And… hate to say it, but there are a lot of people with 80-90 level IQ in the US. Many of them struggle with things like projecting forecasts, longterm planning. They are extremely vulnerable to these manipulative marketers.
Did the IQ measurements change or something? I thought 100 was considered fairly intelligent, but lately I’ve seen multiple comments indicating that it’s a lukewarm average and anything less is unintelligent.
People use “room temperature IQ” as an insult, but I thought 70-80 was average and there’s really no need for concern until you get below 60.
Also, from what I can remember, IQ was calculated as some function of one’s “mental age” relative to their “actual age,” so it really doesn’t mean anything beyond one’s mid-twenties. It functioned mainly as an indicator of intellectual development among youths, relative to their peer group. And 80-90 would have meant you were above average…
I agree with the criticisms below about methodology; IQ is ultimately a measure of how good you are at those particular tests. And multiple skillsets are tested. But it is valuable when you’re talking about general trends or having a concrete point of comparison (for example, a certain individual compared to the general population).
And… hate to say it, but there are a lot of people with 80-90 level IQ in the US. Many of them struggle with things like projecting forecasts, longterm planning. They are extremely vulnerable to these manipulative marketers.
While true about the vulnerability,
Did the IQ measurements change or something? I thought 100 was considered fairly intelligent, but lately I’ve seen multiple comments indicating that it’s a lukewarm average and anything less is unintelligent.
People use “room temperature IQ” as an insult, but I thought 70-80 was average and there’s really no need for concern until you get below 60.
Also, from what I can remember, IQ was calculated as some function of one’s “mental age” relative to their “actual age,” so it really doesn’t mean anything beyond one’s mid-twenties. It functioned mainly as an indicator of intellectual development among youths, relative to their peer group. And 80-90 would have meant you were above average…
Trump is probably around 80, for reference.
I agree with the criticisms below about methodology; IQ is ultimately a measure of how good you are at those particular tests. And multiple skillsets are tested. But it is valuable when you’re talking about general trends or having a concrete point of comparison (for example, a certain individual compared to the general population).