough work to have dignity and be kept out of sight, holed up in the local warehouse, while the rest of the family gets together on Christmas eve, sips a bit too much whine, and tries so very hard to forget.
so let me get this straight.
peepee works hard for her money?
what a fucking loser.
people like me call people like you “drones”.
couldn’t find the source, but i just typed in “amphetamine WISC score performance” to google and what i said was confirmed.
i couldn’t find any numbers on P per se, but i did find +4.5 FSIQ vs placebo, and that VIQ was unaffected.
so maybe 9 points in the P is what i remember.
but maybe it only works on kids with a problem.
they haven’t tried crack yet.
Prasanna Ranganathan?
No but I’ve met him.
I think he’s smart. He was a lawyer.
He’s hilarious too. Oprah has a sidekick named Iyanla Vanzant, and she always speaks about scooping out the emotional lawyers from your past, so Prassana showed up with a huge scoop and began scooping into the air. Never seen Oprah and Iyanla laugh so hard.
of course you’ve met him.
i’ve met myself too.
I hate Iyanla with a passion.
Her show is a waste of time.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3557028/Lil-Kim-looks-unrecognisable-shares-photos-blonde-wig-lighter-taut-skin.html
wtf does that have to do with anything santa claus?
I guess something like “who PP seems to be and who PP really is” with makeup = internet.
She is hot btw <3.
Yes, i thought in Pumpkin,
racially ambiguous, s(he) don’t know shhe’s man, woman or Lil Kim.
before, after, what tha hell is it…
ah yes.
Black women do all they can to look white.
“psychoed consultant also said that if I worked hard, my non-verbal abilities would pull my verbal abilities up to their level”
Do you know how to go about this, PP? You see, I have the opposite problem: an extremely high verbal IQ but relatively weak nonverbal IQ. Language, linguistics, and writing all come naturally to me; engineering, on the other hand, is far more of a struggle. On the WAIS-IV, Matrix Reasoning was the subtext that caused me the greatest amount of difficulty: I obtained a scaled score of 14, which is much lower than the score of 19 on my strongest subtexts (e.g., Similarities, Vocabulary, Digit Span).
Is there any way for me to boost my nonverbal IQ? My verbal IQ seems to have gone up in recent years (I had a rocky education, too, so my score on the Information subtext would undoubtedly increase if I took it now), but so far I have not noticed much improvement in my nonverbal IQ. This could be because I primarily focus on cultivating my strengths, not my weaknesses; or it could simply be because a noticeable increase in fluid intelligence is impossible for someone my age. Either way I am not entirely sure.
Having a well-rounded mind is important to me. What, in your opinion, can I do to prevent my nonverbal skills from atrophying, or even to improve them? Currently I am in my early twenties and, based on my research, my fluid intelligence will begin to decline very soon, which is why I am asking this question now.
Adapt your weakness by your strenghts
or simply accept it and don’t try to force your weaknesses, it’s counterproductive.
useful idiots always tend to act like that.
but paradoxically, wisdom tend to be little contrary to the creativity.
Creative people experiment ideas and also commit a large margin of mistakes, but they tend to tolerates their mistakes…. also because creative ideas comes to the same source.
Wise people refine ideas and try to do the otherwise, reduce their mistakes progressively.
The ideal world is gravitates between them.
the point of the intersection between creativity and wisdom is the intrapersonal intelligence/domain, the capacity to know thyself, their own strenghts and weaknesses and start to develop their own potentials.
Intrapersonal intelligence/domain: What a lot of pseudo-experts in intelligence like to give pejorative functions or tradings.
(Oops—I just realized that autocorrect had changed the word “subtests” to “subtexts” in my prior comment. Sorry about that!)
Touching story PP, sorry you had a tough time.
I am bright but I guess I have the flip side of the story.
I could do normal before I finished primary school (11 here), so I always had a wide circle of friends at school, lots of clubs, student council etc. My intelligence mean’t I found the work very easy and didn’t really have to concentrate at all to get top grades in my year.
I had the choice of every university I applied to, but once I got there I was lost for a few years, it just wasn’t what I had imagined (I did do a STEM subject and had always thought I would be a research scientist – and I was offered a place to stay on and do that – but by then I was disillusioned with the reality of academic science). Despite partying a lot I still got my degree and got on a prestigious graduate job scheme (10,000 applicants for about 45 places) and ended up getting an MBA paid for by my company.
So for me high intelligence has led to a kind of charmed life so far. Even when I haven’t worked as hard as others I have ended up ahead (although at times in my life I have worked very hard) – life seems a bit unfair sometimes.
At least I realise I am lucky, an accident of genetics and the fact I enjoyed school and got the opportunity to go. However, I do always feel that what I have achieved is about the minimum I could have done with the gifts I have, I am deeply unsatisfied that I should have done better. I am not very ambitious however, so I don’t have that drive and now I am older, and have responsibilities to a family, I am more risk averse, so it doesn’t look as if I will ever achieve what I feel I should have done. Still most people have regrets, c’est la vie.
Do you know your IQ?
No, I have never had a full IQ test.
However, after University I obviously applied for a few Graduate trainee schemes, for instance in the job I eventually got I did verbal, mathematical and “management potential” tests which were simmilar in character to parts of an IQ test. I know that I was in the top 5% of the graduates they had recruited on each test. As recruitment was limited to good degrees from Russell Group Universities here in the UK, and they only recruited a limited subset of that it is some indication in a formal setting.
Well I don’t think any of the social isolation I felt was because of my intelligence, rather my interests. I had classmates more intelligent than me, but they had mainstream intellectual interests like computers, and thus were well adjusted as kids.
How big was your school? It seems strange that you would have had classmates more intelligent that you if you are IQ 142?
There was maybe one person in my year who was more intelligent than me (although maybe not) but he moved school when he was 14. I lost touch after a while but strangely he ended up in the same career as me – although a different path.
Based on the chart above, I estimate 142 to be my score on the WISC-R, but keep in mind that the norms on the WISC-R were old by the time I took it, and giving IQs that were 7 points inflated (see the Flynn effect).
Not only that, but they were American norms, and I live in Canada where the average IQ is several points higher, and I grew up in one of the best suburbs of perhaps the smartest city in Ottawa:
https://pumpkinperson.com/2015/08/31/is-ottawa-the-smartest-city-in-north-america/
So when you combine the inflated norms, with a very smart community, an IQ of 142 becomes much less rare.
Hey PP, you mention that you grew up corresponding with members of the Triple Nine Society, the Prometheus society and the Mega society. Considering the value of these people’s insights, I assume you still have copies of this communication. Could you share some on your blog / via email? You should already have mine.
I did not save these correspondences. They were on the email of an old computer which I don’t think still works. Plus, I would need to get their permission to share their emails and I’m no longer in touch with them.
But I do from time to time on by blog try to always mention when I’m explicitly sharing an insight I learned from one of them.
The whole concept of multiple regression for example, was suggested to me by a Promethean because I was interested in estimating IQ from multiple biodemographic correlates (i.e. head size, income, height, etc).
The concept of dynamic vs static g (not to be confused with fluid vs crystallized g) was also suggested to me by a Promethean.
And so was the idea that problem solving speed doubles every 5 IQ points because the human mind works in parallel.
Some of these ideas are speculative of course.
Very moving and inspiring post. And unexpected, because i’ve noticed that generally, people are disappointed by their IQ, even very high ones.
Have you been in contact with Jane Clifton. I read she was the highest scorer in Mega test (46 score like Vos Savant, Langan scored 47 but is said to have a first score of 42 under pseudonym Eric Hart on previous attempt) :
In a 1992 letter, she wrote : “I have a PhD in psychology (cognitive) with lots of background in statistics, factor analysis, test theory, etc., etc. “. She was struggling to find a job. So that’s a lot of match with your interests Pumpkin.
http://megasociety.org/noesis/67.htm
PS : in this letter, there is an interesting article from Eric Erlandson. I wonder if he is the founder of rock band The hole, former lover of Courtney love. That would be a lot of retrospective hype 🙂
Perhaps it would be a good idea – maybe withholding names – to dress some portrait of Mega society members. Even if i scored 38, i would never dare to contact any of them. I used a pseudonym because i was a bit scared at that time of what was this society (i thought it could like free mansonry, and i was brought up in very catholic environment). So i’m very impress you did contact people and had meaningful correspondance with them. That’s a human experience treasure that can be shared without losing anything.
I forgot to tell Jane V. Clifton is Canadian 🙂