Commenter pumpkinhead made a series of points about Donald Trump’s IQ that I thought were worth responding to in a new article.
1. SAT scores correlate highly with IQ, I believe the correlation is around 0.86. There are SAT to IQ conversion charts online. So using that as a metric we can work out his IQ based on the Wharton school minimum SAT requirements. It is not clear what his score is or whether he even has any but he did gain entry(albeit as a transfer student) which is one more piece of “evidence” in his favor.
2. According to this, https://www.iqmindware.com/blog/the-bell-curve-cognitive-elites/
the average IQ of the top 12 universities in the country is around 142.
The 142 figure is from The Bell Curve by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray. It’s based on the fact that elite school students scored 2.8 standard deviations above the general U.S. population on the verbal SAT, which equates to 142 on the IQ scale. For years I’ve argued that this is a massive overestimate because you get a selection bias effect when you measure the IQs of a group by the very test used to select them. Thus I was happy to see that buried in the notes on page 712 of The Bell Curve, they state that the correlation between verbal SAT and IQ is 0.65, and so students from elite schools should regress about a third of the way to the mean. This would reduce them from +2.8 SD to 0.65(+2.8 SD) = +1.82 SD or IQ 127. And that’s more or less what we see in a study of Harvard and Dartmouth students.
Now there are studies where the SAT correlates much higher with official IQ tests or g (general intelligence) in academically homogenous samples, but if you gave the SAT to all U.S. 17-year-olds (including high school dropouts with no test prep & little interest or knowledge in algebra) the g loading might drop a lot.
Of course in Trump’s case, the SAT would be a valid proxy for his IQ if it were discovered randomly, but the average SAT of elite students in general is an inflated IQ proxy because the only reason we know their average score on the SAT (and not some other test) is precisely because they did well enough to get into an elite school; thus it’s not a random sample of their ability and thus we use regression to predict their score on a random test.
3. He is a billionaire, albeit with a good head start but he has basically multiplied his bankroll/inheritance 100x over in his lifetime. That is nothing to scoff at especially since a lot of people squander their entire inheritance in their lifetime.
Just yesterday The New York Times reported that Trump was given $413 million in today’s money from his father. As of Oct 3. 2018, Forbes estimates his real time net worth to be $3.1 billion so I’d say he multiplied his inheritance by 7.5 times. That’s still quite impressive, but nowhere near 100 times.
4. He comes from the cutthroat business/real estate world AND he managed to become a successful entertainment personality. In retrospect it all may have played into his long term plan to win the presidency. This may be more a testament to his grit and social status/contacts but if by some happenstance it is easy to get in(entertainment & business worlds), i’m pretty sure it is exceedingly hard to stay in, a certain level of intelligence is a must. Any way you slice it though, that is no small feat.
I’ll grant him that. I define intelligence as the cognitive ability to adapt (turn situations to your advantage) and there’s virtually no public figure who has made it to the top in three completely different domains (real-estate, media, and politics).
But at the same time, because there are so many factors that can influence life outcomes, the correlation between IQ and worldly success (money, power, status) is only moderate (0.5 at the most) and Trump had a huge head-start.
His father was one of the 400 richest Americans (and self-made) and such people average IQs around 132, which means their kids have IQs around 116 (assuming about a 0.5 correlation between father and child). His father was about 4.73 standard deviations above average in money (one in a million level) and given the 0.47 correlation between father and son income in the U.S., we’d expect Trump to have been 4.73(0.47) = +2.37 SD in income (and perhaps worldly success in general). Instead, as both a multi-billionaire and a President, he’s arguably the most successful of all 215 million American adults (age 25+) and thus +5.73 SD in worldly success, which is 3 SD higher than expected.
Given a 0.5 correlation between IQ and worldly success and assuming it applies within social classes, that would give him an expected IQ that is 3 SD(0.5) = 1.5 SD above that of other trust fund babies (average IQ 116) and thus IQ 139.
5. Interviews from when he was younger reveal a much more linguistically and cognitively adept individual. His fluid intelligence has taken a hit with age but that is to be expected. IMO certain aspects of his working memory took the biggest hit.
Indeed, which is why although his biggest accomplishment (becoming president) came in old age, I would only apply the above IQ estimate to his younger years. Given the imperfect stability of IQ over the life time, his current score could be wildly different (even adjusting for age).
6. He won the presidency as a complete outsider, going up against the media, corporate, and deep state favorite during a time of “first black”, “first female”(what’s next, first gay?) national infatuation(very un-meritocratic but i’m glad logic prevailed). In my view that is unheard of in the last 100 years, or maybe ever in US politics.
He certainly showed incredible adaptability in becoming President. Being President? Not so much.
7. The reason I give him a high math/visual IQ is because he seems to be the sort of person that thinks in pictures. People that think in images formulate their thoughts in that way and then try to put words to those images. If their verbal is not too high and old age has impacted their working memory even further, they struggle to find the words while the conceptualizing may be stellar. They then try to make up for this and convey their competence(of which they are internally sure of) in a braggadocious way. Of course not all big ego types are of this sort, one has to look at all the evidence…which is found in the obvious competence it would take to gain a degree in business from Wharton, a degree that leans far more into math/logical and visual acuity than it does linguistic.
8. In any case I think that his greatest asset is his interpersonal intelligence a must for any business/real estate entrepreneur let alone a president of the US. This won’t be measured by any IQ test but given the high correlation between respective facets of intelligence it is not much of a stretch to think that the underlying cognitive foundation that allows one to excel in one area can lend itself to facilitating excellence in other areas too(though admittedly this is not a strict rule).
So using all the above I would say there is enough evidence to safely say that he is more likely >125 than he is <125. I’ve settled at 140(a far cry from the reported 156) and while I admit I may be wrong, I doubt I am wrong by much. So peak 140, current 130.
I can agree with a peak IQ of 140. A current IQ of 130 sounds way too generous (even adjusting for age) in my humble opinion but anything’s possible. Let’s see if he’s smart enough to get re-elected.
Pumpkin, what do you think about big 5 personality traits ? I’ve done the test and it gives food for thought. In my case, I think that some mental condition twists my results …
I’ve always assumed it was valid since it’s not an arbitrary taxonomy someone just pulled out of their hat, but is based on factor analysis of psychometric tests. Jensen cited it as evidence that factor analysis does not inevitably lead to a single g factor. On the other hand, I’ve also read other research showing there is a g factor for personality just like there is for cognition. Rushton was a pioneer in this work.
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.646.6388&rep=rep1&type=pdf
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ_D4d42sD32QTlHVfJYBErEqtqxWeYMiuYlQHkFXeO0Gx4QWsS
I’ll read the article. I am 100% in intellect. But I am only 7% on neuroticism and 0% on agreableness (both compassion and politeness).
Probably my very poor mind ontoly is the reason (culprit) of that. And that reinforces my belief that one can choose to be a different and better person that ones own genetic program.
My genes would have me being a Halloween 🎃 monster …. I am not interested in that. I don’t even watch horror movies. Or crime. Nor serial killers bio. I don’t even understand their motivation.
I thought if i have a hyper-personality, i tend to score high on everything, less extroversion, based on my subjective interpretation. But i’m very extroverted with people i trust or have enough intimacy.
I go from 100% to 0% with some very average – openness (creativity) or extraversion or orderliness at 60%.
On big five i scored very higher on
Openess
Introversion
avg on
Agreeableness
Emotional stability
and lower on
Consciousness
Extroversion
”Probably my very poor mind ontoly is the reason (culprit) of that. And that reinforces my belief that one can choose to be a different and better person that ones own genetic program.”
True. Sister.
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS78UFmEVMMEQiLmyyfC4vRwV28cnci5usAvK-u7Irm2q-EQxRj
A squirrel*
EVERYONE SHUT THE FUCK UP!
MY SON JUST DIED OF SIDS!
Oh my God, what happened?
Her son died.
Pumpkin, is this person for real?
It is so sad. In retrospect I regret giving statistics about child mortality. I present you my condolences. I hope you find the cause too.
Can you show us a picture
Gond, why are you doubting Marsha ?
i need a exorcist
I will put my name number in the stories
PP please moderate visual homosexuality.
Unless its mugabe then its 73% ok.
I can’t
Are you affected or afraid**
Both. I never get boners over guys, only the bassline emotional stuff. I don’t like most guys at any level also. As Ive matured Ive gotten less gay. Ive never found the hardcore gay aesthetic appealing, disturbing in fact. Now I’m less autistic and can visualise how id look to others and myself, and I don’t like it, so thats one driver to leave the stuff.
What are your thoughts on gay parenting?
It’s not visual homossexuality = men kissing one each other…
learn this autard
Favorable only after a strict psychological examination of couple and absolutely against ”sexual transition” in kids.
The same for heterossexual couples.
And for ”animals” adoption.
So you think homo parents are fine, but trans parents aren’t?
At priori [deja vu… pffff]
i thank swank for being honest about his low IQ.
another sock puppet retired.
mugabe is 1000 – 0.
SAD!
STICKS AND STONE MAY BREAK MY BONES
BUT (UNLESS I’M A RETARDED GAY JEW) WORDS WILL NEVER HURT ME.
TRUE!
IT’S PART OF GROWING UP.
SWANK IS A LITTLE GIRL.
A LITTLE SHORT RETARDED GAY JEWISH BODYBUILDER GIRL.
SAD!
STICKS AND STONE MAY BREAK MY BONES
BUT (UNLESS I’M A RETARDED GAY JEW) WORDS WILL NEVER HURT ME.
Words hurt people.
Government non-intervention in speech is invaluable.
Words hurt people.
Both of these principles can co-exist.
muggy can’t understand this.
muggy really believes ideas and the expression of those ideas have no impact on the mental and physical well-being of individuals…
…when it’s been SHOWN that just knowing that one is lower status and lower income than one’s neighbors has real consequences on health. it follows that the expression of differing views and ideas than one’s own and casting those as superior will have the same effect.
because muggy is a little girly man who doesn’t understand that everything comes with a price.
they can have consequences. but they should have no consequences for people over the age of 6. the truth and honesty are more important than feelings.
but as you have said yourself “government is a racket”. even if this isn’t always true today, it certainly is true that all governments began as rackets, basically the same as cosa nostra. that is, the state is basically just violence and intimidation + propaganda. so the idea that the sate would arrest people for hurting other people’s feelings is ABSURD.
hurting people’s feelings should have no legal consequences. there are plenty of other consequences for mean girls and bullies.
“respect” is for people who have no self-respect.
bullies at school or at work can be talked to. and you can always walk away. a MAN walks away. women have no problem with this. why do men?
the only real problem is if your own family has douche bags.
but they should have no consequences for people over the age of 6. the truth and honesty are more important than feelings.
more autism.
the entire society of people feeling the consequences of bad words disagrees with you.
I never said hurting people’s feelings should have legal consequences.
that the law is not there to correct every wrong does not mean that there are not wrongs apart from the law.
there are plenty of other consequences for mean girls and bullies.
MORE LYING.
bullies and mean girls TEND TO WIN because of ideologies and ideas that have nothing to do with their merit as people.
bullies at school or at work can be talked to. and you can always walk away. a MAN walks away. women have no problem with this. why do men?
AGGRESSIVE AUTISM.
yes, walk away until you a man are an island and have no one around you. or worse, you have been effectively shut out from most of your society.
and women DO have a problem with this. they get catty in their own ways.
the only real problem is if your own family has douche bags.
WHO DO YOU THINK TEACHES BULLIES TO BULLY
IT’S PART OF GROWING UP.
another retarded lie.
what part of growing up?
the mental health issues and PTSD millions of people suffer from from those innocuous words?
muggy doesn’t even believe verbal abuse is a thing.
Sticks and stones may break my bones,
but words can also hurt me.
Stones and sticks break only skin,
while words are ghosts that haunt me.
Slant and curved the word-swords fall
to pierce and stick inside me.
Bats and bricks may ache through bones
but words can mortify me.
Pain from words has left its scar
on mind and heart that’s tender.
Cuts and bruises now have healed;
it’s words that I remember.
everybody hurts sometimes until they reach the kill screen.
alcoholism…
the diamond path to happiness is letting go, is to stop wanting what doesn’t come easily, is to know that whatever one does it won’t make any difference, is to never take on responsibilities and rid oneself of those he may have if possible, is to know he can’t change his past, but he can re-interpret it, etc.
swank: no pain, no gain.
mugabe: no pain, no pain.
you can get an MD to prescribe you atenolol and clonazepam. the latter makes it easy to drink not very much and still get very drunk, but it’s a scheduled drug and withdrawal is very unpleasant. the former and the latter make it easier to stop cold turkey.
better living through chemistry.
swank: sayings are just sayings. humans are human.
muggy: no, sayings are reality! humans aren’t human!
the diamond path to happiness is letting go, is to stop wanting what doesn’t come easily, is to know that whatever one does it won’t make any difference, is to never take on responsibilities and rid oneself of those he may have if possible, is to know he can’t change his past, but he can re-interpret it, etc.
this isn’t Cynicism, it’s Epicurean.
humans want things.
humans have needs.
you can’t train yourself to be a non-human.
swank: if you knew how bad that made me feel you wouldn’t say that.
me: if you knew how that made me feel and that i will repeat what i just said over and over and over again you wouldn’t say that.
wrong.
swank: words hurt people. it’s a fact. manifestly obvious for any non-retarded person.
muggy: humans aren’t human. social john galt-ism. up is down. left is right. war is peace. child-like idioms that anyone past the age of 6 knows aren’t true.
Pumpkin, are you familiar with IQExams? If so what’s your opinion on the tests? I know most online tests aren’t accurate, with few decent ones, but there they correlate results with member results from professional or highly regarded tests. However, the average there is also about 140…so maybe inflated.
I’m not familiar with it.
intelligence and creativity both rely on internal feedback
intelligence (causality)
creativity (combination)
mentally simulated information
I have solved Artifical Intelligence
How come the WAIS matrix reasoning and the RPM norms are extremely different? The WAIS norms say that the matrix reasoning average is the same till age 30 I believe. Ravens norms change by every half years. Why is that?
The WAIS is more colorful, and it does feel different to the RPM.
Would IQtest.dk be normed with the WAIS or RPM?
I’ve noticed the WAIS Matrix reasoning is individually administered & time is taken to make sure everyone understands the task. This may affect scores, particularly of older generations who are less used to taking tests because of less schooling.
I don’t think that’d be a factor in the younger ages, below 30. Norms are extremely different from ages 16-30 on both the tests.
A young person’d be able to figure out what the test is about in most cases.
Also, is problem solving just pattern recognition?
peterson tears a shitholer a new shithole.
weakerson is dumb as bush
Also, can you take a look at this WAIS profile
Similarities: 13
Vocabulary: 12
Information: 16
Digit Span: 15
Arithmetic: 17
Matrix Reasoning: 15
Block Design: 11
Visual Puzzles: 8
Coding: 13
Symbol Search: 13
two other exceptions i forgot about.
1. fraud or false advertising. this always involves false statements made for pecuniary gain usually. but maybe this isn’t a speech crime per se. idk.
2. i forgot it again.
my right not to hear does not mean i can shut you up. it just means i can shut you up if i can’t avoid your speech any other way…because you’re blasting it from speakers at 200 decibels or whatever.
(1) definitely is a crime….
(2) is a slippery slope.
if a ginger lives in a society that constantly bombards him with messages about the inferiority of gingers…can he meaningfully avoid that speech? can you say with a straight face that such messages won’t have a harmful impact on his psyche?
and if ‘avoiding speech’ means the ginger has to live in a hole beneath the ground or in a manner that effectively cuts him off from 90% of the society’s opportunities…can we say that he can meaningfully avoid the speech?
…
face the music — words hurt.
most ‘free expression’ is toxic.
the marketplace of ideas is completely consistent with this.
in the long run we get the best of the best.
in the long run we’re also dead, as some fucktarded ideologue once said.
there is no such thing for any of the identity groups. there is such for poor people. but you can always turn the tv off.
i’m sorry about you disability swank.
i learned from eric cartman, peace be upon him, that gingers have no soul.
“hate speech” laws are just another way the rich distract the people.
there is no such thing for any of the identity groups
a LIE.
the degree of self-loathing we see in society is externally caused. humans don’t naturally hate themselves.
but you can always turn the tv off.
you can’t turn general society off.
the tv isn’t the only place such messages thrive.
“hate speech” laws are just another way the rich distract the people.
no one is talking about approving hate speech laws.
that the government has no place in outlawing hate speech != hate speech not being a real thing and a real social problem.
peepee can add authentic leftist C J Hopkins to the list of people who get it.
The ruling classes love identity politics because they keep the working classes focused on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, and so on, and not on the fact that they (i.e., the working classes) are, essentially, glorified indentured servants, who will spend the majority of their sentient existences laboring to benefit a ruling elite that would gladly butcher their entire families and sell their livers to hepatitic Saudi princes if they could get away with it. Dividing the working classes up into sub-groups according to race, ethnicity, and so on, and then pitting these sub-groups against each other, is extremely important to the ruling classes, who are, let’s remember, a tiny minority of intelligent but physically vulnerable parasites controlling the lives of the vast majority of human beings on the planet Earth, primarily by keeping them ignorant and confused…
The political parties love identity politics because they allow them to conceal the fact that they are bought and paid for by these ruling classes…The fake Left loves identity politics because they allow them to pretend to be “revolutionary” and spout all manner of “militant” gibberish while posing absolutely zero threat to the ruling classes they claim to be fighting…See, the thing is, there is no essential difference between your identity politics-brainwashed liberal and your Swastika-tattooed white supremacist…The short version is, what we are currently experiencing (i.e., Brexit, Trump, Italy, Hungary, et cetera, the whole “populist” or “nationalist” phenomenon) is resistance (an insurgency, if you will) to hegemonic global capitalism, which is, essentially, a values-decoding machine, which eliminates “traditional” (i.e., despotic) values (e.g., religious, cultural, familial, societal, aesthetic, and other such non-market values) and replaces them with a single value, exchange value, rendering everything a commodity…But that’s the lens I choose to look through. Maybe I’ve got it all assbackwards. Maybe what is really going on is that Russia “influenced” everyone into voting for Brexit and Donald Trump, and hypnotized them all with those Facebook ads into hating women, people of color, transsexuals, and the Jews, of course, and all that other “populist” stuff, because the Russians hate us for our freedom, and are hell-bent on destroying democracy and establishing some kind of neo-fascist, misogynist, pseudo-Atwoodian dystopia...
https://www.unz.com/article/who-doesnt-love-identity-politics/
If im reading this right, ((swanky)) is one of those people that believes blacks do badly in school because teachers are too nasty towards them and don’t worship them enough.
the degree of self-loathing we see in society is externally caused. humans don’t naturally hate themselves.
sort of. i agree that in a “state of nature” humans do not hate themselves, but i also agree with nietzsche that people don’t hate themselves enough.
it’s always darkest just before the dawn.
for one thing, if people hate themselves they must have already decided who they are. why would you do that karen? italian americans clearly do not hate themselves for being italian. even though they are the sole remaining white ethnics.
why can’t blacks and latinos be like asian immigrants? is it all down to asian immigrants being select, like black african immigrants and afro-caribbean immigrants? were chinamen once hated as much as negroes?
If im reading this right,
phil while you (unsurprisingly) didn’t read it right…
…your skepticism about hatred having an effect on a group and its performance says a lot.
it’s always darkest just before the dawn.
sometimes the NIGHT IS ETERNAL.
so we have “sticks and stones” and now some other jive platitude.
if people hate themselves they must have already decided who they are. why would you do that karen?
Get off Margarat Thatcher’s “there is no society” clit. People are impressionable. All of them.
“To consort with the crowd is harmful; there is no person who does not make some vice attractive to us, or stamp it upon us, or taint us unconsciously therewith. Certainly, the greater the mob with which we mingle, the greater the danger. … I mean that I come home more greedy, more ambitious, more voluptuous, and even more cruel and inhuman, because I have been among human beings.”
italian americans clearly do not hate themselves for being italian.
that’s why later generations of italians are just as observant of the old country’s traditions and rituals as they are American ones, right?
doing away with cultural heritage/assimilation = taught inferior vs superior.
how someone could be familiar with Chomsky and Manufacturing Consent and fail to appreciate the FACT that people are conditioned to hate themselves and that this conditioning/speech has a deleterious effect on the human condition is…well, unsurprising. it’s the Terrence Tao gene.
This makes a BIG assumption that Trump was accepted into Wharton on his own merit. Rich fathers who are willing to make contributions to the school are very adept at getting under-performing offspring into exclusive schools. GW Bush, for example. I don’t think you can judge his IQ simply based on admittance to an exclusive school when bribery and connections can bypass normal admission procedures.
Also, it is very unlikely that he actually is a billionaire. That is part of the brand he has built for himself. He is undoubtedly a millionaire and perhaps close to becoming a billionaire, but I doubt he actually is one, reports notwithstanding. We all know journalism isn’t what it used to be and fact checking isn’t something that publications care to fund or invest the manpower to do it. Let’s also not forget the bankruptcies he has declared. Heck, I’d be a whole lot richer myself if I could have declared bankruptcy several times in order to get a fresh start. Most little people don’t have the luxury of doing that and still getting approval for millions in loans from banks. We have to suffer the consequences of our financial mistakes and misfortunes. The rich clearly don’t. The bank bailouts should have taught us that. “Successful” takes on a different meaning when you are looking at a system rigged in favor of those who already have wealth and against those who don’t.