04-05-2010, 09:42 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-05-2010, 06:42 AM by James H. Fetzer.)
NOTE: THIS POST WILL MAKE MORE SENSE IN VIEW OF POST #441 BELOW. IN THE ORIGINAL SEQUENCE, IT APPEARED BEFORE THESE TWO.
Jack,
I don't want to make too much of this, but some of those you have been dealing with have extremely high IQs. I would estimate that David S. Lifton has an IQ around 150, for example, and David W. Mantik and John P. Costella have to have similarly high IQs. My GCT (General Classification Test) was 152. That doesn't mean I know everything, but only that I'm pretty good at taking things apart and putting them together--not physical things, as my wife would tell you, but matters intellectual. From your post of 4 May 2010, I take it you discovered that philosophers average around 160 and scientists around 159. Well, I am a philosopher and Judyth is a scientist, so I take that as indirect confirmation of what I am saying. That much should have been obvious even from her early accomplishments as a high-school student. She was a prodigy. Judyth not only has an extremely high IQ but knows more and in more detail about events in New Orleans than anyone else, in my estimation. She cannot have learned these things from reading, because she has often corrected them with new data not previously known. And in the case of controversies over interpretations of events, she has proven herself to be more able than anyone else on his thread, as I have lived through it. My familiarity with IQ is also theoretical, by the way, since I published THE EVOLUTION OF INTELLIGENCE (2005) on the nature of mind and the emergence of human mentality from those of earlier species, including animal mind and primate mind. There is a lot there on intelligence as the ability to learn. I think this is not a subject to which you have given as much attention as have I. Going by your data, I am not equal to the average for philosophers! It is easy to make too much of IQ as those who tout their membership in MENSA often do. Measures of ability are not also measures of accomplishment, which requires effort, discipline, and perseverance. Very few philosophers, for example, publish as many articles and books as I have. That's just something I happen to be good at. I am not equally good at everything, including mathematics.
Jim
[quote name='Jack White' post='191657' date='May 4 2010, 07:30 AM']
Whoever came up with an IQ of 160 for JVB is making the wildest Judyth claim yet!
The standard Stanford-Binet adult IQ Test rates any score above 135 as genius!
........
[color="#000080"]A normal intelligence quotient (IQ) ranges from 85 to 115 (According to the Stanford-Binet scale). Only approximately 1% of the people in the world have an IQ of 135 or over. In 1926, psychologist Dr. Catherine Morris Cox - who had been assisted by Dr. Lewis M. Terman, Dr. Florence L. Goodenaugh, and Dr. Kate Gordon - published a study "of the most eminent men and women" who had lived between 1450 and 1850 to estimate what their IQs might have been. The resultant IQs were based largely on the degree sof brightness and intelligence each subject showed before attaining the age of 17. Taken from a revised and completed version of this study, table II shows the projected IQs of some of the best scorers.
For comparison I have included table I which shows the IQs' relation to educational level.
Cox also found that different fields have quite widely varying average IQs for their acknowledged leading geniuses. Displayed below are there calculated Deviation IQs (the number in brackets is the number in the sample considered):
Philosophers (22) average IQ 160; Scientists (39) 159; Fiction writers (53) 152; Statesmen (43) 150; Musicians (11) 149; Artists (13) 153; Soldiers (27) 136.
[/color]
[quote name='Kathleen Collins' post='191655' date='May 4 2010, 04:48 AM']"She has an IQ of around 160 and is superb at research."
-- Jim Fester
Read your own sentence. She's a researcher. Doesn't that give you a clue about what she knows? She didn't live all this. She read about it.
Kathy C[/quote]
[/quote]
Jack,
I don't want to make too much of this, but some of those you have been dealing with have extremely high IQs. I would estimate that David S. Lifton has an IQ around 150, for example, and David W. Mantik and John P. Costella have to have similarly high IQs. My GCT (General Classification Test) was 152. That doesn't mean I know everything, but only that I'm pretty good at taking things apart and putting them together--not physical things, as my wife would tell you, but matters intellectual. From your post of 4 May 2010, I take it you discovered that philosophers average around 160 and scientists around 159. Well, I am a philosopher and Judyth is a scientist, so I take that as indirect confirmation of what I am saying. That much should have been obvious even from her early accomplishments as a high-school student. She was a prodigy. Judyth not only has an extremely high IQ but knows more and in more detail about events in New Orleans than anyone else, in my estimation. She cannot have learned these things from reading, because she has often corrected them with new data not previously known. And in the case of controversies over interpretations of events, she has proven herself to be more able than anyone else on his thread, as I have lived through it. My familiarity with IQ is also theoretical, by the way, since I published THE EVOLUTION OF INTELLIGENCE (2005) on the nature of mind and the emergence of human mentality from those of earlier species, including animal mind and primate mind. There is a lot there on intelligence as the ability to learn. I think this is not a subject to which you have given as much attention as have I. Going by your data, I am not equal to the average for philosophers! It is easy to make too much of IQ as those who tout their membership in MENSA often do. Measures of ability are not also measures of accomplishment, which requires effort, discipline, and perseverance. Very few philosophers, for example, publish as many articles and books as I have. That's just something I happen to be good at. I am not equally good at everything, including mathematics.
Jim
[quote name='Jack White' post='191657' date='May 4 2010, 07:30 AM']
Whoever came up with an IQ of 160 for JVB is making the wildest Judyth claim yet!
The standard Stanford-Binet adult IQ Test rates any score above 135 as genius!
........
[color="#000080"]A normal intelligence quotient (IQ) ranges from 85 to 115 (According to the Stanford-Binet scale). Only approximately 1% of the people in the world have an IQ of 135 or over. In 1926, psychologist Dr. Catherine Morris Cox - who had been assisted by Dr. Lewis M. Terman, Dr. Florence L. Goodenaugh, and Dr. Kate Gordon - published a study "of the most eminent men and women" who had lived between 1450 and 1850 to estimate what their IQs might have been. The resultant IQs were based largely on the degree sof brightness and intelligence each subject showed before attaining the age of 17. Taken from a revised and completed version of this study, table II shows the projected IQs of some of the best scorers.
For comparison I have included table I which shows the IQs' relation to educational level.
Cox also found that different fields have quite widely varying average IQs for their acknowledged leading geniuses. Displayed below are there calculated Deviation IQs (the number in brackets is the number in the sample considered):
Philosophers (22) average IQ 160; Scientists (39) 159; Fiction writers (53) 152; Statesmen (43) 150; Musicians (11) 149; Artists (13) 153; Soldiers (27) 136.
[/color]
[quote name='Kathleen Collins' post='191655' date='May 4 2010, 04:48 AM']"She has an IQ of around 160 and is superb at research."
-- Jim Fester
Read your own sentence. She's a researcher. Doesn't that give you a clue about what she knows? She didn't live all this. She read about it.
Kathy C[/quote]
[/quote]