IQ has nothing to do with how good you are at chess, except maybe an extremely low IQ.Â
I don't believe btickler raised the spectre of IQ with any thought towards relating it to chess ability. I think it's just an obsession of his.
I didn't mention my IQ here, which was professionally measured with a calibrated IQ test called the Schonell Test, when I was 9, nearly 10. btickler mentioned it, probably because he's negatively obsessed with the idea that someone can be cleverer than him although that isn't a particularly rare occurrence. I made the mistake of mentioning it a few years ago and he's like a dog with a particularly tasty bone, who keeps burying it and then digging it up. Anyway, it was confirmed as an adult in the 1970s.
That aside, and although you've had the good grace to answer my questions, I hope you don't mind if I criticise your ideas slightly. "Even .... can" isn't necessarily the prelude to insulting speech and I had no reason to assume that it might have been meant in an insulting way. I don't think there's a syntaxial judgement to make because all depends on what you meant by "re-examining a conversation" or to whom it might apply. I don't think that "has the cognitive ability to question someone's distaste" is any better. A four year old has no ideas of sexual misconduct and the disapprobation among others which can result. My home was a relatively happy one so neither would I have understood, at four, that people can be systematically cruel to others, as Einstein was, especially if they're members of his family. So no, I hadn't a clue because I wasn't given a clue. They just didn't like him at all. Apparently, the feeling was quite strong but that's all I knew.
Apparently, most people can't even remember much, if anything, from when they were four.
All I can find on the Schonell test is a reading/spelling test, if you could, please direct me to a source where I can read about it.Â
I didn't say it necessarily preluded an insult, only that that was its most common use. It wasn't meant as insulting in that context, only as an example.
I wasn't referring to any sexual misconduct, I was referring to being told something with no given reason. I further clarified one sentence after your quotation.
When I was four my preschool teacher was Ms.Wall who had black hair, My PE teacher was Ms.Hiddleston who was rather short and had brown curly hair, My art teacher was an older woman named Mrs.spencer, and my Library teacher was Mr.axe who had glasses and short, spiked, fading brown hair. This is just to say people do remember stuff from the age of four, as I could continue for paragraphs of memories from the age of 4 specifically.
Â
Â
I wouldn't know where to find a link. Your searching will be as good as mine. I did check up on the Schonell test some years ago and discovered that they didn't continue with the IQ testing. Bear in mind that it was early 1961. Good, I'm glad you have a good memory. Are you interested in IQ measurement and related things?
All fields of study are interesting; if you meant that as asking if I've been tested, then yes, but my therapist gave me the test at the worst possible time. If you are curious as to the score, allow me to make my excuses first: 1. I had had no caffeine that day, a drug I require to be a peak performance. 2. I was fresh out of the hospital (I mean that literally, we drove from the hospital to the therapist) 3. I was unaware that that was the day I would be getting the test 4. and finally, I was extremely anxious throughout hindering my performance
All that considered: 138
That isn't so bad, is it.
That isn't so bad, is it.
Eh, I was disappointed in my performance on that one
And anyways, why would Albert Einstein waste his time away on a board game when he could dedicate his time to science and creating advancements to mankind?
Such as bigger bombs.
I have over 1000 books and am a voracious reader. My most precious book is a 1st edition Charles Dickens. At present we are changing one of our spare bedrooms into a library. Finally we will have the room to display our collections.
Â
That isn't so bad, is it.
Eh, I was disappointed in my performance on that one
In 1975-76 I spent quite a lot of time in India and hitch-hiked back from Kashmir as far as Italy, where I came down with hepatitis and was hospitalised for three weeks. Back in England, when I was convalescing, I became interested in IQ testing and wished to test the early result, which, apparently, was off the scale. When I'd asked them, all they would say was "over 140" but I knew it was going to have been in the region of 180 to 200, because I was on form the day I did that test and very nearly completed all the questions in the paper. I could calculate very fast and accurately and had good concentration. So good that I could close everything else out, entirely.
I used the Eysenck IQ tests because I believed that they were the least culturally biassed of all IQ tests. I did a battery of them .... I may still have them somewhere. The aim was to do tests under all conditions, so I did them when I was feeling good, feeling ill, had a bad cold, had a hangover, had a bad cold AND a hangover .... each time trying my very best. The aim, though, was to produce low scores, because I wanted to disprove the prevailing idea that "how you feel" doesn't alter the results by much. I managed to produce one score much lower than the rest, of 116. There were a couple around 130 and the bulk were in the range of about 145 to 155. But I also did about four when I was feeling fine, as a sort of standard. I scored 169 I think three times. I was disappointed because I made bad mistakes in those. I never did a test when I was feeling on top form. I produced a range from 116 to 169, which is pretty massive and which completely discredited the idea that IQ tests are reliable indicators, which was my aim. So you can feel quite pleased for scoring 138 when you were feeling bad.
I have over 1000 books and am a voracious reader. My most precious book is a 1st edition Charles Dickens. At present we are changing one of our spare bedrooms into a library. Finally we will have the room to display our collections.
Â
Oh lovely. All I had to compare with that was a later edition of some of his serialised works. Wish I'd kept those though. But I was dealing in books back then and using the proceeds to build a collection. When the price of books bombed, I just kept my collection and started doing the same with stamps.
That isn't so bad, is it.
Eh, I was disappointed in my performance on that one
In 1975-76 I spent quite a lot of time in India and hitch-hiked back from Kashmir as far as Italy, where I came down with hepatitis and was hospitalised for three weeks. Back in England, when I was convalescing, I became interested in IQ testing and wished to test the early result, which, apparently, was off the scale. When I'd asked them, all they would say was "over 140" but I knew it was going to have been in the region of 180 to 200, because I was on form the day I did that test and very nearly completed all the questions in the paper. I could calculate very fast and accurately and had good concentration. So good that I could close everything else out, entirely.
I used the Eysenck IQ tests because I believed that they were the least culturally biassed of all IQ tests. I did a battery of them .... I may still have them somewhere. The aim was to do tests under all conditions, so I did them when I was feeling good, feeling ill, had a bad cold, had a hangover, had a bad cold AND a hangover .... each time trying my very best. The aim, though, was to produce low scores, because I wanted to disprove the prevailing idea that "how you feel" doesn't alter the results by much. I managed to produce one score much lower than the rest, of 116. There were a couple around 130 and the bulk were in the range of about 145 to 155. But I also did about four when I was feeling fine, as a sort of standard. I scored 169 I think three times. I was disappointed because I made bad mistakes in those. I never did a test when I was feeling on top form. I produced a range from 116 to 169, which is pretty massive and which completely discredited the idea that IQ tests are reliable indicators, which was my aim. So you can feel quite pleased for scoring 138 when you were feeling bad.
Interesting, I'll have to take a few more and calculate the average
Yes, do. There is one thing, though. I did find a slight tendency to find the tests easier as I did them. I think that would have very slightly reduced the time I had to take to understand questions, probably resulting in a small upward drift of scores. Not particularly noticeable looking at the results, because there was no pattern to whether I did a test feeling good or feeling ill or hung over. But my subjective impression was that practice made them very slightly easier. But I took care to do those that produced good results "not in a bunch".
Our collection continue to grow on a weekly basis. The children are going to curse us when they have to clear the house out! LOL
Haha yes, or maybe bless you. My son will get my books. He's a physicist and mathematician, working as an engineer. I hope he likes what he gets and doesn't curse me too much!
Da Vinci made a difference but so did Monet, Manet, Van Gogh., John Constable.
Vera Brittain
No politicians would ever make my list.
Poets would though. Shakespeare,Wordsworth Robert Graves, John Keats and the chap who wrote "Dulce et decorum est" and sadly died a few days before the Armistice, Wilfred Owen. Siegfried Sassoon.
Yeah, but I am not inviting Da Vinci just as an artist 
. He did so much more in so many areas. Same reason I think Franklin is a good choice.
My hubby collects stamps and has a fatastic model railway. Takes up all the garage!
I didn't mention my IQ here, which was professionally measured with a calibrated IQ test called the Schonell Test, when I was 9, nearly 10. btickler mentioned it, probably because he's negatively obsessed with the idea that someone can be cleverer than him although that isn't a particularly rare occurrence. I made the mistake of mentioning it a few years ago and he's like a dog with a particularly tasty bone, who keeps burying it and then digging it up. Anyway, it was confirmed as an adult in the 1970s.
I did not bring it up it here this go round. And at least not since before the January post you responded to. In fact, I haven't said boo to you for weeks. You kicked this off.
Try again. I think you read the other poster and just assumed it was me, but I am far from the only person that knows of your IQ claims.
I messaged you. But I'm going to bed. Another day you must tell me what areas of philately your husband specialises in and what your favourite coins are to collect. By message is better than taking up space here, for various reasons!
Â
Try again. I think you read the other poster and just assumed it was me, but I am far from the only person that knows of your IQ claims.
Oh, for Heavens Sake, please try to cultivate some kind of sense of proportion and stop being quite so obsessive. Please do attempt to grow up, eventually.
I have all his published work.
Oh, wonderful. I'm sorry to say that about 18 years ago we had to have our house underpinned due to the fact that the house next door was subsiding. So we had to get out of the house for six months. The insurance paid for the rent of another house and for storage but I had a massive book collection and the price of books was starting to drop, so I sold half of my book collection and the ones to go were mainly history, art, chess and poetry. I have a few poetry books left. A couple of Robert Burns, I think, maybe from the 1840s, a modern Byron, about half a dozen others at the most. I dip into them occasionally but most of my books are once again in boxes because we're in the process of moving into a bigger house.