How can one measure his/her IQ

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”

Albert Einstein


most people take an IQ test
but i think those leave out a lot
cause most of those just measure what was drilled in to you at school

but i have seen a few that take it a step farther
adding in street smarts as well as other Que's that you would not common come across and many other area's

big diff between street smart and common smart

Millions of categories of thousands of tests have been devised since age-old times, with the purport of measuring IQ. 'Google' and you'll find loads of appropriate links.


You may try this if you like.

First: An Example:










Now: The Question:


How long will you require to read this successfully?

Go to a search engine and take an IQ test. They time you so be quick with answers.
Good luck :)

What the goal of most IQ tests is, is to try to put a number on how rapidly a person is likely to be able to learn new things.

What most tests actually measure, is how much you know, relative to how much the test writers expected you to know, given your age, location, etc.

There are some more active tests, in which the person being tested is given extremely unusual problems to work out, which the test writers are convinced will be new things to face, to the test subjects. But they can give false indications too, since there's no way to know what any given person might have been through in their life.

And as the Einstein quote and the "if you can read this easily" citations illustrate, intelligence or knowledge is a relative thing, and depends on the exact circumstances for whether it's meaningful or not.

More than anything else, no matter how "intelligent" a person is, if they aren't inclined or capable or willing to cooperate and coordinate with you, they are useless wastes of time no matter how clever they may be.

Wisdom and moral courage is more important than having a high IQ

I'm my humble opinion anyway.

There are several different types of intelligence. Some can be measured and some are subjective. Math and Verbal skills are the primary ones measured by college entrance exams such as the SAT. There are others types of brain skills, such as Music, Emotional, and Spatial Perception that less commonly tested but are found to be commonly useful in the real world.

Some people are fairly well balanced in the different types of intelligence and others are strong in some and weak in others. I am strong in Math, Physics, Spatial Perception, Verbal, and a few others but weak in Music and others. I enjoy music very much but cannot sing or play an instrument.

The trick to success is to find what are your interests and then compare them to your aptitude by testing. You can do this on the internet.

Some people make the mistake of choosing a profession for which they have no or little aptitude. One can make up for lack of ability by extra hard work, but it may take more work than is possible or practical.

If I wanted to be a musician I would have already starved to death!

Good luck.

The post got me interested to look up some stuff in Wiki. Here is a little.

...

"This led Gardner to break intelligence down into at least a number of different components. In the first edition of his book "Frames of Mind" (1983), he described seven distinct types of intelligence - logical-mathematical, linguistic, spatial, musical, kinesthetic, interpersonal, and intrapersonal. In a second edition of this book, he added two more types of intelligence - naturalist and existential intelligences. He argues that psychometric tests address only linguistic and logical plus some aspects of spatial intelligence.[10] A major criticism of Gardner's theory is that it has never been tested, or subjected to peer review, by Gardner or anyone else, and indeed that it is unfalsifiable.[12] Others (e.g. Locke, 2005) have suggested that recognizing many specific forms of intelligence (specific aptitude theory) implies a political—rather than scientific—agenda, intended to appreciate the uniqueness in all individuals, rather than recognizing potentially true and meaningful differences in individual capacities. Schmidt and Hunter (2004) suggest that the predictive validity of specific aptitudes over and above that of general mental ability, or "g", has not received empirical support.

Howard Gardner mentions in his Multiple Intelligences The Theory in Practice[13] book, briefly about his main seven intelligences he introduced. In his book, he starts off describing Linguistic and Logical Intelligence because he believed that in society, we have put these two intelligences on a pedestal. However, Gardner believes all of the intelligences he found are equal. Note: At the time of the publication of Gardner's book Multiple Intelligences The Theory in Practice, naturalist and existential intelligences were not mentioned.

Linguistic Intelligence: People high in linguistic Intelligence have an affinity for words, both spoken and written.

Logical-Mathematics Intelligence: Is logical and mathematical ability, as well as scientific ability. Howard Gardner believed Jean Piaget may have thought he was studying all intelligence, but in truth, Piaget was really only focusing on the logical mathematical intelligence.

Spatial intelligence: The ability to form a mental model of a spatial world and to be able to maneuver and operate using that model.

Musical Intelligence: Those with musical Intelligence have excellent pitch, and may even be absolute pitch.

Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence: The ability to solve problems or to fashion products using one's whole body, or parts of the body. For example, dancers, athletes, surgeons, craftspeople, etc.

Interpersonal intelligence: The ability to see things from the perspective of others, or to understand people in the sense of empathy. Strong interpersonal intelligence would be an asset in those who are teachers, politicians, clinicians, religious leaders, etc.

Intrapersonal intelligence: A correlative ability, turned inward. It is a capacity to form an accurate, veridical model of oneself and to be able to use that model to operate effectively in life."

I agree with this cause any field requires concentration and the mind seems unable to concentrate on more than one field at a time. Even a professional, say like Louis Armstrong, the first time he sang “what a wonderful life”, he most likely dissolved into the song. I can see now why scientists and mathematicians seem abrupt, don’t have social leadership of say a lawyer or a politician. It’s like they require all the mind space they can get to run through their equations.

Makes sense of when people talk about their success stories and the price they paid for growth. And sure makes Jacks of the rest of us.

Some funny experience here, like sometimes words flow out in a poem
even before i think them. Where did that come from. It's like if i had
thought on the points to make, couldn't have written them any better.
i suppose language ability is reflexive, like throwing a ball.
(and mind you, i generally stay away from poems.)

Notice baby girls speak earlier than boys and women in general speak
at a faster clip than men? It's almost like there is an internal conversation
going on all the time & we get to listen the edited output.

I don't think the male brain works that way. In fact, it's almost as if this department of the male brain is half shuttered down. Would like to hear on this.

3, 263, 442

X*(X+1)
thanks Tulip. Notice digits in your 2633 is also in 3263??

Now all this reminded me of those number series and as all of us know
that it was developed during Blaise Pascal's times and Newton then
developed his Calculus over it.

Anyway I started fiddling with Excel to check T's result and realized
that prime numbers could be generated with primitives too.
Like 1, 3, 5, 7, 13, 17 can be expressed in primitives
as: 1, (1+2), (1+2^2), (3+2^2), (7+(3*2)), (13+2^2), (17+2) and so on.
If we then switch 3 or 7 for 2 we get longer prime series, i.e., if we
'correct the result with a +/-1' to locate the prime.

Funny thing is with Excel, any kid fiddling with it can now become
a genius?

Anyway last night was reading an article by Late Mr. Jiddu Krishnamoorthy
who said: "Thought by itself is an object stored in memory." (This was in
the seventies before PC & Microsoft Excel.)

Hmm.

Now the interesting part:


Point is that when we are measuring IQ, there are excellent chances
that all we are measuring is a person's 'experience' and
'memory of that experience'.

Cannot say where all this is leading to but IQ concept has been there
for so long there must be more advanced percepts by this time.

i am not genious(*^___^*”)

Nice point & a big smile.

Figure out a category or two before passing the sentence:



^?^

Jaigi, I just factored all the numbers and noticed a pattern to do the last one. But the pattern is the formula you indicated, x * (x + 1). Pretty cool.

Some of the factoring:
2 x 3 = 6; take that 6 x 7 = 42; take that 42 x 43 = 1806.

So for the last # I took 1806 * (1806 + 1) = 3,263,442.

That's funny about the 2633 & 3263.

I think you guys are the geniuses. I just notice patterns. No biggie.

Have a great day!

IMPECCABLE! CONGRATULATIONS!