8 ms·

> It turns out that the people who join Mensa and attend meetings are, on average, not successful titans of industry. They are instead – and I say this with gre

> It turns out that the people who join Mensa and attend meetings are, on average, not successful titans of industry. They are instead – and I say this with great affection – huge losers. I was making $735 per month and I was like frickin’ Goldfinger in this crowd. We had a guy who was some sort of poet who hoped to one day start “writing some of them down.” We had people who were literally too smart to hold a job. The rest of the group dressed too much like street people to ever get past security for a job interview. And everyone was always available for meetings on weekend nights. https://woodrow.typepad.com/the_ponderings_of_woodrow/2006/11/scott_adams_on_.html https://woodrow.typepad.com/the_ponderings_of_woodrow/2006/1...

wallace_f 7y ago
I did first 2-years undergrad at a CC. My calc course had _2_ people from mensa, 1 failed. Anyways, the idea in academic literature -- that some super smart psychiatrists know the Right Questions to ask which correlate with _g_ -- is aggravating.
- lliamander 7y ago
  Well, a sample of 2 isn't exactly a representative sample size. The thing is, if you look at IQ and ability to pass a math class, they do correlate strongly. The fact that these folks were Mensa means something else.
  - wallace_f 7y ago
    I think you misunderstood my comment. >The thing is, if you look at IQ and ability to pass a math class, they do correlate strongly. In fact, we actually agree here. My point can maybe be explained in a different way: So does playing chess at a high level, or I'd bet even probably even MMR in Dota does as well. Once you consider this, you may go the next step and ask what better methods test for ability to pass a math class (perform other tasks successfully). For example, consider that I know someone who has a far greater ability than I to learn a new language; while I have a greater ability with math.
    - lliamander 7y ago
      > So does playing chess at a high level, or I'd bet even probably even MMR in Dota does as well. Once you consider this, you may go the next step and ask what better methods test for ability to pass a math class (perform other tasks successfully). I would agree that playing Chess and Dota are both probably pretty good predictors. What kinds of abilities do you need to play Chess (or Dota) at a high level? Abstract reasoning, mental quickness, and a good working memory. What about an IQ test? An IQ test is just a random sampling of problems that test abstract reasoning, mental quickness, and a good working memory. If you iteratively give people a series of IQ tests there will be some variation in their score from test to test, but what you will find is that over time the average of their scores converges. This convergence is why researchers believe there is a single main factor of intelligence (g). Now, there are still things aside from intelligence that relate to the ability to pass a math class (or any class). A big one is Conscientiousness. It's a facet of personality that basically has to do with how organized and hardworking someone is. It is the second strongest single predictor of overall life success next to IQ (although even with both factors combined there's still a lot of the variance in life success left unexplained). My contention is that Mensa membership tends to select for people who have low conscientiousness. > For example, consider that I know someone who has a far greater ability than I to learn a new language; while I have a greater ability with math. So there are different sub-factors of general intelligence[1]. That does not mean that there still isn't a general factor of intelligence, because all of these factors do still correlate pretty stongly with one another. However, I've heard that towards the high end of IQ, there does tend to be a greater distance between the sub-factors. In other words, a person of average intelligence is likely to be average in all of the categories, whereas a person of high-intelligence is more likely to be especially gifted in one or two areas (though still pretty good in the rest). [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattell%E2%80%93Horn%E2%80%93Carroll_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattell%E2%80%93Horn%E2%80%93C...
      - wallace_f 7y ago
        Something about IQ which we forget is that people with exceptionally high IQ scores are not necessarily exceptionally intelligent. They are good at answering the types of questions on IQ tests. I would agree with you that it is likely true that generally intelligent people will generally be generally better at scoring higher on IQ tests. Are there any formal studies you are aware of which compare IQ tests as a predictor of success with other intelligence tests, or just other tests?
- Kaveren 7y ago
  why do you think MENSA members are representative of people with high IQs in general? obviously you cannot extrapolate from them. there's a reason that accomplished people who would obviously get a high IQ score don't join, because the organization offers absolutely nothing of value. extreme selection bias at play.
lliamander 7y ago
So, I'm fairly sure I'm reasonably smart, and I am reasonably successful at life. But I am somewhat hesitant to take an actual proper IQ test. Partly because I'm afraid I won't get a "good" score (given my expectations) and partly because I'm worried I'll let my score (whatever it is) distract me from actually achieving more things in life.
- mantap 7y ago
  The highest score obtainable on an IQ test is achieved by realising it's complete nonsense to project the entirety of human intelligence onto a one dimensional value, and refusing to waste time on it.
  - LegitShady 7y ago
    no, the iq test is used by some groups as a diagnostic to rank order large groups of people for research and other purposes. IQ is itself a basically fluid intelligence - how quickly you learn something compared to the average. In jobs were problems are novel this is an indicator of success. In jobs where tasks are repetitive, it is not an indicator of success. Overall, it one of the strongest if not the strongest statistically backed concept in modern psychology, so if you don't believe IQ means something you should also dismiss all of psychology as unscientific nonsense.
    - thrwayxyz 7y ago
      Sounds about right. I have an iq of 80 yet somehow I published papers in physics, maths and computer science and I'm in the 1% of NY income. Psychology is used to keep the working class down and disunited the same way religion was used in times past.
    - mantap 7y ago
      IQ is a model. Models never perfectly match the thing they are modelling. In the case of IQ people seem to have forgotten whatever it was that they were trying to model in the first place and it has been promoted way beyond its station to the very definition of intelligence. The result of this is organisations such as Mensa. To me, intelligence means one's capability to contribute to human endeavour, whether it be in mathematics, music, art, writing, or anything else that you can apply your mind to. For example, most people agree that Mozart was a very intelligent individual by virtue of his contributions to music. Sure, IQ means something, it's just that the thing it means is not intelligence. It doesn't capture the amazing breadth of human capability, and intelligence is not an objective measurable property.
crispinb 7y ago
"losers". FFS. Does anyone other than primary school kids and US Presidents think about their fellow humans in this way?
- jaredklewis 7y ago
  Scott Adams' use of the word does not seem inappropriate or juvenile to me. He is describing his impression of Mensa members. His expectation was that Mensa was an "organization of geniuses," which gave him certain expectations, but he what he found was very different. He observed that Mensa members were financially unsuccessful, unaccomplished, and idle. Describing someone that is financially unsuccessful, unaccomplished, and idle as a "loser" just seems like colloquial English to me. Adams doesn't express any dislike or hate for the Mensa members; he just describes his impressions. Is there something wrong with using the word "loser?" If we stop using the word will everyone suddenly be richer and more accomplished?
  - crispinb 7y ago
    > Scott Adams' use of the word does not seem inappropriate or juvenile to me. Well then we differ. Given your (by my lights) Jesuitical approach to glossing a common English usage, I don't think we have anywhere further to go here. I personally can't imagine a circumstance where I'd call a brother or sister a 'loser', and certainly not by reference to a trivial superfluity like financial 'success'. And if I did not for a minute do I believe they'd consider the term a neutral descriptor. But by all means carry on using the term however, and to whomever, you like.
    - jaredklewis 7y ago
      Neither Adams or myself has assigned any more importance or worth to financial success than you have. He merely observed that he expected a society of geniuses would be very different than they were, and I can’t for the life of me find anything wrong with that. Remarking that someone with a disabled limb is ”lame” is not offensive; it’s just using a word according to its definition. Look up ”loser” in a dictionary.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
jcadam 7y ago
I still pay the annual dues, but I never attend the meetings (too busy. And also, I don't want to). Well, sometimes there's an interesting article in the monthly newsletter... but not often. They do, however, give you a handsome plastic membership card you can "accidentally" fling onto the table at restaurants when reaching for your Amex, so, that's nice.

wallace_f 7y ago

I did first 2-years undergrad at a CC. My calc course had _2_ people from mensa, 1 failed. Anyways, the idea in academic literature -- that some super smart psychiatrists know the Right Questions to ask which correlate with _g_ -- is aggravating.

lliamander 7y ago
Well, a sample of 2 isn't exactly a representative sample size. The thing is, if you look at IQ and ability to pass a math class, they do correlate strongly. The fact that these folks were Mensa means something else.
- wallace_f 7y ago
  I think you misunderstood my comment. >The thing is, if you look at IQ and ability to pass a math class, they do correlate strongly. In fact, we actually agree here. My point can maybe be explained in a different way: So does playing chess at a high level, or I'd bet even probably even MMR in Dota does as well. Once you consider this, you may go the next step and ask what better methods test for ability to pass a math class (perform other tasks successfully). For example, consider that I know someone who has a far greater ability than I to learn a new language; while I have a greater ability with math.
  - lliamander 7y ago
    > So does playing chess at a high level, or I'd bet even probably even MMR in Dota does as well. Once you consider this, you may go the next step and ask what better methods test for ability to pass a math class (perform other tasks successfully). I would agree that playing Chess and Dota are both probably pretty good predictors. What kinds of abilities do you need to play Chess (or Dota) at a high level? Abstract reasoning, mental quickness, and a good working memory. What about an IQ test? An IQ test is just a random sampling of problems that test abstract reasoning, mental quickness, and a good working memory. If you iteratively give people a series of IQ tests there will be some variation in their score from test to test, but what you will find is that over time the average of their scores converges. This convergence is why researchers believe there is a single main factor of intelligence (g). Now, there are still things aside from intelligence that relate to the ability to pass a math class (or any class). A big one is Conscientiousness. It's a facet of personality that basically has to do with how organized and hardworking someone is. It is the second strongest single predictor of overall life success next to IQ (although even with both factors combined there's still a lot of the variance in life success left unexplained). My contention is that Mensa membership tends to select for people who have low conscientiousness. > For example, consider that I know someone who has a far greater ability than I to learn a new language; while I have a greater ability with math. So there are different sub-factors of general intelligence[1]. That does not mean that there still isn't a general factor of intelligence, because all of these factors do still correlate pretty stongly with one another. However, I've heard that towards the high end of IQ, there does tend to be a greater distance between the sub-factors. In other words, a person of average intelligence is likely to be average in all of the categories, whereas a person of high-intelligence is more likely to be especially gifted in one or two areas (though still pretty good in the rest). [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattell%E2%80%93Horn%E2%80%93Carroll_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattell%E2%80%93Horn%E2%80%93C...
    - wallace_f 7y ago
      Something about IQ which we forget is that people with exceptionally high IQ scores are not necessarily exceptionally intelligent. They are good at answering the types of questions on IQ tests. I would agree with you that it is likely true that generally intelligent people will generally be generally better at scoring higher on IQ tests. Are there any formal studies you are aware of which compare IQ tests as a predictor of success with other intelligence tests, or just other tests?
Kaveren 7y ago
why do you think MENSA members are representative of people with high IQs in general? obviously you cannot extrapolate from them. there's a reason that accomplished people who would obviously get a high IQ score don't join, because the organization offers absolutely nothing of value. extreme selection bias at play.

lliamander 7y ago

So, I'm fairly sure I'm reasonably smart, and I am reasonably successful at life. But I am somewhat hesitant to take an actual proper IQ test. Partly because I'm afraid I won't get a "good" score (given my expectations) and partly because I'm worried I'll let my score (whatever it is) distract me from actually achieving more things in life.

mantap 7y ago
The highest score obtainable on an IQ test is achieved by realising it's complete nonsense to project the entirety of human intelligence onto a one dimensional value, and refusing to waste time on it.
- LegitShady 7y ago
  no, the iq test is used by some groups as a diagnostic to rank order large groups of people for research and other purposes. IQ is itself a basically fluid intelligence - how quickly you learn something compared to the average. In jobs were problems are novel this is an indicator of success. In jobs where tasks are repetitive, it is not an indicator of success. Overall, it one of the strongest if not the strongest statistically backed concept in modern psychology, so if you don't believe IQ means something you should also dismiss all of psychology as unscientific nonsense.
  - thrwayxyz 7y ago
    Sounds about right. I have an iq of 80 yet somehow I published papers in physics, maths and computer science and I'm in the 1% of NY income. Psychology is used to keep the working class down and disunited the same way religion was used in times past.
  - mantap 7y ago
    IQ is a model. Models never perfectly match the thing they are modelling. In the case of IQ people seem to have forgotten whatever it was that they were trying to model in the first place and it has been promoted way beyond its station to the very definition of intelligence. The result of this is organisations such as Mensa. To me, intelligence means one's capability to contribute to human endeavour, whether it be in mathematics, music, art, writing, or anything else that you can apply your mind to. For example, most people agree that Mozart was a very intelligent individual by virtue of his contributions to music. Sure, IQ means something, it's just that the thing it means is not intelligence. It doesn't capture the amazing breadth of human capability, and intelligence is not an objective measurable property.

crispinb 7y ago

"losers". FFS. Does anyone other than primary school kids and US Presidents think about their fellow humans in this way?

jaredklewis 7y ago
Scott Adams' use of the word does not seem inappropriate or juvenile to me. He is describing his impression of Mensa members. His expectation was that Mensa was an "organization of geniuses," which gave him certain expectations, but he what he found was very different. He observed that Mensa members were financially unsuccessful, unaccomplished, and idle. Describing someone that is financially unsuccessful, unaccomplished, and idle as a "loser" just seems like colloquial English to me. Adams doesn't express any dislike or hate for the Mensa members; he just describes his impressions. Is there something wrong with using the word "loser?" If we stop using the word will everyone suddenly be richer and more accomplished?
- crispinb 7y ago
  > Scott Adams' use of the word does not seem inappropriate or juvenile to me. Well then we differ. Given your (by my lights) Jesuitical approach to glossing a common English usage, I don't think we have anywhere further to go here. I personally can't imagine a circumstance where I'd call a brother or sister a 'loser', and certainly not by reference to a trivial superfluity like financial 'success'. And if I did not for a minute do I believe they'd consider the term a neutral descriptor. But by all means carry on using the term however, and to whomever, you like.
  - jaredklewis 7y ago
    Neither Adams or myself has assigned any more importance or worth to financial success than you have. He merely observed that he expected a society of geniuses would be very different than they were, and I can’t for the life of me find anything wrong with that. Remarking that someone with a disabled limb is ”lame” is not offensive; it’s just using a word according to its definition. Look up ”loser” in a dictionary.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

jcadam 7y ago

I still pay the annual dues, but I never attend the meetings (too busy. And also, I don't want to). Well, sometimes there's an interesting article in the monthly newsletter... but not often. They do, however, give you a handsome plastic membership card you can "accidentally" fling onto the table at restaurants when reaching for your Amex, so, that's nice.