YOUR IQ compared to" World Chess Champion" Garry Kasparov ..

Sort:
jonasejoasch

I got 6/10. I had the correct idea on no. 8 about perfect squares but was too lazy to work out which of the two 391 or 197 was not a perfect square. I also missed no.1, 4 and 7.

Jazzist

IQ is useful as a predictor of educational attainment as well as for detection of individuals with special needs in education and in other areas of social functioning. To my understanding, it is also generally accepted as a measurement of general intelligence in clinical practice.

There is robust evidence in that differnt aspects of cognitive performance in humans are positively correlated and the general intelligece theory states that this is caused by a common factor - the general intelligence which is supposedly approximated by IQ tests.

I can't understand the reactions provoked by this topic in some individuals. It seems to me that they're having trouble accepting that some people are more intelligent than others.

IQ does not mean everything for any human activity, including chess, and no professionals believe this is the case. It is true that many other skills are needed for any activity, and IQ may not be among the most important for most activities, but this does not invalidate IQ as a construct and its use in the situations I describe above.

The test given in this thread is of course a joke.

Deranged
Jazzist wrote:

IQ is useful as a predictor of educational attainment as well as for detection of individuals with special needs in education and in other areas of social functioning. To my understanding, it is also generally accepted as a measurement of general intelligence in clinical practice.

There is robust evidence in that differnt aspects of cognitive performance in humans are positively correlated and the general intelligece theory states that this is caused by a common factor - the general intelligence which is supposedly approximated by IQ tests.

I can't understand the reactions provoked by this topic in some individuals. It seems to me that they're having trouble accepting that some people are more intelligent than others.

IQ does not mean everything for any human activity, including chess, and no professionals believe this is the case. It is true that many other skills are needed for any activity, and IQ may not be among the most important for most activities, but this does not invalidate IQ as a construct and its use in the situations I describe above.

The test given in this thread is of course a joke.


I've noticed people like you that complain about IQ tests being "unfair" are usually the ones that score low (such as below 100). Perhaps when your IQ reaches the 100 mark you will realise that IQ is a good indication of intelligence.

Jazzist
Deranged wrote:
Jazzist wrote:

IQ is useful as a predictor of educational attainment as well as for detection of individuals with special needs in education and in other areas of social functioning. To my understanding, it is also generally accepted as a measurement of general intelligence in clinical practice.

There is robust evidence in that differnt aspects of cognitive performance in humans are positively correlated and the general intelligece theory states that this is caused by a common factor - the general intelligence which is supposedly approximated by IQ tests.

I can't understand the reactions provoked by this topic in some individuals. It seems to me that they're having trouble accepting that some people are more intelligent than others.

IQ does not mean everything for any human activity, including chess, and no professionals believe this is the case. It is true that many other skills are needed for any activity, and IQ may not be among the most important for most activities, but this does not invalidate IQ as a construct and its use in the situations I describe above.

The test given in this thread is of course a joke.


I've noticed people like you that complain about IQ tests being "unfair" are usually the ones that score low (such as below 100). Perhaps when your IQ reaches the 100 mark you will realise that IQ is a good indication of intelligence.

Did you quote the wrong post? I didn't complain about IQ tests being unfair.

EDIT: I'm very curious about how you know that the people that complain about fairness in IQ tests usually score low. Do you have access to these people's IQ test results? :p

yusuf_prasojo
i_r_n00b wrote: however, i thought the Rio de Janeiro was a river or something....im such an idiot.

i dont think answers are as important as the reasoning process, and i clearly failed at that.


Rio De Janeiro consists of more than one word, so that is my answer.

yusuf_prasojo
Jazzist wrote:
I can't understand the reactions provoked by this topic in some individuals. It seems to me that they're having trouble accepting that some people are more intelligent than others.

May be they have had bad experience. Being rejected and considered a dumb person for having low IQ. While actually they have many other positive qualities instead of IQ. Such as hate and insecurity.

yusuf_prasojo
Jazzist wrote:

yusuf: Maybe. But I don't think most of these people have taken any validated IQ test.


It often hurts looking at others acting like a god just for having high IQ. My IQ is only 105 but I'm smarter than my IQ suggests

Jazzist

yusuf: Maybe. But I don't think most of these people have taken any validated IQ test.

DrSpudnik

I thought the answer to #8 was 144, because it's gross.

Surprised

yusuf_prasojo
DrSpudnik wrote:I thought the answer to #8 was 144, because it's gross.

625,361,256 and 144 sounds familiar but 197 does not so my answer was 197.

The one who created this IQ test must have a very low IQ.

MsJean

http://www.msoworld.com/Olympiad/mwr.html 

here is the link :)

quadrewple

Call me crazy, but I don't see how knowing trivia questions is an indicator of IQ...

Kingpatzer

"1. Whale. The whale is the only mammal."

Pike is the only one that refers to a single set of organizism within a single genus. All of the others refer to groups of multiple genuses.

3. Hermes. All the others are planets in the solar system.

Saturn is the only one from Roman mythology, the rest are Greek.

Washington is the only city that doesn't exist inside of a State.

Oslo is the only city whose river(s) isn't a navigable waterway 

Really these are some bad questions. :)

yakushi12345
quadrewple wrote:

Call me crazy, but I don't see how knowing trivia questions is an indicator of IQ...


 

This test isn't great, but the questions still involve an abstract understanding of information to find the answers.  For instance, the question about cities is flawed in that knowing about those cities is a result of education experience and not thinking ability(specific knowledge instead of capacity for knowledge) but the ability to identify the uniqueness is a test of thinking ability.

MsJean

next Im going to post the MMPI !

Kodfish
trysts wrote:

Question two is 30, 33, not 90, 93.


 No the answer to number two is 90,93.  You double 45 to get 90 and add 3 to get 93, that's the pattern.

MsJean

WOW so the test was right ? I missed that question twice do I have to take a point off now ?

trysts
Azukikuru wrote:
trysts wrote:

Question two is 30, 33, not 90, 93.


No, 90 and 93 is correct. It's explained in the second post.


Oh.

stanhope13

IQ tests are just a rough guide

MsJean
echecs06 wrote:
MsJean wrote:

WOW so the test was right ? I missed that question twice do I have to take a point off now ?


 Ms, your post was # 69, so you got screwed twice.


Awww well ill just take it again cause now I know all the answers ! ha!