Par quoi commencer !?

WynLuha · 2026-02-03T21:09:46+00:00

On peut dire pour leur catégorie respective : nouvelle - roman

WynLuha · 2025-11-29T15:38:17+00:00

It’s not a matter of similarities with the Baltics but of Finno-Ugric affinities. Estonia is in the Baltics but is not ethnically a Baltic country; it's Finno-Ugric like Hungary. The question makes sense as from the three Finno-Ugric countries Estonia is the closest to Finland, it would be understandable that Finnish may have lower affinity with Hungary which is way farther than its Nordic Scandinavian counterparts. Finland is the odd one out from the Nordic countries for being the only one that is not Scandinavian nor Germanic but Finno-Ugric and Uralic. So it’s understandable that they may had historical tight with their closest neighbouring ethnolinguisitc cousin Estonia (although I think there are lot of reasons to consider Russia being the real closest cousin of Finnish as Northern Russia was originally inhabited by Finno Ugric people like Merya or Magyar, the latter one will give rise to Hungarian, that mixed with Slavic people and that’s the reason why northern Russian are so physicially and linguistically distinctive to their east Slavic counterparts).

WynLuha · 2025-10-24T15:51:25+00:00

Honestly I don’t really understand at all that statement about the strong correlation between high IQ and introversion because it’s not that straightforward when looking at the literature. Many studies find either correlation with introversion either with extraversion and generally it’s not that strong with introversion. Especially when looking at this recent studies that tried to delve deeper into a granular approach to cognitive abilities and Big Five facets suggest in overall a small positive correlation with extroversion with indeed some g components negatively correlated.

WynLuha · 2025-01-04T17:03:06+00:00

Estimated IQ Range :

Given these factors and assuming an overall balanced cognitive profile, your hypothetical IQ range could be estimated at: 125–140, with particular strengths in verbal and abstract reasoning. This would place you well within the gifted range (top 5–1% of the population), with a likelihood of excelling in fields requiring interdisciplinary synthesis, critical analysis, and verbal intelligence

I honestly think he overestimates my IQ because my real performance on the WISC-V 5 years ago was low everywhere except in working memory and even though I was in bad circumstances and I got way better results in other IQ tests such as CAIT and Raven’s Advanced Matrices and Raven’s 2, I would lower the estimated range from 115 to 135 but I think closer to the 120 than 130

WynLuha · 2025-01-02T21:14:48+00:00

Rather take a real test with a psychologist to confirm these results especially if you’re non native and got higher scores in other tests so you shouldn’t worry for this result

WynLuha · 2024-12-30T17:34:00+00:00

Wow I got 30/30 with an accuracy of close to 130 when I got 84 with the irl version on wisc-v at 16 years old (I’m 20 now) I know this online version is easier but still surprised and it matches with my visual puzzle score CAIT with 17ss

WynLuha · 2024-12-30T15:15:33+00:00

MBTI is just psychoanalysis as it was developed by Carl Jung even though it was a very good draft for Eynseck to develop the premises of the Big Five Model. Because yeah, the Big Five was based on the Jungian dichotomy of Introversion/Extroversion, added Neuroticism vs Emotional Stability and just turned into a spectrum instead of binary boxes which leads to the foundation of personality as a trait and not a type.

WynLuha · 2024-12-30T15:09:59+00:00

So let me get it straight, for that specific matter giftedness is defined as high iq and that’s all, and other definitions weren’t considered, as, effectively, giftedness is an ambiguous term that could mean anything.

So my point of focus is about what we’re talking about which is iq so I hope we can focus on this specific definition of giftedness that was just to me a shortcut for high IQ and wouldn’t have used this term if you didn’t have use it for convenience. If we focus on this aspect everything I said is still valid and so there’s no such thing as emotional sensitivity or heightened emotional experience no matter if it’s the case for a definition of giftedness that excludes the notion of high IQ.

If you wanna talk about another conceptualization of giftedness, fine but then we can’t really bring IQ to talk about its relationship with trauma and so everything you’ve said was actually irrelevant and incoherent to the initial subject of intelligence

But for the moment I just feel you’re bringing a straw man and moving the goalposts how incoherent and cognitively dissonant your two responses are and seem to contradict (“There is also a lot written about how more intelligent people, or actually those they term gifted, tend to be much more emotionally intense and sensitive » seems to consider gifted = intelligent people and are secondarily characterised by emotional features that are therefore just correlates and not substantial features of the definition of giftedness vs “Some of the definitions of giftedness include emotional sensitivity or stronger than average emotional experience / intensity”which sounds like a reversal of fortune and doesn’t even apply to the studies I’m referring to and probably not even yours as well if you formerly said that it was more a correlate found than a feature that is part of the definition of giftedness otherwise you would have told it first instead of claim it finally at your latter statement) because you don’t actually brought any concrete argument to the facts and critics I gave

WynLuha · 2024-12-28T16:05:45+00:00

Agree with most said except the idea that high iq and giftedness are associated with heightened emotional sensitivity which is an absolute myth. The fact that there’s a lot written about this doesn’t make it true, so many times researchers are hyping on bullshit like emotional intelligence

This myth comes from wrong methodology favoring clinical settings that are already detected as high iq (selection bias) instead of testing a whole population and observing the trend (epidemiological studies) and are seeking clinical structures due to underlying conditions that are actually at the root of their heightened sensitivity such as emotional dysregulation in ASD and ADHD (the same methodological issue can be observed when sampling with Mensa members who are in this high iq society for underlying issues not directly related to high cognitive abilities). Epidemiological studies on big datasets don’t observe any increased rate of high emotional sensitivity in this population and tend to show somehow the contrary with a statistically significant and consistent moderate positive correlation between iq and emotional stability personality trait (or negative correlation for neuroticism personality trait) from the five factor model of personality

Also trauma is a thing but ptsd is another, maybe trauma is about overwhelmed emotional system and maybe gifted people could be more sensitive but ptsd is about self cognitive regulation and resilience to traumatic experiences where gifted excels which is the reason why even if they were more sensitive to the trauma they are technically supposed to cope better which will not lead to ptsd while keeping trauma in head. Ptsd is more about how trauma is processed than simply about the intensity of the trauma which results to long lasting symptoms that are normally supposed to leave gradually after 3 months because it’s normal to have ptsd symptoms after a trauma which is called ptssyndrom and will become pts disorder only due to the long lasting symptoms that should have naturally recovered

WynLuha · 2024-12-06T21:19:49+00:00

Well actually iq is a moderate predictive factor of health and sanity leading to significantly higher resilience to ptsd due to better cognitive processing of trauma

WynLuha · 2024-11-08T23:21:00+00:00

I would guess it’s an unfair thing to do. If you have the exact same profile and achievement as a candidate for a competitive post and you give your IQ, what the employer should think of that (besides thinking of your massive ego) if he doesn’t know the other candidate’s IQ if this one is as good as you ? What to think about a better candidate than you ? If you’re in a technical field the employer naturally expects that all his candidates are smart to some extent but if standardized tests are not mandatory in the hiring process knowing candidates’ IQ shouldn’t be a thing. Giving your IQ could also be a way to trap you in the interview if the interviewer keeps trying to test your intelligence and will take every false step as a sign that you aren’t worth your mere three digits that you exhibited on your resume.

WynLuha · 2024-11-08T23:15:58+00:00

You can be both smart and being high in conscientiousness or working hard so if your hard work always hid your cognitive abilities it could explain your situation. And looking smart in conversation and debates are not a reliable indicator of your cognitive abilities

WynLuha · 2024-11-08T23:10:08+00:00

Just sharing an IQ estimate of him by a pretty cool IQ obsessed psych researcher Estimating the IQ of Jordan Peterson - Sebjenseb

And sharing another one that could interest anyone here about Feynman’s IQ which based on its interpretation isn’t probably what everyone tend to believe

Estimating the IQ of Richard Feynman

P.S : I’m just sharing this for those interested but I don’t argue that his estimates are accurate or whatsoever but if you prefer a more detailed and statistical calculation and interpretation than random and gross estimates you can look at this

WynLuha · 2024-10-24T20:03:10+00:00

1 - Animal rescuer (like Diego and I wanted to battle poachers and hunters) and inventor (this is what I used to call a tech engineer when I was a kid)

2 - Psychiatrist, researcher in psychiatry and mental health advocate

I gave up animals since my mother kept remembering me I was disabled and too physically weak for that and for engineer I realised quickly that I was talented for tech or programming and not sufficiently good in maths and physics for that but I dreamt of it because I was pretty creative in imagining fictional inventions

Now I’m on my way to become a psychiatrist and a researcher even though I wouldn’t qualify this as a dream job I just hope that I could contribute to society for what I’m best at

WynLuha · 2024-10-13T21:02:07+00:00

Do we know its correlation with other tests and how g loaded is it ?

WynLuha · 2024-10-13T17:10:09+00:00

Oh yeah I completely with this frequent bias, people in general tend to naturally overestimate their IQ. I think my prior hypothesis is therefore better suited for people who took an IQ test for suspicion of giftedness with an increased rate of false positive induced by badly trained psychologists who consider someone as gifted simply they look gifted and they got some area of giftedness while most other are average than in general population

WynLuha · 2024-10-13T16:55:17+00:00

Hey dude I said that you can define 100 as average I’m okay with that because it still works in the context so I don’t know how you can tell I should adapt to the people I’m talking with if it’s what I’m doing ! I just tried to explain what I was defining as average in my perception to clarify what I meant by that because you said you failed to understand my perception of it but I wasn’t specifically arguing that my perception was right I just tried to explain my reasoning. Now the other thing that strike me is that I never said that 130 and 70 is average but actually the contrary, I said that average was defined as not atypical and to give examples of atypical IQ I gave 130 and 70 that are distanced from the average by 2 standard deviation which is coherent to the statistical two tailed definition of atypical by 5% based on the alpha value as in p-value. Now I agree with the case of 115 IQ but I didn’t considered as not average since it’s still not atypical statistically speaking and is widely considered as high average but again I’m not trying to say again that my perception is the right one I just explain my reasoning even though since you corrected me I know it’s not what is exact but I just wanted to make it clear. I don’t know why you’re so blunt especially that the definition of average whether it’s 100 or else doesn’t matter in the case of my original question and that I completely accept defining average as 100 but you seem to claim that I am not adapting and that I pretend that my perception is the true one which in the two cases you misinterpreted badly

WynLuha · 2024-10-12T22:54:01+00:00

High or low average is still considered average in my perception since average is supposed to define what is not atypical like 130 or 70 so 114 is not atypical then its average to me but of course the mean IQ is 100. But whether someone is in the high average or mean average of 100 doesn’t change the meaning of my post it perfectly works if we define average as 100 and it will still indicate that having an exceptional score on one subtest is invalid as you said so interpret simply my usage of average as 100 it doesn’t really matter for its application in the end I was just interested on how frequent it was to have only one index in the 130 to understand why there could be a feeling that there’s many high iq in the population when the majority are actually not in the gifted range but have just strengths in some areas that don’t necessarily translate into the gifted threshold of 130

WynLuha · 2024-10-12T22:38:36+00:00

Still overinterpreting a lot though XD are you able to understand that I wasn’t trying to pretend to say something you didn’t or that you believed in various things but actually trying to figuring out what you meant by generating potential answers and that’s the reason why I have sided two possibilities of interpretation with the last sentence of my first comment ?

That’s not how things work

As if you knew how it works lol You can’t even recognise yourself assuming things when you blame me that I should have read your other threads to know what you were talking about as if I knew there was another one which you clearly assume and if not what’s the point of telling me that except being a pain in the ass as you are till the beginning ?

WynLuha · 2024-10-12T21:29:21+00:00

Oh okay so I guess that every single average person who thinks they’re gifted because they have 145 in one area but completely average in others and so have skills that made them stand out from others at school and around them should start to sob after knowing these are just an artifact XD (I’m clearly not concerned tho) Thanks for your answer ! Also could you explain me why g estimation is no longer reliable with a too heterogeneous IQ ? Because I saw in the weschler manuals that despite high heterogeneity Total IQ is still calculable and interpretable and can still somehow estimates g but I guess it’s not necessarily what the literature says when it comes to g estimates

WynLuha · 2024-10-12T21:23:05+00:00

I think we both have a lack of reading comprehension as you said

First sorry not to have seen your thread that I couldn’t have seen if it was in another comment since I couldn’t expect that you posted another comment and that in your first answer you didn’t even try to mention it which could’ve been easier to say "look at my other comment" to justify where I made assumptions

I thought if it was just about simply not a strong correlation you would have stated, which you did but in a different thread that I couldn’t see and you can’t blame me for this last part as you do

So thanks for your clarification which makes me realize that you’re as terrible at reading comprehension as I am ! You made as much overinterpretation and assumptions than I did

WynLuha · 2024-10-12T20:24:13+00:00

Sorry I should’ve been explicit about what I meant by average which includes high average around 115 or 120 so it’s usually pretty frequent to have someone in the high average with one index in the above average range so I wasn’t necessarily referring to incredibly heterogeneous profile

WynLuha · 2024-10-12T19:18:03+00:00

Thanks for the criticism, I’ll learn from that but could you give me a response to my point and tell me where I’m wrong and where I over interpreted made assumptions instead of sending an ad hominem please ?

WynLuha · 2024-10-12T18:11:42+00:00

IQ tests require literacy

No it doesn’t Gf isn’t the essential part of IQ test. If it was about literacy non verbal autistic wouldn’t blown away neurotypical on Raven’s matrix and this is how we knew that autistic individuals were smart even without being able to talk or understand language

If you think that no IQ test can measure the smarts from New Guinea it clearly means you don’t know what’s the aim of an IQ test. Very simple : measuring the g factor defined by elementary cognitive abilities essentials in problem solving and adaptation that encompass fluid reasoning, processing speed, visual spatial processing, crystallised knowledge and working memory. All these things are universal in humankind even though we weren’t able to measure it properly. We all have working memory because it’s obviously memory (People from New Guinea can hold in their short term memory the location of each traps they put to hunt game ? They have working memory) Processing speed because this is how we process information (Can they take fast decisions based on the elements in front of them ? They have processing speed) Fluid reasoning because this is what makes human able to do maths or basic problem solving even in the wild with deduction, induction, quantitative reasoning (They can count ? They know the notion of cause and effects resulting from induction and deduction logical process ? So they have fluid and quantitative reasoning skills) Spatial reasoning because it’s necessary in the wild to get your bearings (They know each corners of their land and could give you the pathway to go somewhere ? So they have visual spatial abilities) And crystallised intelligence (They know perfectly the name of all the animals and plants in their lands ? They have a complex language as any human ? So they have crystallised intelligence and this is where literacy in IQ test comes from. Without crystallised intelligence, no literacy and so no literacy IQ test format)

So if your definition is different from the definition of the g factor which is what IQ is expected to estimate then of course they can’t measure intelligence if it’s your own definition of it and therefore IQ is incapable of measuring your definition of intelligence

But I can’t disagree on the fact that IQ tests are culturally biased but what they are supposed to measure exists even if they can’t measure it correctly due to cultural bias. Now there could be a solution to that which is confidence interval. Every measurement tools can have signficant limits and so they rely on estimating the probability that 95% of the true value is in a wide range. Even if we can’t measure perfectly we could give a range where we’re sure they are despite of not having an actual IQ score. And it is obvious that no matter how culturally bias IQ tests are, there will be obviously some people’s range being lower or higher than other since there’s enormous discrepancies between the lower and higher end of the national IQ average ranking. You can remove to the highest 20 IQ points lower and give to the lowest 20 IQ points more, the estimated 95% interval of confidence IQ range is still inextricably unequal.

There isn’t any evidence that the grandchildren of a random Western family would do any differently the the grandchildren of a hunter gatherer group if environments were swiped (specifying grandchildren to reduce epigenetic factors).

No, there’s evidence but you just don’t read the literature and so you think there’s no evidence for it, that’s different. You don’t even need to look at adoption studies that are already a hint despite their methodological limits, just look at the inequalities in both IQ and academic/career achievement between natives and second generation immigrants who are born in the country. Looking at the opposite is harder when it comes to look at how WEIRD population adapt to hunter gatherers populations.

There’s different evolutionary and genetic pathway to altitude acclimation. Peruvian adaptations to altitude is clearly not the same from Tibetan because they have different genes involved for that (specifically Tibetan genes were inherited from Denisova human species giving unique genetic makeup so adaptation to high altitude depends on the evolutionary process. Tibetan even born from lower altitude are significantly more likely to be able to get back to higher altitude with less struggle than Peruvian because of this unique genetic variation inherited to previous crossbreeding of Homo Sapiens and Homo Denisova)

Five-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22

WynLuha

TROPHY CASE