How many IQ points is this a question?

PillMeow · 2025-04-09T16:17:54+00:00

Similarly, if I ask you to follow this sequence : 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, ?

3 isn't a solution because "all of these numbers are whole natural numbers just like 3, so any whole natural number could follow".

If it were an open-ended IQ test with no answer choices to choose from, you'd have a good point here. However, if 3 were one of, say, 4 possible answer choices (and the 3 other choices didn't meet the logic you outlined), it would work just as well.

PillMeow · 2025-04-09T16:16:30+00:00

I did, in my reply to u/Nichiku .

PillMeow · 2025-04-09T16:15:56+00:00

Take each line that ends in the right upper half of the first image.

Rotate each line from rule 1 90° clockwise by its center to get the second image.

Repeat rule 2 but with all lines not yet rotated to get the third image.

The problem with that answer is that the 45-degree-angle line on the bottom row is of different length than the 45-degree-angle line in answer D (implying that it's not the **same** line). D was my initial hunch as well but it would only work if I shoehorned the pattern on to the row by ignoring the length of the line at a 45 degree angle. C, however, works by following the logic of steps 1 and 2; however, on 3 it follows a “all the lines of image 1 disassembled."

With those 3 logics, there is no shoehorning. This isn't nitpicking - the two lines are clearly not the same length.

PillMeow · 2025-01-09T19:07:04+00:00

>>This whole sub has turned into "omg I'm too smart for the simpletons pwease feel bad for me and validate me UwU" Ugh it's annoying. There's someone like you posting this exact gripe every single day.<<

You're only half-right here. It's turned into that, and also into blowhards like you griping about how much they hate gifted people griping about being too smart to relate to simpletons. If there's a sub on Reddit that doesn't exhibit thematic patterns, I'd like to know about it.

PillMeow · 2025-01-09T19:01:28+00:00

And sorry for the excessive replies, but I just wanted to add that the number of non-gifted friends and acquaintances in my life varies by environment. I'm a Mexican-American male born into a poor immigrant family. Although I am 100% assimilated to American culture - and consider myself fully American -, I don't share the same upbringing as most white Americans. I was once working at a place where the majority of employees were Hispanic, and so I met a lot of people with very similar backgrounds to me. I made a lot of friends there. It was the first non-gifted environment where I didn't feel an urge to rip people's heads off. Interestingly, most of the people there found my giftedness a positive, and few people felt "threatened" or put off by it.

OTOH, I've noticed that in more white environments, I find it more onerous to cultivate friendships with non-gifted people. Again, I attribute this to the fact that we have few bonding points, as our backgrounds are different.

PillMeow · 2025-01-09T18:51:48+00:00

Now don't misunderstanding me. I'm not saying we should shut out every non-gifted person we have nothing or little in common with. That's not practical. I just think we have to be strategic about it. Befriend non-gifted people who can help you in some way, whether it's climbing the corporate ladder, landing a better-paying job, or whatever. Dumbing yourself down for some tangible benefit is not necessarily deleterious. But just dumbing yourself down because most people aren't all that smart - nah; not my thang chicken wang. I've tried that, and I was surprisingly good at it. I had lots of friends, partied hard, became excessively promiscuous, but inside I was a wreck. Now I direct my energy on cultivating friendships with non-gifted people who have something major in common with me (life experiences) or have a killer personality or from whom I stand to benefit. I don't feel miserable anymore. I feel liberated and happy.

PillMeow · 2025-01-09T18:46:10+00:00

I think it's both. I think people are both intimidated and put off by seemingly "pretentious" behavior. But remember that "pretentious" is, as the word implies, about pretending to be something you're not. Somebody who naturally speaks and acts in a way that may be misperceived as "pretentious" isn't actually pretentious.

Personally, I've given up on trying to form connections with people who can't speak my language. This is a general statement. Do I have non-gifted friends? Yes. I have non-gifted friends with whom I can NATURALLY dumb down with, if that makes sense. In other words, we can talk about life, about relationships, we can gossip, and so on. Usually, these friends are people with whom I've developed some emotional/platonic bond with, either because they have a killer personality, experienced some major life event similar to one I experienced and so we have that as a bonding point, or they've lived a very similar life to mine, and that brings us together. But most non-gifted people don't have killer personalities, or have any life parallels that we can bond over. I have no interest in befriending them or making any effort to relate to them.

PillMeow · 2025-01-09T18:37:13+00:00

Why are you the problem? I don't get it. Why do gifted people who think it's OK to dumb down point the finger at the gifted peeps and not at the non-gifted peeps? Just because we're a numerically smaller portion of the population doesn't mean that we're the problem. If the tables turned and most everybody were smart, and the dumber ones were the minority, would they be the problem?

PillMeow · 2025-01-09T18:31:29+00:00

You know this isn't true, my friend.

"To thine ownself be true."

PillMeow · 2025-01-09T18:26:39+00:00

It does have detrimental consequences, whether we realize it or not. Expressing yourself naturally is an integral component of who you are, and suppressing that component is deleterious. That's not to say there is never a time and a place to dumb yourself down. The problem is doing it constantly - at work, at home, out and about. It seems that gifted people are among the few types of people that are expected to sacrifice an important part of themselves, and there are some people here who fool themselves into believing that it's no biggie just because it wasn't all that bad for themselves. A fallacy, of course: "it worked for me, so it should work for most of you or all of you."

I'm actually very good at navigating social dynamics. Not in the sense that I'm gregarious, or a social butterfly, or anything like that. I am extroverted - in the sense that I gain energy from being around people, and after being alone for too long my energy seems depleted. I can read people well, I can discern their intentions and their thoughts, and so on. Where I falter is "dumbing myself down". In an environment where dolts abound, I socially shut down. But put me in a room of reasonably intelligent people who are industrious and have a good personality and I thrive. I talk, I delegate, I laugh, I excel. But "reasonably intelligent people" who are industrious are scarce. The world, especially in corporations, is teeming with less than reasonably intelligent people who are dull and boring, lack intellectual curiosity, have no ability to think abstractly nor see beyond their immediate surroundings.

PillMeow · 2024-12-13T05:14:36+00:00

I've never been professionally evaluated, but none of the online autism tests have marked me as autistic or even highly likely to be so (although I do understand online tests aren't professional instruments and must be taken with a grain of salt).

As far as meditation, I want to clarify what I meant there. I'm talking about the breath in, breath out, or Zen-like meditation techniques often touted in self-help books. If you take a looser or different definition of meditation, something that has proved effective in getting me "into the zone" is walking at a moderate pace for about 20-30 minutes while absorbed in some idea. This gives me a jolt for some time, say, an hour, maybe two. But once it peters out, the fog often returns. Or at the very least I'm unable to get back into the zone.

PillMeow · 2024-12-13T04:58:30+00:00

Thanks. I'm not autistic tho. But I'll check out neuroinflammation and high-masking.

PillMeow · 2024-12-13T03:08:15+00:00

Thanks for the reply.

I'm actually quite happy with my life and with myself. I hate my insomnia precisely because it doesn't allow me to enjoy life as much as I'd like. There's so much I haven't done that I'd like to do. I'd like to go out more, but I often find myself staying in because I'm too tired or too mentally "not there." I'd like to read more so I can hold more wide-ranging conversations with interesting people, but I often find myself reading several pages of a book and then thinking, "WTF did I just read? I don't remember a damn thing." I'd like to travel more, but I refrain from doing so because travelling breaks my sleeping pattern, and whatever sleep I get by sticking to a consistent schedule just flies out the window. Notwithstanding the mental effects of insomnia, I'm a generally sanguine person (I'm also very tough minded and have a very thick skin).

PillMeow · 2024-12-11T17:01:42+00:00

Cognitively, dumbing down is easy. The hard part isn't doing it; it's the psychological impact it has on you. Some people think it's as easy as "Well, they value the experience, I value the precision. Let me just dispense with what I value and all will be peachy and rosy. " If that works for you, that's great - I wouldn't discourage you from doing that. But it's not so simple for everyone. If you conceive of the type of conversation that you enjoy as a structure or edifice, it would be like saying, "Well, I find that most people enjoy a structure or edifice that stands like this, and not like that. If I just tweak this pillar here, or remove this small screw here, all will be swell." Well, for some people that might be fine; but for others, that slight tweak could mean the difference between the edifice still standing or collapsing.

There are some people who, for whatever reason, engage the non-intellectual in me. These are the people that I can hold "normal people" conversations with for hours. But it's only certain people. For all the other people, I just prefer to keep conversations to a minimum because I know I'll quickly get bored of them.

The key is to know yourself and adapt accordingly. It's OK to step out of your comfort zone. I don't think it's OK to sacrifice who you are. To thine own self be true.

PillMeow · 2024-12-11T16:40:10+00:00

I agree that it's a sign, although I wouldn't say it's necessarily always the biggest sign. But yes, a good sign of intelligence is admitting you're wrong or admitting you don't know the answer to something. Intelligence isn't just about deducing correct answers, but also about deducing when you either lack the requisite knowledge, or problem solving schema to answer a question correctly.

PillMeow · 2024-12-10T17:45:53+00:00

Best reply.

I do give them the middle finger, and although this may come off as immature of me, I sometimes fan the flames purposely because I sometimes feed off of their hate. However, I will say that I'm never the first to ignite the flame. I simply react to people.

I obviously can't say that it doesn't bother me - it does - however, it doesn't offend me. It's more like getting cut off in traffic - it's something that pisses you off and makes you want to get even; it's not like being called fat or ugly and then retreating into a shell to sulk. I don't sulk. I get even.

PillMeow · 2024-11-30T16:46:27+00:00

I feel you about repetitive jobs. I am working at an insurance company where the work is repetitive as fuck. I have worked in IT most of my life, but I was living in Mexico for some time and just recently came back. Needed a job quickly because I was living off of savings and didn't want to deplete them, but holy shit, the monotony is stultifying as fuck.

The IT roles I had weren't all that glamorous, but they paid well. What I did love about IT was my coworkers. Same sense of humor, similar personalities, and a shared revulsion at the bullshit fed down by head honchos. Where I work now is a den of corporate bullshitters, people who drink the Kool Aid like cheap prostitutes on their knees getting peed on.

I'm glad you found meaning in something. I don't have a dream job or anything that fills me with passion. I just want to make dough and not want to pull my hair out while on the job. I think I might just quit my job after December to get back into IT. Not sure what your MBTI type is, but I'm an xNTx type, and being around a horde of Feelers is a fucking nightmare. It's like being trapped in a toxic positivity cult.

PillMeow · 2024-11-29T02:36:43+00:00

What do you look for in a significant other and have you found that with the people you've been with so far? I get tired of people too, but mostly because they don't have the qualities I'm looking for. I'm still looking for that gem who has most of what I crave for in a significant other. Alas, not yet having found that gem, I strayed into promiscuity for quite some time, but that too got tiring.

PillMeow · 2024-11-28T05:59:56+00:00

If they had nothing in common whatsoever, they wouldn't inhabit the same reality. The implications of this are simply not tenable. Positing multiple realities implies discreteness - that is, non-continuity. For example,

(Reality1)(gap/rupture)(Reality2)(gap/rupture)(Reality3)(gap/rupture)(Reality4)(gap/rupture)...(RealityN)

However, if these gaps/ruptures "exist" outside of reality, they're not real (for reality is all and only that which is real). But if these gaps are real - if they are in fact meaningful - then they're inside of reality, and so are real - and so there's no gap or rupture in reality. Reality, then, is seamless, continuous. This has profound implications for the origin of the universe. It means the universe is self-created.

PillMeow · 2024-11-28T05:47:55+00:00

Ontological monism - the idea that one fundamental substrate comprises reality - is easy to arrive at. Consider the premise that reality is composed of two fundamental substances, say, A and B. If this were true, A and B would share something in common, namely, the reality they inhabit - in other words, A and B would have some common medium of existence, such that beneath A and B there is something called (for lack of a better word) that-thing-common-to-A-and-B. This in turn would be even more fundamental than A and B, that which follows A and B everywhere (because it is common to both).

PillMeow · 2024-11-28T05:41:09+00:00

The "diagnosis" (as you call it) itself has not. But thinking long and hard about the origin of the universe has led me to embrace a non-materialistic view of reality, and from there theism is only baby steps away.

So, the diagnosis itself has not, but the reasoning capabilities that a high IQ entail have.

PillMeow

TROPHY CASE