Author Topic: Guess my I.Q.! (The results are in early!) (Read 31654 times)

Azure · « **on:** November 03, 2008, 06:47:57 pm »

RESULTS:

I noticed the topic was dying out, so everyone, here are the results!

My average IQ score from tests I've taken is about 135. The lowest score I ever recieved was 123, and my average scores are in the upper 130's. I just took another today, and the results were as follows:

Auriman1 posted about two IQ tests he took, and his scores were 130 and 118, respectively. He provided the URLs, and I chose the latter (and presumably more difficult test). On this test my score was 138.

...

I can provide the some score pages if you wish, but that's about it!

EngiNerd · « **Reply #1 on:** November 03, 2008, 07:08:56 pm »

I'd say you're reasonably bright ... at least, you speak awefully well on a forum for a 14-year-old.

douglas · « **Reply #2 on:** November 03, 2008, 07:09:57 pm »

Quote from: Azure on November 03, 2008, 06:47:57 pm

I'm bored, and that's when my greatest (and dumbest) ideas come forth from the inner machinations of my mind.

This time, I'm very curious as to how much of an idiot you guys take me for. I know my IQ, and at the end of (Edit: eight) days, I'll tell it to you. But until then, let the approximations and off-topic ridicule begin!

(I'm 14 years old, in case you find that fact relevant)

Lack of appropriate option makes Doug cry :(

Quote from: Minus the Antiporcupine on November 03, 2008, 07:08:56 pm

I'd say you're reasonably bright ... at least, you speak awefully well on a forum for a 14-year-old.

I bet he can even spell "awfully" properly. Guy's a genius.

Auriman1 · « **Reply #3 on:** November 03, 2008, 07:13:08 pm »

The "awefull" reminds me of one of my old math teacher's nitpicking of the English language. For example, he was comparing awesome and awful. He claimed that, logically, awesome would mean some awe, while awful would mean full of awe. Therefore, when someone said something was awful you should take it as a compliment.

Azure · « **Reply #4 on:** November 03, 2008, 07:50:36 pm »

Quote from: Minus the Antiporcupine on November 03, 2008, 07:08:56 pm

... at least, you speak awefully well on a forum for a 14-year-old.

Awefully well. I like that.
Keep guessing, guys!

EngiNerd · « **Reply #5 on:** November 03, 2008, 08:13:22 pm »

Epic facepalm.
Wow I walked into that. I talk English good.

Azure · « **Reply #6 on:** November 03, 2008, 08:26:57 pm »

Quote from: Minus the Antiporcupine on November 03, 2008, 08:13:22 pm

Epic facepalm.
Wow I walked into that.

You tend to do that, but you usually evade the brick, right?

General Throatstomper · « **Reply #7 on:** November 03, 2008, 09:30:47 pm »

Any attempt to quantify intelligence is fundamentally meaningless for a stew of fundamentalisms, mostly stemming from the myopic definition of 'intelligence'- myopic, almost paradoxically, for the try's bloated nature. Intelligence tests only provide lumpy, instantaneous assessments on abilities with a low ceiling-once you hit that 800 math on the SAT's, are you as good at math as everyone else who scored an 800? Even the math savant who can instantly calculate triple digit factorials (no semantics, nobody can do this)? Are you "smarter" than this same idiot savant who you outscore on the verbal section by a considerable margin? Or maybe you scored poorly because you didn't sleep the night before. And, what about the brilliant musician-how do we consider his intelligence? "Intelligence" has become a meaningless term, these tests try to read compartmentalized faculties that are intrinsically blended. The best method of determining how "smart" someone is is no real meter at all.

Anyways, I'd bet a Vegas ice bath that he inflates the score he received. Relatedly, from which test is this taken?

Combo · « **Reply #8 on:** November 03, 2008, 09:57:30 pm »

I chose 30-50 for lols <_<

I want to take an I.Q. Test...

Luxray · « **Reply #9 on:** November 04, 2008, 02:30:20 am »

121-130...even though mine's about 140+

P.P.A. · « **Reply #10 on:** November 04, 2008, 06:43:32 am »

Mine was 139 when I took that test... about 5 or 6 years back.
Also I'd guess 111-120.

Azure · « **Reply #11 on:** November 04, 2008, 07:44:29 am »

Quote from: General Throatstomper on November 03, 2008, 09:30:47 pm

Any attempt to quantify intelligence is fundamentally meaningless for a stew of fundamentalisms, mostly stemming from the myopic definition of 'intelligence'- myopic, almost paradoxically, for the try's bloated nature. Intelligence tests only provide lumpy, instantaneous assessments on abilities with a low ceiling-once you hit that 800 math on the SAT's, are you as good at math as everyone else who scored an 800? Even the math savant who can instantly calculate triple digit factorials (no semantics, nobody can do this)? Are you "smarter" than this same idiot savant who you outscore on the verbal section by a considerable margin? Or maybe you scored poorly because you didn't sleep the night before. And, what about the brilliant musician-how do we consider his intelligence? "Intelligence" has become a meaningless term, these tests try to read compartmentalized faculties that are intrinsically blended. The best method of determining how "smart" someone is is no real meter at all.

Anyways, I'd bet a Vegas ice bath that he inflates the score he received. Relatedly, from which test is this taken?

I agree with your statement, or at least some part of it. I believe that aptitude can not be properly measured by a single test, as it is almost inevitable that the questions will require knowledge that you may or may not possess, which is unrelated to your ability to reason in general.

However, I do believe that IQ tests can give an accurate approximation of one's intelligence.

So, that's why I've decided to give intervals of IQ scores, since the ones I recieved (even though I took numerous tests, and found the average of the scores) could have been inaccurate.

So, at the end of the voting, I'll give the correct approximate interval, or voting choice.

If you think the score I give at the closing to be "inflated", I'll direct you to the results of the tests I took.

Aitamen · « **Reply #12 on:** November 04, 2008, 07:58:23 pm »

I love the above assesment...

Same reason I think we all become gamers to begin with, as per the first half of the Hacker's Manifesto!

Antronach · « **Reply #13 on:** November 04, 2008, 08:47:44 pm »

I voted 161+ cause your sexy

Azure · « **Reply #14 on:** November 05, 2008, 07:39:54 am »

That's slightly disturbing, Chao_Fan.

But at least you voted.

bertin · « **Reply #15 on:** November 05, 2008, 09:09:44 am »

I voted for 131-140.

Azure · « **Reply #16 on:** November 05, 2008, 09:14:30 am »

Interesting...

Alondite · « **Reply #17 on:** November 06, 2008, 10:38:23 am »

There are so many factors when trying to "calculate" intelligence that it's not worth even trying; it's just not possible. SATs are fundamentally flawed in the assumption that Math and English aptitude is the measure of intelligence...but that could not be farther from the truth. There are some general trends concerning intelligence, but not everyone fits into those trends. And then there is the whole matter of what it means to be "intelligent." There's just no way to determine intelligence, or even what it means to be intelligent.

Oh and BTW, average IQ is ~100, and standard deviations are like 10-15 points iirc. You want go more than a few deviations without stepping into "genius" territory, so I would doubt that you are anywhere above the 120-130 range, if that. No offense, I doubt any of us are above that range (and if so, not by much). I personally have never taken an IQ test, but I know that in a real IQ test anything above like 110-115 is a very high score. Only a small fraction of the population is above 130, and many of those people are not what most would consider to be "normal."

Azure · « **Reply #18 on:** November 06, 2008, 11:16:48 am »

Quote from: Alondite on November 06, 2008, 10:38:23 am

Oh and BTW, average IQ is ~100, and standard deviations are like 10-15 points iirc. You want go more than a few deviations without stepping into "genius" territory, so I would doubt that you are anywhere above the 120-130 range, if that.

Then I am am product of no average deviation... (this could be a good thing, or perhaps not so good.)

Quote from: Alondite on November 06, 2008, 10:38:23 am

No offense, I doubt any of us are above that range (and if so, not by much).

I honestly think that a few people are close to the genius range here; they just don't look it.

Alondite · « **Reply #19 on:** November 06, 2008, 01:59:49 pm »

Also yes, your age is relevant because IQ is based on age. That's why younger people tend to have higher IQs.

Auriman1 · « **Reply #20 on:** November 06, 2008, 03:53:54 pm »

To throw some comparison numbers out there, I took a few quizzes today:

Age: 18

http://www.iqtest.com/
Score: 130

http://www.intelligencetest.com/
Score: 118

12 points is a pretty big gap, a clear example that results vary depending where you take it, and these tests are more of a general indicator. I'll also note that the second score was received from a considerably more credible site than the first.

Also, to make your ratio IQ test results out of the "child" rankings, Azure, place your age above 16, as that's the commonly used divider in these tests between "kid" and "adult", and once you hit adult, the results of these tests aren't altered due to age.

Azure · « **Reply #21 on:** November 07, 2008, 08:06:51 am »

Most of the tests I took were made for people ages 16 and over, so I don't think that will be a problem.

Auriman1 · « **Reply #22 on:** November 07, 2008, 01:05:54 pm »

Assuming you took my advice about the age for your final results, that's very impressive, Azure.

Still, as stated, think of them more as a general indicator. I've found results to fluctuate pretty drastically from person to person once they're past the 110 point on those tests depending on the test, as there's normally questions requiring background knowledge they may or may not have/think about. Similarly, it's quite easy for people to focus on these concepts alone and make their results skyrocket on IQ tests.

And, of course, as people have more or less already stated, most IQ tests focus primarily on basic math concepts and knowledge of the english language, rather than critical thinking, problem solving, artistic evaluation, scientific understanding, and other such categories. They cover a very narrow spectrum.

To throw even more numbers out there, here were my ACT scores from when I took the ACT during my junior year in high school. If you're unfamiliar with the ACT, the absolute max for any category is 36. Take them as you will:

English: 34
Math: 28
Reading: 30
Science: 31
Composite: 31

Aitamen · « **Reply #23 on:** November 07, 2008, 09:07:15 pm »

31
36
32
27 (I swear, they avoided ALL of what I knew... it was BS)
34

also, I got a perfect on the math portion of my SAT... I'd just rather not post the other two <_<

Auriman1 · « **Reply #24 on:** November 08, 2008, 01:20:29 am »

A perfect 36 on the math section...most excellent performance, Aitamen :)

I had been dealt a cruel question on the general math portion, and it tripped me up to the point I had to rush through about half of the section to make sure I still finished it in time. The worst part of it is, I got that particular question wrong anyway. I should've listened to the old advice of skipping questions that are taking too long :[

EngiNerd · « **Reply #25 on:** November 08, 2008, 07:48:48 am »

I've taken the GRE (read: SATs for grad school) twice and got 800/800 on the math section both times. That still didn't keep me from bombing the writing the first time.... <_<

Aitamen · « **Reply #26 on:** November 08, 2008, 05:38:45 pm »

Yeah, my writing was abysmal because I was rushed...

I appreciate the compliment... a 34 in english is nothing to scoff at, my friend!

my composite score increases by English by 1 and my sci by 4... but those are the best scores from a single testing session...

P.P.A. · « **Reply #27 on:** November 09, 2008, 05:48:44 am »

I took my test in real life. >:O

Aitamen · « **Reply #28 on:** November 09, 2008, 06:35:16 am »

uh... I'll assume you mean the IQ test...

and I did too... but my results were VERY sporadic... ranging from 112 to 152... most were 135-145, though...

yse · « **Reply #29 on:** November 09, 2008, 08:23:55 am »

Wow you think that's bad. Mine have ranged from 108 to 168. o_O

I would say that mine is somewhere in the 120s based on that, but I would indicate that a) I don't believe that IQ testing has much worth and b) even if it did, it's not even a good indicator of a person's potential, let alone the kind of person they are.

Guess my I.Q.! (The results are in early!)

The Sonic Center > Forum > The Lounge > Wikkity! > Guess my I.Q.! (The results are in early!)

Poll

Give your honest opinion. The correct answer will be revealed in 8 days.

Author Topic: Guess my I.Q.! (The results are in early!) (Read 31654 times)