It only tests you on how well you can take a test. But lots of people excel at other things, so defining them with an iq might not be entirely accurate.
It is fairly accurate. It test your ability to solve problems.
People excelling at other things means they can only problem solve that specific thing and/or they are limited in their problem solving capacities.
High IQ levels means the person has a broader range of skills that allows them to problem solve a variety of things.
Though it most likely measures broadness, not deepness. So some one with lower IQ might be able to solve something very specific that is extremely complex that some one with higher IQ cant because it does not have the experience in that specific field.
A 90 IQ marine will probably outperform some one with 180 IQ in the field of battle, but 180 IQ general will always make a better strategy for the battle.
@FortuneFox said [^](/forum/redirect/post/ERx7pjEI)
> It only tests you on how well you can take a test. But lots of people excel at other things, so defining them with an iq might not be entirely accurate.
Idk why, but I find IQ tests kinda funny ;p
@FortuneFox said [^](/forum/redirect/post/ERx7pjEI)
> It only tests you on how well you can take a test. But lots of people excel at other things, so defining them with an iq might not be entirely accurate.
so artemis fowls iq is wrong
What is their IQ? Have they taken the test? For me, it's been verified by psychologists; btw, I know something about psychology.
@GatoChess89 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/IpJi6v8u)
> What is their IQ? Have they taken the test? For me, it's been verified by psychologists; btw, I know something about psychology.
My test is 127
I sure hope it isn't.
@Alientcp has the best explanation here, but I will try to elaborate.
It is definitely true that IQ is not a good measure of someone's overall competence. Stephen Hawking, himself a very intelligent person, once said (paraphrased): "Those who boast about their IQ are losers." The point is, people with higher IQs *are* **generally** more intelligent. However, having a less than average IQ does not mean one is stupid, nor does a high IQ mean one is smart. This is because what is usually called "smart" is actually a lot of different things. Critical thinking, reading comprehension, adaptability, and so on. Someone may be good at understanding texts but not think critically about it. Or they may be good at solving problems but be bad at teamwork or communications.
This doesn't mean it is "rigged" though, a word that has nothing to do with IQ. A test that is rigged is predetermined so some succeed and some don't. IQ tests are not rigged, but they do not provide a perfect portrait of someone's competence at a given task.
Additionally, on the subject of Artemis Fowl, he's obviously a fictional character and thus constrained by the author's intelligence. He is rather irrational and often does not seem to behave like the smartest individual in Europe.
It must be cool to be one of those very high iq kids.They go to special schools and these kids shock other people with their intelligence all the time.There are many movies abaut this.Has anyone watched Young Sheldon ? Its the childhood of Sheldon from the big bang theory.I hope high iq kids will turn out kind nice adults who dont spend their intelligence to create destructive things,Things that are actually bad for us.
So many copers, in responses.
Of course, it isn't rigged.
High IQ is a strong proof, that you have a good potential in STEM or in academia.
Only thing, determining whatever you just have potential or you can have it, is hardwork.
High IQ is a entry ticket for even opportunity for elite job prospects, even if you have it, you can still fail by not working enough.
Sure guys, you can cope by skills with cannot be verified, and can't be compared to others like drawing or cleaning dishes....
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.