CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:68
Arguments:49
Total Votes:77
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 What is your IQ? (49)

Debate Creator

EnigmaticMan(1844) pic



What is your IQ?

Add New Argument
2 points

Those online tests are all fake. One I went on required me to log on with my email adress, even though I had never even visited the site before. When I did, it pulled up my results from the last time I took the test on the site which never occured. It said I had an IQ of 124. That's rediculous. I never took a test and it's telling me I am in a higher than average quotient? Those tests are fake, completely fake. The true test of wit is being able to discern a real test from a fake one; and here-to-date, I justly doubt the existence of the latter.

-

Besides, there is controversy on the validity of real intelligence quotient tests, being as they are generally unable to test particular fundamental qualities of intelligence, such as the very cognitive process, reason, the ability to correlate dissociated knowledge (and properly so), and the ability to learn.

-

One cannot be too certain. Besides, it's fairly simple to outsmart the majority. Idiots do it all the time, we call them politicians.

Side: Unrepresented variables devalue debate
1 point

Those online tests are all fake.

I didn't say I did the test online.

It said I had an IQ of 124. That's rediculous.

Not if your spelling is any indication of one's IQ.

Those tests are fake, completely fake. The true test of wit is being able to discern a real test from a fake one; and here-to-date, I justly doubt the existence of the latter.

Sounds like you are angry that you only got 124...

Besides, there is controversy on the validity of real intelligence quotient tests, being as they are generally unable to test particular fundamental qualities of intelligence, such as the very cognitive process, reason, the ability to correlate dissociated knowledge (and properly so), and the ability to learn.

Not what I asked.

One cannot be too certain. Besides, it's fairly simple to outsmart the majority. Idiots do it all the time, we call them politicians.

That too is irrelevant.

Side: Unrepresented variables devalue debate
Akulakhan(2973) Disputed
1 point

My post was in response to the majority of posts that were on this debate at the time of it's incarnation, which claimed to have taken an online test to evaluate their IQ. Responding directly to each individual would be rather inefficient to the space economy of this debate. My response was not directed to you, Sir.

-

And to reiterate, I had taken no test. The number it gave me was merely spam.

-

I go on further to give information on the controversy of the testing system; a rebuttal of sorts, again, to the majority I had directed it to.

-

All of which are relevant to the topic of IQ, though it may not be the answer to what mine actually is, being as I do not know.

Side: Unrepresented variables devalue debate
2 points

I haven't a clue what I score as, by choice because I'd rather not know. It's one of those kinds of tests that gives a result that is never high enough, and no matter where I placed I'd still be insecure about it because I'd feel underwhelmed.

The only hints I have about my intelligence are that after having conversations with people who have told me their IQ, often in the 130 to 170 range, I still come away from the conversation feeling smarter than them, then there's the fact that the reasoning a number of great minds throughout history have used to justify certain arguments often seems facile to me. There's also a story where after taking an IQ test at school, when I was young, one evening when my mother came to pick me up, the teachers intercepted her and told her the results personally because they were so abnormal. I never found out what the results were, however.

Finally I'd just like to add that this debate has the quality of a pissing contest, or comparing your manhood with everyone in the school showers. I never liked that aspect of this discussion, when it should be much more clinical, I think.

Side: Don't wanna know
2 points

by choice because I'd rather not know.

Same here.

I don't mind online tests, though; they're all a load of hokum.

often in the 130 to 170 range, I still come away from the conversation feeling smarter than them

Funny, I've felt the exact same way with all people. I, however, am quite certain that it has to do with my egotism.

Finally I'd just like to add that this debate has the quality of a pissing contest,

I felt the same way after reading the first four or five arguments.

Side: Don't wanna know
Kinda(1649) Banned
2 points

Haven't taken no IQ test. Closest thing I've done is taken the Morrisons test of which 90% of things I was off the charts

But who cares? Forreal? Having a huge IQ means fuck all most of the time. Sure the geezer with 189IQ can make the best video game in the world. Or can recite each and every star trek episode. So what. Real intelligence is much more. How many of these high IQ people can do manual labour? Sports? How does it test their business acumen? Ability to make decisions? How to manipulate and not be manipulated? How they come across people?

I'd rather have an average IQ and have all these other qualities than have an extremely high IQ and have none.

Side: Unrepresented variables devalue debate
aveskde(1935) Disputed
2 points

But who cares? Forreal? Having a huge IQ means fuck all most of the time. Sure the geezer with 189IQ can make the best video game in the world. Or can recite each and every star trek episode. So what. Real intelligence is much more. How many of these high IQ people can do manual labour? Sports? How does it test their business acumen? Ability to make decisions? How to manipulate and not be manipulated? How they come across people?

I'd rather have an average IQ and have all these other qualities than have an extremely high IQ and have none.

It sounds to me like you entered a debate on IQ yet have no idea what IQ is.

Side: Unrepresented variables devalue debate
Kinda(1649) Disputed Banned
2 points

Seems to me that 'IQ' is trying to measure something that's intangible. It's putting numbers on a small part of a brain which somehow equates the whole of the brain.

Aren't you one of those faggots who cry about how important creativity and individualism and self-esteem is yet now you're limiting the importance of it?

Side: Unrepresented variables devalue debate
1 point

90% of things I was off the charts

Idiocy.

Racism.

Bigotry.

Being an bastard.

How many of these high IQ people can do manual labour?

Does intelligence somehow make somebody weak?

How does it test their business acumen? Ability to make decisions? How to manipulate and not be manipulated? How they come across people?

It is not designed to do so.

Ability to make decisions? How to manipulate and not be manipulated? How they come across people?

Unfortunately, you have a low IQ and none of these qualities.

Side: Unrepresented variables devalue debate
2 points

You deserve a "Magnificent Bastard" award for that. Unfortunately I can only give you a (+1).

Side: Unrepresented variables devalue debate
Kinda(1649) Disputed Banned
1 point

Idiocy.

Racism.

Bigotry.

Being an bastard.

this obviously doesn't apply to you.

Does intelligence somehow make somebody weak?

Answer the question. How many of these people can do manual labour.

It is not designed to do so.

Which obviously shows that it doesn't measure intelligence but only proportions of it.

Unfortunately, you have a low IQ and none of these qualities.

Great. Your internet IQ said you have and IQ of 152 (or w.e.) and that's the best you can come up with. I guess my IQ must be 360...

Side: Unrepresented variables devalue debate
2 points

Mine is 135.

But someone can have a very high IQ and still be an idiot. Its a rating of logical ability based on a single test. Einstein is a good example of how brilliance is something that could be lacking in a seemingly intelligent individual while it could strike a man without a clue of anything but the field in which their brilliance is shown

Side: Unrepresented variables devalue debate
1 point

My internet IQ is OVER 9000!!!11!!!!ONE!!!!!

Seriously though, if you don't know yours take this test http://www.testq.com/career/quizzes/show/121

I've taken it and non-online ones and they give about the same number, giver or take a point.

Side: Unrepresented variables devalue debate
1 point

A real iq test needs to be administered by a professional psychologist under controlled conditions. The stuff you find on the internet is bs. Real iq tests are kept under lock and key so people can't "train" for them.

The closest thing I've taken is the SAT, on which I got a 1300. If this site is reliable then that puts my iq at 131.

Side: iDK

Anyway, not sure, scored a 139 on a online test. But who knows.

Side: iDK
-2 points
2 points

Wow, shouldn't you be trying to cure cancer or something?

According to fake bs online IQ test I'm 146... which I used to think was pretty good ;)

Side: iDK

Wow, shouldn't you be trying to cure cancer or something?

All in due time. Saying that always makes me want to go "bwahahahaha!".

According to fake bs online IQ test I'm 146... which I used to think was pretty good

The average is 100. 146 is very good.

Side: iDK

Wow, shouldn't you be trying to cure cancer or something?

O, but there is a cure! It's been hidden, though; pharmaceutical companies don't want to lose the billions they make from propagating the lie that there is no cure.

According to fake bs online IQ test I'm 146

According to a real IQ test, the only person with whom I've ever felt comfortable - equal, if you will - speaking with had an IQ of about 152. Or was it 142? It's been years since he told me.

Side: iDK
Bohemian(3861) Disputed
2 points

With an IQ of 167, I believe this would put you slightly above Albert Einstein.

IQ tests may give a rough idea of someone's intelligence, I don't think they are incredibly accurate. One of the most frequent complaints about IQ tests, is that they contain cultural bias. This is nearly unavoidable, as long as language (spoken, or written) is used, it is going to be culturally reflective. The only solution I see is to avoid language all together and instead rely on, logic puzzles, mathematics, but then we'd be missing out on a lot of what makes up our intelligence.

Another problem lies in tests that may require you to recall specific events, specific details etc. This doesn't test intelligence, it tests knowledge and memory.

Although, I don't doubt you are a very bright individual, EnigmaticMan, based on what I have seen.

Side: iDK

Another problem lies in tests that may require you to recall specific events, specific details etc. This doesn't test intelligence, it tests knowledge and memory.

Finally, I agree completely with you.

Side: iDK
1 point

With an IQ of 167, I believe this would put you slightly above Albert Einstein.

Not grounds for my claim's falseness.

IQ tests may give a rough idea of someone's intelligence, I don't think they are incredibly accurate.

You weren't asked what your opinion was. I am conducting a study. It seems my initial speculations were correct. Everybody here has an IQ above the standard of 100.

One of the most frequent complaints about IQ tests, is that they contain cultural bias. This is nearly unavoidable, as long as language (spoken, or written) is used, it is going to be culturally reflective. The only solution I see is to avoid language all together and instead rely on, logic puzzles, mathematics, but then we'd be missing out on a lot of what makes up our intelligence.

Take the Mensa test. The online ones are mostly spam.

Another problem lies in tests that may require you to recall specific events, specific details etc. This doesn't test intelligence, it tests knowledge and memory.

None of the tests that I have taken require general knowledge. However, the Mensa test did require trigonometry. Two men starting at one point walked four metres in opposite directions, turned left and walked 3 metres. The hypotenuse was five and they were twice that distance away, so they were 10 metres away from each other.

Although, I don't doubt you are a very bright individual, EnigmaticMan, based on what I have seen.

Thank you.

Side: iDK

Mine is 158 (according to free online tests where I have to guess how many feet six horses, two ducks and five pigs have). This is consistent with what my parents tell me I scored as a child, however, their claim that they can't find a record of my results makes me suspicious.

At any rate, I'm in the atheist range. I'd like to find my test results and join Mensa to impress the ladies, but procrastination and fear of flunking a new test if I can't is holding me back.

Side: iDK
TERMINATOR(6778) Disputed
2 points

At any rate, I'm in the atheist range.

Your belief that being atheism is indicative of a higher IQ - or that a higher IQ is indicative of atheism - if erroneous.

I could easily cite many an example in which some of the most brilliant of minds were theists:

- Sir Isaac Newton (IQ 190)

- Blaise Pascal (IQ 195)

- Alexander Pope (IQ 180)

- Christopher Langan (IQ 190-205)

- Gottfried von Leibniz (IQ 205)

- Emanuel Swedenborg (IQ 205)

- Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (IQ 165)

- Thomas Wolsey (IQ 200)

- Thomas Chatterton (IQ 180)

- Thomas Jefferson (IQ 160)

- Francis Galton (IQ 200)

- Garry Kasparov (IQ 190)

- Benjamin Netanyahu (IQ 180)

- Dr. David Livingstone (IQ 170)

- Voltaire (IQ 190)

- Ludwig Wittgenstein (IQ 190)

- Leonardo Da Vinci (IQ 180)

- Michelangelo (IQ 180)

- Immanuel Kant (IQ 159)

- Galileo Galilei (IQ 185)

- Friedrich von Schelling (IQ 190)

- Thomas Hobbes (IQ 165)

- Albrecht von Haller (IQ 190)

- Antoine Arnauld (IQ 190)

Stephen Hawking is an agnostic.

Side: iDK

Who the fuck down-voted me?

-------------------------------------

Side: iDK
2 points

Welcome to Create Debate, EnigmaticMan!

Side: iDK
1 point

134 according to a free online test I just took. Probably spam, but nevertheless...

Side: iDK