This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
SomeMichGuy · M
I think some good points raised both elsewhere in replies to your post, and here, are:
1) [u]What score range[/u] do you consider to be a "high" IQ? Anything over 1 σ out? Two σ's? Three? Four?
2) [u]How do you know[/u] whether or not someone has what you consider to be a "high IQ"?
3) [u]What do you mean[/u] by "a bit off"?
4) [u]What are your examples[/u], (since it seems you have some set of persons in mind)?
I think that these would help better define the parameters of the experiences you have had which feed into the generation of this post.
1) [u]What score range[/u] do you consider to be a "high" IQ? Anything over 1 σ out? Two σ's? Three? Four?
2) [u]How do you know[/u] whether or not someone has what you consider to be a "high IQ"?
3) [u]What do you mean[/u] by "a bit off"?
4) [u]What are your examples[/u], (since it seems you have some set of persons in mind)?
I think that these would help better define the parameters of the experiences you have had which feed into the generation of this post.
ElmerWilks · 36-40, M
@SomeMichGuy 170 on up and when I say a bit off I mean really awkward. Like simple things make them speechless or they don't know how to react in social situations.
SomeMichGuy · M
@ElmerWilks So like 3.5 sigmas... That answers #1, and you also got #3.
How big is your sample size? How do you know the IQs?
I knew a guy who used to tell everyone he was a genius...like the same claim by a former chief executive of a large, well-known country...this was simply not true.
How big is your sample size? How do you know the IQs?
I knew a guy who used to tell everyone he was a genius...like the same claim by a former chief executive of a large, well-known country...this was simply not true.
ElmerWilks · 36-40, M
@SomeMichGuy they told me their IQs. More than one person stated they have a high IQ.
ElmerWilks · 36-40, M
@SomeMichGuy Also, certain serial killers had high IQs.
SomeMichGuy · M
@ElmerWilks
[quote]they told me their IQs. More than one person stated they have a high IQ.[/quote]
Oh...ok. I think self-reported IQ scores are likely to be as accurate as self-reported penis sizes...for similar reasons.
You have met many fewer people of IQs 170 & above than you have been led to believe. I don't know how many have told you that they are in your select set.
[quote]Also, certain serial killers had high IQs.[/quote]
Not sure how this fits in...?
Are you saying your circle includes a lot of serial killers?
[sep]
Just for fun...
For a population described by a Gaussian distribution, the fraction of the population greater than or equal to some given value is called the [b][i]Q[/i] function, [i]Q(x)[/i][/b].
Using a calculator at Wolfram (see [i]https://www.wolframalpha.com/widgets/view.jsp?id=95784c6b00784691c55ea0a420fd7ee0[/i]), for
[i]x = 3.5 σ[/i]
that fraction seems to be
[b]0.000232629...[/b] (0.00232629...%)
or 232,629 people per billion.
From
[i]https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/[/i]
World population now
~7.898 billion
so ~1.837 million...over the planet
But you are in the US, with a current population of
~0.3335 billion
so ~77,582 people in your high IQ range.
(We'll go with that, but [i]https://www.census.gov/popclock/[/i] has ~0.3328 billion for the current US population).
Using [i]https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/tables/2010-2020/state/totals/nst-est2020.xlsx[/i] for Missouri, the population is
~6.152 million = 0.006152 billion
so ~1,431 people in your high IQ category, across the whole state.
From
[i]https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/datasets/2010-2020/metro/totals/cbsa-est2020-alldata.csv[/i]
the St. Louis metropolitan area has
~2.805 million people, or
about 45.6% of the population...if it doesn't include ppl from across the river...
Regardless, it has the lion's share of your state's population, and so also the greatest number of your high IQ pool.
Now, we can expect that some mechanisms result in high IQ persons migrating to certain areas, and you could argue that, say, Washington St. Louis University, could be a reason that St. Louis would have a bigger-than-simply-statistical number of high IQ persons.
Maybe you are in a place where you happen to run into more smart people than is typical...but do you think it makes sense?
[quote]they told me their IQs. More than one person stated they have a high IQ.[/quote]
Oh...ok. I think self-reported IQ scores are likely to be as accurate as self-reported penis sizes...for similar reasons.
You have met many fewer people of IQs 170 & above than you have been led to believe. I don't know how many have told you that they are in your select set.
[quote]Also, certain serial killers had high IQs.[/quote]
Not sure how this fits in...?
Are you saying your circle includes a lot of serial killers?
[sep]
Just for fun...
For a population described by a Gaussian distribution, the fraction of the population greater than or equal to some given value is called the [b][i]Q[/i] function, [i]Q(x)[/i][/b].
Using a calculator at Wolfram (see [i]https://www.wolframalpha.com/widgets/view.jsp?id=95784c6b00784691c55ea0a420fd7ee0[/i]), for
[i]x = 3.5 σ[/i]
that fraction seems to be
[b]0.000232629...[/b] (0.00232629...%)
or 232,629 people per billion.
From
[i]https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/[/i]
World population now
~7.898 billion
so ~1.837 million...over the planet
But you are in the US, with a current population of
~0.3335 billion
so ~77,582 people in your high IQ range.
(We'll go with that, but [i]https://www.census.gov/popclock/[/i] has ~0.3328 billion for the current US population).
Using [i]https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/tables/2010-2020/state/totals/nst-est2020.xlsx[/i] for Missouri, the population is
~6.152 million = 0.006152 billion
so ~1,431 people in your high IQ category, across the whole state.
From
[i]https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/datasets/2010-2020/metro/totals/cbsa-est2020-alldata.csv[/i]
the St. Louis metropolitan area has
~2.805 million people, or
about 45.6% of the population...if it doesn't include ppl from across the river...
Regardless, it has the lion's share of your state's population, and so also the greatest number of your high IQ pool.
Now, we can expect that some mechanisms result in high IQ persons migrating to certain areas, and you could argue that, say, Washington St. Louis University, could be a reason that St. Louis would have a bigger-than-simply-statistical number of high IQ persons.
Maybe you are in a place where you happen to run into more smart people than is typical...but do you think it makes sense?
ElmerWilks · 36-40, M
Yeah make sense and I'm scared of serial killers but well-known ones like Jefferey Dhamer, Edmund Kemper, and many others had high IQs. Which is really bizarre. I guess intelligence doesn't really correspond with sanity.@SomeMichGuy
SomeMichGuy · M
@ElmerWilks Well, it makes sense that high IQs are distributed among both sociopaths and non-sociopaths.
The most..."successful" sociopaths might well be those with the highest IQs. So maybe a slight recharacterization of what you said is
[b]"A high IQ is no guarantee that that person will be benevolent to you, or even neutral."[/b]
And being afraid of serial killers is not silly, but don't let it consume you. Be careful, be alert, listen to your gut/instincts.
The most..."successful" sociopaths might well be those with the highest IQs. So maybe a slight recharacterization of what you said is
[b]"A high IQ is no guarantee that that person will be benevolent to you, or even neutral."[/b]
And being afraid of serial killers is not silly, but don't let it consume you. Be careful, be alert, listen to your gut/instincts.
SomeMichGuy · M
sarabee1995 · 26-30, F
@SomeMichGuy 170+ is pretty high. I followed your math and it appears right, but I'm still surprised there are so many 170+'s in the population.
SomeMichGuy · M
@sarabee1995 Same here. Sounds high, but we ARE multiplying it by 10^9.
And I think there is self-selected bunching; higher concentrations in certain locations.
But meeting a person of, say, 140 & above is much easier. lol
And I think there is self-selected bunching; higher concentrations in certain locations.
But meeting a person of, say, 140 & above is much easier. lol
sarabee1995 · 26-30, F
@SomeMichGuy So assuming no bunching (and obviously there is some), approximately [b][i]one[/i][/b] out of every 4000+ people you meet would be 170+.
I wonder if we could estimate how many of these 170+'s are congregated at MIT and Stamford and Harvard, and therefore not among the general population? Would that then be one out of 10,000 people?
And then, I would wonder about the odds of one person in, say, Missouri meeting "several" 170+'s?
Sorry. Curiosity is, indeed, a curse sometimes.
I wonder if we could estimate how many of these 170+'s are congregated at MIT and Stamford and Harvard, and therefore not among the general population? Would that then be one out of 10,000 people?
And then, I would wonder about the odds of one person in, say, Missouri meeting "several" 170+'s?
Sorry. Curiosity is, indeed, a curse sometimes.
SomeMichGuy · M
@sarabee1995 Yes, that's an incredibly interesting thing.
And you have to also consider that the set of "brains which could hit IQs >= 170" also has people who don't get the proper prenatal care, or proper bodily nutrition, or perhaps the chance to be fed intellectually, or die of preventable diseases...etc. So that people with those brains from socio-economically DISadvantaged backgrounds, countries, regions also are seeds which never come to full fruition.
So the numbers are depressed in some areas...which is depressing. What if a couple of kids from the middle of Sub-Saharan Africa would would have figured out some amazing global warming solutions, etc., died of malaria in the past few years...or another few starved in the horn of Africa...or died in a filthy slum nearly anywhere...
I'm not sure that people in nations like ours have ever thought, seriously, about the loss of talent from our lack of a comprehensive, world-wide public health system, and an inability to bring clean water, air, and reliable food to much more of the globe.
A century ago, the obvious & vast loss of talent due to the death tolls from WWI were noted with a mass sense of how much light had left the world. I haven't come across the same sense of loss of talent being mourned after WWII; I guess people *do* become jaded all-too-quickly.
And you have to also consider that the set of "brains which could hit IQs >= 170" also has people who don't get the proper prenatal care, or proper bodily nutrition, or perhaps the chance to be fed intellectually, or die of preventable diseases...etc. So that people with those brains from socio-economically DISadvantaged backgrounds, countries, regions also are seeds which never come to full fruition.
So the numbers are depressed in some areas...which is depressing. What if a couple of kids from the middle of Sub-Saharan Africa would would have figured out some amazing global warming solutions, etc., died of malaria in the past few years...or another few starved in the horn of Africa...or died in a filthy slum nearly anywhere...
I'm not sure that people in nations like ours have ever thought, seriously, about the loss of talent from our lack of a comprehensive, world-wide public health system, and an inability to bring clean water, air, and reliable food to much more of the globe.
A century ago, the obvious & vast loss of talent due to the death tolls from WWI were noted with a mass sense of how much light had left the world. I haven't come across the same sense of loss of talent being mourned after WWII; I guess people *do* become jaded all-too-quickly.
sarabee1995 · 26-30, F
@SomeMichGuy I actually think about that a lot.
My work allows me to travel through quite a large swath of southeastern Europe and southwestern Asia. I see and meet talented people all the time who are malnourished and living in unsanitary conditions.
As a global human population, we are losing so much talent at a time when we cannot afford to.
My work allows me to travel through quite a large swath of southeastern Europe and southwestern Asia. I see and meet talented people all the time who are malnourished and living in unsanitary conditions.
As a global human population, we are losing so much talent at a time when we cannot afford to.
