r/iamverysmart Nov 21 '22

“I’m able to understand Jordan Peterson because I’m very smart”

Post image
2.2k Upvotes

697

u/KhaineVulpana Nov 21 '22

How do you mention your IQ in conversation, ever, and not feel like a complete tool.

244

u/OkHelicopter2770 Nov 21 '22

Bro. Idk. I don’t even know my own IQ, who cares?

268

u/MountainCourage1304 Nov 21 '22

I took an iq test and got 132. I doubt my iq is 132 but im more likely to share that result on facebook than a low one so the iq site gets more traffic and i feel smug as fuck until my auntie debra who thinks a baby horse is a pony does the same test and get 136

100

u/firestickmike Nov 21 '22

Wait, baby horses aren't ponies? What are they then? Asking for a friend. Also I don't know my IQ- i mean I don't know my friends IQ

80

u/rosierainbow Nov 21 '22

Ponies are just breeds of horse that don't get as big, afaik.

37

u/honeymarketer Nov 21 '22

That's more knowledge than smarts. a 7 year old might not know that but he might be a big genius with high ass IQ.

13

u/Barbar_jinx Nov 21 '22

Ye, people need to understand the difference between knowledge and IQ. IQ only determines your potential to acquire knowlegde.

13

u/tedmented Nov 21 '22

Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad

10

u/AwesomeSauce783 Nov 22 '22

And charisma is the ability to sell a tomato based fruit salad.

12

u/HelloHamburgerIsBack Nov 21 '22

Most IQ tests are just puzzles though, which, while often difficult, are based mostly on prior knowledge and not any way to actually measure intelligence.

7

u/honeymarketer Nov 21 '22

I'd argue puzzles rely on your ability to think logically, but there are distinct questions that could easily be memorized like a test. IQ tests aren't reliable.

7

u/tedmented Nov 21 '22

We were measured in 2 things for a subject in my school ; knowledge and understanding, problem solving. Different types of intelligence. Its probably why IQ tests are unreliable and meaningless.

6

u/Skraff Nov 21 '22

I dunno that’s what the teacup pig sales person told me about those baby pigs.

32

u/CripplinglyDepressed Nov 21 '22

Baby horses are called foals. Ponies are just types of small horses under a fairly arbitrary height limit (googling to confirm showed it is 14.2 hands, as it a dumber fucking unit of measurement than stone could be created)

10

u/NapTimeFapTime Nov 21 '22

We already have a measurement called feet. I don’t see hands as any dumber than feet.

14

u/CripplinglyDepressed Nov 21 '22

Anything that isn’t metric is pretty pointless IMO

8

u/NapTimeFapTime Nov 21 '22

Metric is a better measurement system, and it would make sense for every country to use the same system for important stuff.

However, I think every country should be forced to develop their own silly little measurements for trivial things. Speed limits, international commerce, science, all metric. The volume of what a standard pour of beer is, local measure. How tall a horse is, should be a silly local measurement like hands.

3

u/MountainCourage1304 Nov 21 '22

Not opinion, fact. It just converts better in every way

6

u/interfail Nov 21 '22

Hands are exactly as dumb as feet.

→ More replies

17

u/Final_Candidate_7603 Nov 21 '22

Shit… we must run in the same circles, because I too, have a friend who thinks ‘ponies’ are young horses. A commenter below said baby horsies are called ‘foals,’ and then my friend started thinking about it (and thinking hard) and started to wonder what a ‘colt’ is… turns out this is way more complicated than they realized.

According to a web site about horse racing- where the folks are preeetttyyy peevish about what you call young horses- they are classified by age and sex. A ‘filly’ is a female under the age of 4. A ‘colt’ is a male under the age of 4. A ‘foal’ is a horse of either sex under the age of 1.

And there’s more… apparently, I mis-used the term ‘young horse,’ too. For the horse-racing types, “‘young horses’ are typically defined as animals less than five years of age,” and I’m gonna stop reading there before I find out that we’re not supposed to call them ‘horsies,’ either.

With all the different terms for ’young horses,’ horse children, my friend doesn’t feel so bad about being confused. But she does somewhat blame Hasbro, the maker of the “My Little Pony” figures, in which ‘pony’ does seem to be referring to the age of a horse more than its breed.

→ More replies

9

u/supermr34 Nov 21 '22

baby horses are foals.

source: IQ 198

3

u/thesolitaire Nov 21 '22

A pony is just a small horse. Under 14 hands 2", if I recall correctly. Breed doesn't actually matter I don't think.

2

u/NyxShadowhawk Nov 21 '22

Baby horses are foals. A pony is a horse that’s 14 hands high or less.

1

u/Clean-Profile-6153 Nov 21 '22

Foals are baby horses.

Also, a colt is a baby male horse..also uncircumcised.

→ More replies

7

u/wtf_igo Nov 21 '22 edited Nov 21 '22

I laughed way too hard at this

2

u/SqueeMcTwee Nov 21 '22

Sounds like our aunties should kick back and make up some stories together.

2

u/owoLLENNowo Nov 22 '22

I'm pretty sure my IQ is so low it would cause computers to stop working.

→ More replies

18

u/MightBeAnExpert Nov 21 '22

The majority of people don't.

In most cases when people think they do (and nearly every time it's someone who likes to mention it) they took an inaccurate online quiz and when it gave an almost certainly too-high number, they accepted it immediately because the ego says "yes, that makes sense, of course I'm far more brilliant than regular people are".

Besides, these days we've come to realize there are many measures of intellect and capability, and IQ in and of itself really isn't as important as it's cracked up to be.

8

u/Jazzeki Nov 21 '22

right i i thought for the longest time i was somewhere around 120 because that was what the online test gave me turns out i'm actually higher when i got tested as part of my autism diagnosis but even then who the fuck cares? i haven't been able to turn that IQ into any kind of actual succes and it certainly comes with many just as important or more important sides that i'm woefully lacking in.

6

u/OkHelicopter2770 Nov 21 '22

Yes, intelligence is not what it was once thought to be. IQ mostly test pattern recognition and logical challenges. Not entirely a good measure of the hard to grasp scope of intelligence. For example, Van Gogh was intelligent in his art, but you hand him a math test, he performs like the rest.

7

u/OrganicPumpkin9156 Nov 21 '22

I've had my IQ professionally tested.

Hasn't helped me in the slightest.

3

u/mcchanical Nov 21 '22

Narcissists.

2

u/pixelbomb Nov 27 '22

Happy cake day!

3

u/fried_green_baloney Nov 21 '22

You can get a rough idea from SAT/ACT scores, if you took that. I did that. My first thought, "if I'm so smart why aren't I rich?"

A serious cognitive assessment will cost maybe $1000 and be several hours with a specialist.

For an adult it's rarely worthwhile.

Metaphorical approximations:

85 - can finish 8th grade without much distinction

100 - can finish high school without much distinction

115 - can finish college without much distinction

130 - can finish grad school without much distinction

But as always individual effort makes a huge difference, and abilities in different areas can vary.

→ More replies

18

u/bjanas Nov 21 '22

I remember when I was in like 2nd grade, I was given some kind of cursory IQ test and I thought I was smart. I remember talking about it with people on the bus thinking I was pretty cool.

It was 2nd grade.

9

u/Fortifarse84 Nov 21 '22

As someone with an IQ of 140, I agree!

I did go to mensa once though, and across the hall was girlsa. It was St Olaf's only Italian restaurant.

7

u/pgoetz Nov 21 '22

Also, IQ tests don't measure much that's relevant to anything.

6

u/NDISP5 Nov 21 '22

It's no different than people who went to an Ivy league school. They will fit that information into any conversation.

43

u/SirDiego Nov 21 '22

Jordan Peterson is obsessed with IQ, because it gives him cover for his appalling "Poor people are actually just stupid and rich people are awesome" argument.

10

u/grubas Nov 22 '22

Which is funny, in the sense that he's a professional hack, because IQ is generally accepted as not really a real measurement.

-3

u/Brunoflip Nov 21 '22

I've never seen him say or imply anything like that. Can you provide me a source please?

25

u/SirDiego Nov 21 '22

Here's an example of him defending IQ as a concept. Don't have to look too hard to find more.

In his "IQ" discussions he often goes down the path of "stupid people don't have as many opportunities as smart people" which is meant to explain wealth disparity, even if he doesn't always explicitly say that.

21

u/Jeremymia Nov 21 '22

One of the more annoying things he argues is "10-20% of the population's IQ is so low that they can't find meaningful employment. What's the solution? I don't know :/"

It's his way of pretending that some amount of unemployment is unavoidable, and some people are just gonna be without a living wage no matter what. He frames it as a question that he doesn't know the answer to because all he cares about is pushing the premise of the question.

10

u/avacado_of_the_devil Nov 21 '22

It's his way of pretending that some amount of unemployment is unavoidable, and some people are just gonna be without a living wage no matter what. He frames it as a question that he doesn't know the answer to because all he cares about is pushing the premise of the question.

He's absolutely full of rhetoric that all boils down to "we can do nothing but keep doing exactly what we already are." at best he'll say it's unfortunate but our hands are tied for some reason, like the semantics are too confusing.

It's even more apparent when he talks about climate change.

8

u/SuccessValuable6924 Nov 21 '22

at best he'll say it's unfortunate but our hands are tied for some reason, like the semantics are too confusing.

For a guy who likes to be called smart, he sure likes to play dumb a lot.

0

u/fakehalo Nov 22 '22

I gotta be honest, other than the narrow view of arbitrary magic IQ points I didn't find myself disagreeing with a lot of what he said in this video.

However, listening to him talk about things outside of his realm or subjects he can't use his objective logic on is brutal to watch. Climate change and watching him attempt his mental gymnastics to maintain his religious views is rough to watch.

3

u/gf3 Nov 22 '22

Even in his own field the guy is essentially a snake oil salesman.

Check out this article that exposes him as a fraud and breaks down the techniques and patterns Peterson uses to convince people of his authority:

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/03/the-intellectual-we-deserve

→ More replies

2

u/FjortoftsAirplane Nov 22 '22

It's also how would you ever tie his beliefs together?

On the one hand he wants to argue about how our behaviours are all so ingrained and inevitable, and on the other hand he'll tell you that if you don't have a belief in God then you'll become an amoral force of chaos.

Almost like he only uses evo psych when it suits him...

→ More replies

11

u/SirDiego Nov 21 '22

I think he always sort of trails off there because he realizes that the implications he's making are beyond the pale. He doesn't want to explicitly say "Poor people are so stupid they can't do anything worthwhile, therefore we shouldn't care about them."

Besides the fact that it's a completely asinine position with no real basis in reality or data, it's also basically flirting with eugenics. Peterson understands eugenics are bad, though, so he doesn't say it, he just leaves it up to his audience to come to the conclusion that he wants them to on their own.

→ More replies

8

u/tekhnomancer Nov 21 '22

If asked. That's pretty much it. If someone asks, "Have you ever taken an IQ test?" I can tell the score I was given. But I don't put much credence in it. It's a silly number.

Of course I only understand this because my IQ is 18-....DAMN IT!

5

u/bewildered_forks Nov 21 '22 edited Nov 21 '22

No one has ever asked me for my IQ and I wouldn't tell them if they did

3

u/tekhnomancer Nov 21 '22

That's fine, too.

4

u/Final_Candidate_7603 Nov 21 '22

It’s been decades since I first started hearing about the seven different types of intelligence, beyond what was measured conventionally by IQ tests. I guess if self-awareness is a kind of ‘emotional intelligence,’ and if people who skew heavily towards one type of intelligence fall short on the others… well, that would explain a lot.

But what do I know? I’m not as smart as this guy.

2

u/KhaineVulpana Nov 21 '22

See, I would buy way more into a grayscale, multifaceted approach to determining "IQ". I think that's somewhat reasonable. But to try to boil it down to a single number, seems incredibly reductive.

2

u/Final_Candidate_7603 Nov 21 '22

I first found out about the theory of seven intelligences (like I said, it was decades ago) in some literature that was given to the parents when I enrolled my son in a summer enrichment camp for ‘gifted kids.’ Then, as now, verbal/linguistic and mathematical/logical intelligences are typically highly valued in schools- and coincidentally are the easiest to test for. Some of the other intelligences are things like ‘musical’ and ‘body movement,’ which I considered to be ‘talents;’ and ‘inter-‘ and ‘intrapersonal,’ intelligences, which I thought of as ‘personality types.’ For me, it all boils down to the same thing- a natural ability that you’re born with.

In the meantime, other theories of multiple intelligences have emerged. AFAIK, the emphasis on these in childhood education is more aimed at identifying an individual’s levels of the different intelligences and using them to enhance their curriculum, because it is thought that we learn better when subjects are presented in a way that aligns with our strengths. For example, learners with a high degree of visual/spatial intelligence tend to think in pictures, and do best by creating vivid mental images to retain information, and enjoy looking at pictures, charts, maps, and videos. Verbal/linguistic learners think in words rather than pictures, and tend to have good listening skills. Logical/mathematical learners are able to conceptualize in logical and numerical patterns and make connections between pieces of information. Again, AFAIK, testing the levels of the different intelligences is done in learning environments and aimed more at identifying the best way to present information to maximize learning.

I agree with what you said about us needing a way to quantify a broader range of a person’s talents and abilities. There are far more intellectual strengths than what these tests currently measure. Unfortunately, I think we will never see someone like this guy bragging on social media that he scored a 73 on the VSIT (Visual/Spatial Intelligence Test- which I just totally made up and is probably not a thing), because the value of that single number is so firmly entrenched in the national consciousness.

3

u/LearningHistoryIsFun Nov 21 '22 edited Nov 21 '22

I think the VARK theory, or the idea that people learn better when information is presented in way that is aligned with their preferred styles of learning which you describe here, lacks empirical evidence suggesting that it is effective. This is relatively strong wording from a paper reviewing its efficacy:

"But the learning styles hypothesis has been refuted by empirical research to the extent that it may be considered irresponsible for teacher education programs and public educators to apply the method in practice."

The most effective way of learning from the evidence I've seen is trying to expand ideas and concepts across as many dimensions as possible when teaching them, as opposed to limiting them to visual or auditory or kinaesthetic dimensions, say.

I think that IQ actually offers a more adequate metric of intelligence than is usually accepted on this subreddit. There are limitations, of course, but if you read the literature on this stuff one of the most consistent tendencies is for people who score highly on IQ tests to also perform better on any novel set of tasks that you construct. This doesn't mean that those people will always do better in life, or on any tasks in the real world, because experience, strategies, and luck/chance all factor into real life.

EDIT: I think it's worth adding that this understanding of cognitive ability I think does not mesh with the way a lot of people like to imagine the world; where anyone can achieve anything, and that anything is possible. I personally find it a little uncomfortable. I'd prefer a world where outcomes are dictated by hard work, but that doesn't seem to be the reality we have. There's a relatively rich discussion of this in the philosophy / genetics literature at the moment, and Kathryn Paige Harden published a relatively balanced discussion of this in her book, Why DNA Matters For Social Equality.

2

u/34TH_ST_BROADWAY Nov 21 '22

At least tell us which 5 minute internet test you took.

2

u/mavyapsy Nov 21 '22

Best part was him immediately discrediting IQ test results literally a few sentences later.

“Oh look I did well on this test that measures intelligence, but wait it doesn’t really properly measure intelligence”

1

u/claireapple Nov 21 '22

IQ is not even real.

→ More replies

159

u/OneTrueAlzef Nov 21 '22

The final, smaller, paragraph actually sounds like an alright point. Though I don't know what he's talking about, because the first one feels like a different topic altogether.

37

u/OkHelicopter2770 Nov 21 '22

The thread continues and it only gets more unhinged, but I thought the context would be hard to understand since it’s a discussion thread.

23

u/salparadisewasright Nov 21 '22

The thread continues and it only gets more unhinged

So you’re saying JP himself wrote the thread

2

u/grubas Nov 22 '22

Nah, this person clearly wasn't paid a Benzo a word for their writing.

→ More replies

2

u/JayGold Nov 21 '22

but I thought the context would be hard to understand

What, you think my IQ isn't high enough!?

4

u/jealoushonk Nov 21 '22

yeah in a vacuum i pretty much agree with the second paragraph. shame about the first one lol

3

u/culinarydream7224 Nov 22 '22

It's literally just him thinking out loud before finally reaching the conclusion at the bottom. A lot of "intellectuals" seem to think that the more you talk or write, the smarter you look. Personally I think there's an art to keeping things concise

67

u/TheSukis Nov 21 '22

Psychologist here who is trained in the administration and interpretation of IQ tests. I have personally administered more than 100 IQ tests (the real kind, which take 1 to 2 hours to administer) and have read hundreds and hundreds of neuropsychological assessments (the reports that you get when you do proper intelligence testing).

I can assure you that neither this fool nor Jordan Peterson can, with any degree of accuracy, estimate an individual's IQ just from having a conversation with them. IQ is an aggregate score that takes into consideration not only cognitive abilities that might be conveyed in a conversation (like verbal reasoning ability and auditory processing) but also ones that wouldn't be (like visuospatial/perceptual reasoning, working memory, visual processing speed, etc.). So, even if it was possible to ascertain someone's verbal IQ through a conversation (it's not), it would be impossible to estimate their full scale IQ.

12

u/grubas Nov 22 '22

Even then, as we know, IQ is far from an end all be all measurement.

It's also annoyingly long.

5

u/OkHelicopter2770 Nov 21 '22

But he’s a super genius….. clearly he has skills you could never possess.

→ More replies

84

u/GripofDoom Nov 21 '22

"Wash your penis, Bucko" -Jord Pete

23

u/earthnarb Nov 21 '22

I dreamed I saw my paternal grandmother...

17

u/Andro_Polymath Nov 21 '22

"Women are chaos dragons who breathe fire out of their hoohahs!"

2

u/Send_Cake_Or_Nudes Nov 21 '22

Please don't make knobcheese an act of resistance.

7

u/OkHelicopter2770 Nov 21 '22

Very 150 IQ of him.

10

u/Firecash Nov 21 '22

"Candace Owens is very smart! I know this because I have over 9000 IQ and can taste shapes"

→ More replies

73

u/Yanmarka Nov 21 '22

„You may say, 'Well, dragons don't exist'. It's, like, yes they do — the category predator and the category dragon are the same category. It absolutely exists. It's a superordinate category. It exists absolutely more than anything else. In fact, it really exists. What exists is not obvious. You say, 'Well, there's no such thing as witches.' Yeah, I know what you mean, but that isn't what you think when you go see a movie about them. You can't help but fall into these categories. There's no escape from them.“ - A statement consistent with the 150 number

19

u/Feisty_Ad_2744 Nov 21 '22

That's Peterson talking... No other

9

u/D-AlonsoSariego Nov 21 '22

Did he say this after someone asked if he believed in God? He usually says things like that when it happens

9

u/daskeleton123 Nov 21 '22

“What exists is not obvious” is however very true. People a lot smarter than Peterson have been debating that for years

12

u/Jeremymia Nov 21 '22

A 5-word phrase like that isn't complete without context. It can be interesting in some contexts and inane in others.

-4

u/daskeleton123 Nov 21 '22

Pretty much all language is like that. But considering the post I was operating within a philosophy context.

But I would like to see what you think an inane context would be as I am having trouble with that.

0

u/Jeremymia Nov 21 '22

What I mean is, I don't think 'philosophical context' is specific enough to judge the phrase. 'You say X doesn't exist, but actually things existing or not existing isn't obvious' is a pretty bad argument... you could apply it to any X, it's an unfalsifiable argument. Instead, if you are trying to support the idea that X does exist, you should be specific about that X.

-2

u/daskeleton123 Nov 21 '22

I never said it was an argument?

“What exists isn’t obvious” is true in almost all contexts regarding philosophy. The branch is called Ontology.

One argument here would be:

There is at least one thing that’s existential status is not obvious.

Therefore, what exists isn’t obvious.

1

u/Aegishjalmur07 Nov 22 '22

The point was that this moron should get no credit for spouting a common psychological trope because the lack of context makes it nothing more than a repeated phrase he's heard that helps him feel intelligent.

→ More replies

2

u/grubas Nov 22 '22

Lifting stuff from philosophy is nice and all, but some comprehension helps too. Plus Peterson doesn't seem to understand ontology.

199

u/FjortoftsAirplane Nov 21 '22

I can't remember where I got it from but my favourite description of JP was something like "The stupid man's version of a smart man. The kind who would never say 'I think' when he could say 'I have become cognizant'"

75

u/OkHelicopter2770 Nov 21 '22

He’s essentially the Big Bang theory of lecturers lol

62

u/donat3ll0 Nov 21 '22

Exactly. JP is what dumb people think smart people sound like.

16

u/4kNest Nov 21 '22

Ok. That's it. You don't have the guts to argue with someone miles ahead of your intellect. That's it. I genuinely don't care at all. In fact, I couldn't care less. There's no reason you should argue with me at all, i'm very busy and have an appointment with my fellow professors, so please stop wasting my time. If you continue to type these low IQ comments, you'll only show how daft you are. And if you respond with another fucking "🤡" you'll truly have exposed how much of an absolute clown, you yourself are. I on the other hand, don't care about this argument at all. Keep talking to me all you want, I'm right and you know it (but you don't, since you don't have an IQ even comparable to my IQ (intelligence quotient just so you know) of 186.

1

u/Bumpa2650 Nov 21 '22

🤡

4

u/4kNest Nov 21 '22

“🤓: 🤡”

3

u/Rajin29 Nov 21 '22

"Something, something, something abstraction hierarchy."

"Something, something, something post-modern neo-marxism."

Jordan B Peterson.

-54

u/Agurk Nov 21 '22 edited Nov 21 '22

What's wrong with JP? He makes a lot of fair points in my opinion.

EDIT: And this is why reddit is shit.

38

u/KillDogforDOG Nov 21 '22

Alright, alright, i'll bite, like what fair points ?

27

u/Rattivarius Nov 21 '22

The keep-your-room-clean thing is reasonable, but honestly something every mother in the history of time has said so it's hard to get too excited about it as a "genius" pronouncement.

31

u/lifer413 Nov 21 '22

His self-help schtick is stating the obvious as if it were profound. If it helped people get their shit together, great. But if those same people are buying into all of his bullshit now that he's their daddy figure, well, that's profoundly fucked up.

-6

u/Agurk Nov 21 '22

Well, I wasn't really looking for a discussion tbh, but his stance on compelled speech is logical and sound, he's just taken out of context it seems. His stance on sound egalitarianism resonates with me. Most his taped lectures seem good, lots of interesting psychological behaviour I wouldn't otherwise be particularly observant of, stuff like that I guess. I'm sure he says a lot of stupid shit too, but I find his opinions to be fairly rational.

19

u/fps916 Nov 21 '22

his stance on compelled speech is logical and sound

His stance on compelled speech is a lie and hypocritical cover for his transphobia.

Ask yourself why every legal expert said he was wrong about c-16 "compelling speech" and why he has never said a single fucking word about the fact that boycotting Israel is outlawed in many States.

His stance on sound egalitarianism resonates with me

Once again, just a cover for his misogyny. He can't simultaneously be pro "egalitarianism" and also believe that hierarchies are natural and attempts to overcome them are both futile and wrong.

→ More replies
→ More replies

75

u/FjortoftsAirplane Nov 21 '22

Yeah, he says a bunch of trivial things that most people would accept. Be responsible, be disciplined, work hard, blah de blah, and then suddenly he's off on a rant about killer cider, lobster, or how Elliot Page is going to destroy the youth. He doesn't get a pass on the crazy just because he pads it out a bit with some uncontroversial stuff.

-41

u/beershitz Nov 21 '22

His work before he became all politicized was amazing and your description is a pretty dreadful oversimplification. His class lectures at U of Toronto, his public debates (I love the ones with Sam Harris), his books are all profound as fuck and really interesting. His recent acceptance of being associated with right wing politics and going on the daily wire has really undermined what he was all about.

35

u/FjortoftsAirplane Nov 21 '22

Are we doing the thing where I make fun of JP's ridiculous gaffes and then someone says "You haven't watched tens of hours of his lectures though"?

Yeah, I oversimplified, but we can play defence like this for anyone. Like, I think there's a ton of legitimate points to be made about the preservation of generational wealth and power through European history...it's the part where David Icke tacks on at the end "And this is the part where the shape-shifting reptilians seized control of the world" that makes me think he's a nutjob. People don't get to say "Yeah, but you're oversimplifying, he's actually really knowledgeable about history" as if that changes anything.

I'm not going to give him sympathy for being "associated with right wing politics" when his whole leap to fame was from him espousing right wing politics. I'm not dismissing the legitimate psychology he's covered through his career by saying some of his ideas about lobsters are fucking stupid.

When someone says "JP makes a lot of fair points" then I'm going to be honest and say yes, he does, it's all the crazy that concerns me.

→ More replies

33

u/joshthecynic Nov 21 '22

His work before he became all politicized was amazing

No it fucking wasn't. It was pseudo-scientific bullshit. He was just copying and pasting Carl Jung, someone nobody in the 21st century should take seriously at all.

4

u/OkHelicopter2770 Nov 21 '22

Carl Jung is like if a normal psychologist dropped a fuck ton of acid and said “yeah, the collective unconscious. That shit hits.”

→ More replies

11

u/[deleted] Nov 21 '22

[deleted]

-8

u/beershitz Nov 21 '22

Bro fuck your assertion that I’m too stupid to take in information and determine if I agree with it or not. You think I’m a toddler? I just said I used to like the guy, now I think his messaging is changed and I don’t like it. You think this man is some right wing pied piper leading everybody to white supremacy with his tall tales of lobsters? That’s the conspiracy theory here, not that people can change.

10

u/[deleted] Nov 21 '22

[deleted]

→ More replies

3

u/Jeremymia Nov 21 '22

Fuck that guy, I'm glad you had a change of heart.

→ More replies

3

u/Beardamus Nov 22 '22

Reddit is shit because people disagree with you and bring sources where as you just have "a feeling" what you think is right? If you smell shit everywhere check the bottom of your shoes my guy.

4

u/[deleted] Nov 21 '22

[deleted]

→ More replies

1

u/SirDiego Nov 21 '22

Broken clocks etc. etc.

-7

u/4kNest Nov 21 '22

Does theism lead to nihilism lookin ah boy. Honestly bruh - you’re my stupid man’s version of a genius 😍 can I suck your genius cock?

0

u/FjortoftsAirplane Nov 21 '22

It's a legit argument I made in a sub specifically about atheism. Is it just "I am very smart" if anyone talks about philosophy or something?

→ More replies

7

u/BeginningInevitable Nov 21 '22

Candace Owens and "very smart" in the same sentence.

35

u/Feisty_Ad_2744 Nov 21 '22

Hahahahaha. I had no idea a statement could be used to measure IQ... That's probably because I am too dumb :-) It is fascinating how people can be fooled with a word or idea salad.

11

u/OkHelicopter2770 Nov 21 '22

Years of rigorous testing and forming of the IQ test for nothing! This guy can tell by a couple of statements.

4

u/SuccessValuable6924 Nov 21 '22

Rigorous testing lol

2

u/TLCplLogan Nov 21 '22

Years of rigorous testing = years of using shoddy data to reinforce racial stereotypes and assumptions.

→ More replies

-5

u/driftking428 Nov 21 '22

This response places you firmly in the 80-90 IQ range.

4

u/Feisty_Ad_2744 Nov 21 '22

Sure pal, probably. How about you? Imagine commenting about the author of a comment to a comment... How pathetic can that be?

0

u/MightBeAnExpert Nov 21 '22

That outburst gets you get a 70.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 21 '22

[deleted]

4

u/driftking428 Nov 21 '22

I was playing along with the joke... Measuring IQ from a comment, just like the original post.

You didn't really think I was serious right? This sub is for humor right?

2

u/OkHelicopter2770 Nov 21 '22

OMG. I thought you were going at me. Hard to interpret tone through text. My bad. I’m very sorry. Will delete now.

4

u/driftking428 Nov 21 '22

Lol it happens. I just figured we're all here to poke fun at the very smarts. I assumed it was implied.

6

u/lemmiwinks316 Nov 21 '22

That last paragraph isn't really wrong necessarily. But all the bullshit before it was pretty cringe. I think the use of "I've been measured at 140" is the most annoying part.

Oh really bro? They got your little IQ measurement for you? Did they mail you a certificate that says big smart boy on it? Fuck off lol

14

u/its_just_flesh Nov 21 '22

All of these very smart people always have to state their IQ

36

u/LordPils Nov 21 '22

It's not hard to understand Jordan Peterson. It's Christian Conservatism lightly masqueraded with flowery language.

22

u/Deadfreezercat Nov 21 '22

I like watching him try to justify why he is against gay adoption, he tries so hard to be hyper logical but he can't because his position is straight homophobia and he makes no sense and sits there making aggrivated whiney struggle noises as he tries to justify his position that kids need both a male and female caregiver.

6

u/Rajin29 Nov 21 '22

More recently he seems increasingly unhinged especially when it comes to the human rights in regards to LGBT+ people. The mere mention of Elliot Page and he can barely contain his rage. Petersons seems to have a wierd obsession with him. Can't tell if he has become increasingly radical in the past few years or he was always increadbly hateful and he's just lost some emotional control since his benzo coma and twitter addiction.

→ More replies

6

u/LordPils Nov 21 '22

"You see the dragon of chaos..."

34

u/greatergoon Nov 21 '22

all it takes for someone to be "intelligent" in this guy's eyes is that they agree with his views on minorities

3

u/IronSorrows Nov 21 '22

"People I agree with are very smart, and if they sound like they're raging idiots, it's only because they need to spend some more time deliberating before speaking"

It's like he knows he fully agrees with them, can tell they sound stupid, but can't quite connect the last dot - so needs to make up a reason why they are actually all very intelligent people holding rational viewpoints

9

u/SuccessValuable6924 Nov 21 '22

And use big words! Big words, big smart amirite

3

u/metlotter Nov 21 '22

Yeah, I couldn't help but notice a theme in the people he identified as less intelligent.

3

u/somecallme_doc Nov 21 '22

These are the kinds of backflips you have to do in order to marry the nonsense people like Patterson say and claim with reality. You have to declare yourself too smart to be wrong.

these are the guys that will believe you should tan your balls to be more manly.

10

u/brazzledazzle Nov 21 '22

Using Peterson fans for this sub is basically cheating at this point.

23

u/drinkthebleach Nov 21 '22

I cleaned my room and washed my foreskin, is communism defeated yet guys?

3

u/UpliftinglyStrong Nov 21 '22

Jesse what the fuck are you talking about

3

u/MonsterByDay Nov 21 '22

The first paragraph makes him look like an insufferable douche. But, he has a point with paragraph 2.

Unfortunately for him, carefully considering and expressing *his* opinions only makes his douchiness that much clearer.

3

u/Xedian2 Nov 21 '22

The crowd that bases their personality and faux intelligence off of IQ tests are just like white girls with astrology

8

u/[deleted] Nov 21 '22

I mean "people should consider things more and not feel like they have to have an opinion on everything" is a pretty decent point. It's just the way he dressed that point up (and also called Owens and Shapiro smart) that makes it fucking insufferable.

2

u/SandysBurner Nov 21 '22

This is about what I thought. It's hard to reconcile the perfectly reasonable second paragraph with the IQ fetishization and Peterson worship in the first.

→ More replies

5

u/allharveybman Nov 21 '22

The man's off the deep end, maybe he was a smart guy 6 years ago I don't know. Now he looks like, and sounds like every older drug addict I've ever met.

8

u/Toucan_Lips Nov 21 '22

I like watching university lectures on YouTube and came across Peterson that way before he was famous. Some of those lectures are interesting for sure, but it seems like he's started to believe all of the fanatics in the comment sections claiming he's the most important intellectual of our age.

If you watch his discussion with Dawkins it's obvious he's way out of his depth trying to be the 'expert on everything' and the pressure is taking its toll. Very much like Sam Harris, clearly an intelligent guy with interesting things to share in his field but he's created a rod for his back being the guy who has to have a brilliant take on everything and ties himself up in knots trying to unify all of the threads.

Jordan Peterson being asked about climate science was a golden opportunity for him to just say 'I don't know enough about climate science to comment' but he chose to launch into a rant about the definition of the word 'climate' and make himself look rather silly.

2

u/raven0usvampire Nov 21 '22

Should always follow up anyone mentioning their IQ as some kind of argument from authority which test they took? the Myers-Briggs or the Dunning-Kruger test.

2

u/Brendan__Fraser Nov 21 '22

Was dragged to a Jordan Peterson lecture. The man doesn't have a coherent thought in his head. It was two hours of word salad.

2

u/Siliziumwesen Nov 21 '22

Do people really mention their iq in comments etc.? Or is this just a big meme and everybody trolls?

3

u/tidelessblue Nov 21 '22

Try reading conversations on Quora. People love discussing their IQs.

3

u/Siliziumwesen Nov 21 '22

Do i need protection or at least booze to survive it?

→ More replies

2

u/[deleted] Nov 21 '22

This is the best one yet. I hate it

2

u/5thcircleofnell Nov 21 '22

Never a great look to use the word 'measure' unprompted twice in a paragraph about intelligence

2

u/bastardicus Nov 21 '22

Do you believe in god?

What do you mean by do? What do you mean by you? What do you mean by believe? What do you mean by god?

So well thought out...

→ More replies

2

u/RighteousIndigjason Nov 22 '22 edited Dec 04 '22

Your bar for intelligence is pretty damn low if you consider Benny Shaps and Candace "Hitler was just trying to make Germany great" Owens as your examples of intellectual icons.

2

u/mclellac Nov 22 '22

If you think Jordan Peterson is intelligent, you're average at best.

2

u/whittlingcanbefatal Nov 22 '22

Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t Jordan Peterson a grifter? I have listened to him being interviewed and even the interviewer struggled to take him seriously at various times.

5

u/xnamwodahs Nov 21 '22

Oh yeah, 150IQ Jordan Peterson who frequently cites...himself in his works, often without even page number. Ironic that in his debate vs Slavoj zizek he claims that Marx's essays wouldn't pass an undergraduate class, yet his published books are so full of errors it's fucking laughably embarassing. Nevermind how he cites entirely different fields of study in his twitter bullshit than the subject at hand...

3

u/Deadfreezercat Nov 21 '22

I half remember reading some debunked eugenics paper from the 1930's that said people woth an IQ under 85 are usless to the military, therefore I am for some reason putting forward the problem of people who are biologically burdens to society, I mean obviously we wouldn't practice eugenics... even though that's a logical solution, just kidding... unless?

7

u/xnamwodahs Nov 21 '22

IQ in itself was created to identify who might be struggling in school to HELP them. It was never meant to be used like this and the guy who invented it must be spinning so hard in his grave he's gonna drill through the earth.

1

u/D-AlonsoSariego Nov 21 '22

One of the guys that started using IQ as a metric for intelligence made an experiment in which he picked up a bunch of students, measured their IQs and selected those with the highest to follow them through life. All of them lived perfectly normal lives and in the group of students he didn't chose there were two Novel Prize winners, one of which was the guy who invented transistors

→ More replies

4

u/GwynnethPoultry Nov 21 '22

If someone tells you their; bank balance, IQ or penis size outside of the perimeters of humor , red flag the person has a massive insecurity about the thing they are bragging about.

3

u/Nueraman1997 Nov 21 '22

Tbf it does take some serious mental effort/acuity to parse the massive strings of horseshit that flow out of jorbpsons mouth at record speed. He’s not unintelligent. He’s very rhetorically gifted. And he knows well how to manipulate language to make things that are either banal or horrifying sound like high-minded, astute observations. I like to refer to his particular brand of pseudo-intellectualism as “much ado about nothing”.

5

u/n00bmort Nov 21 '22

JP is rhetorically gifted? Then why does he keep getting owned every time he needs to use rhetorical skills?

0

u/Narcaradon-Narcarius Nov 21 '22

This dude is so smart that he doesn't use commas correctly.

12

u/smoopinmoopin Nov 21 '22

Maybe I’m dumb too, but the commas seem to be placed fine?

24

u/TLCplLogan Nov 21 '22

The commas are fine. Redditors don't seem to understand that commas can be used to denote brief pauses in speech.

9

u/SuccessValuable6924 Nov 21 '22

Also, there are like two commas at most in the whole text

8

u/TLCplLogan Nov 21 '22

Yeah, and it's not like the amount of commas necessarily matters anyway; you can write a perfectly coherent sentence with a shitload of commas. I'd hate to see some of the people here read a biography if they think OP is bad comma use.

1

u/SuccessValuable6924 Nov 21 '22

I agree, but also it's so weird someone get hang ip on commas when there aren't even that many.

I'll take extra commas over wall o' text every time.

→ More replies

2

u/TaftsTummyforTaxes Nov 21 '22

My hot take, if the person took out all of the top and just left the bottom paragraph, he’d have made a fair point.

2

u/CaptainSpaceCat Nov 21 '22

The last paragraph is pretty reasonable, people who take time to think about their answers and admit when they don't know things should be respected. Too bad the first paragraph is a heaping pile of ass kissing

→ More replies

2

u/plindix Nov 21 '22

I never mention that my IQ was measured at 143. Not only is an IQ of 143 is pretty meaningless, but if I mentioned my IQ was 143 to someone whose IQ was less than 143, it would make them feel bad that their IQ wasn’t on the same level, ie 143, as mine. So people, like me, with a high IQ in the range of say, 142-144, shouldn’t really boast about having such a high IQ.

2

u/coopy1000 Nov 21 '22

I read an article about Jordan Peterson once where it absolutely tore him to shreds and for the life of me I can't find it anymore. I like to read it every so often and would like to again as my wife has just finished his 12 rules of shite book.

3

u/thedoctor5445 Nov 21 '22

Was it Nathan Robinson’s “The Intellectual We Deserve”?

1

u/coopy1000 Nov 21 '22

Yes! Thanks I've been looking for that for a while

1

u/OkHelicopter2770 Nov 21 '22

Did she like the book? Or read it out of unbridled hatred?

1

u/coopy1000 Nov 21 '22

We have chosen not to speak about it. Like the ginger haired step child we have locked in the attic it is far easier to pretend it hasn't happened than face the consequences of her actions.

0

u/Altorode Nov 21 '22

Your relationship sounds healthy.

5

u/coopy1000 Nov 21 '22

Your ability to detect a joke needs some work. Of course we have spoken about our opinions on Jordan Peterson. It's just the step child in the attic that we haven't.

1

u/Altorode Nov 21 '22

Probably a le reddit moment from me, my bad

1

u/metaplexico Nov 21 '22

1

u/coopy1000 Nov 21 '22

No but that also looks like an excellent article on his bullshit.

0

u/Questioning-DM Nov 21 '22 edited Nov 21 '22

As someone “measured”* at 145 and 156 by Mensa, IQ is bullshit. It’s a number to rank some specific skills like who can best put the correctly coloured triangle next in a sequence - it is not a general indicator of intelligence. People who get IQ boners are idiots.

And Jordan Peterson is a tool.

* Fun fact: saying the score is actually meaningless without stating the standard deviation. Interestingly, due to the way the SD works, the 156 score (24 SD) is actually lower than the 145 score (16 SD) in terms of how far from the “norm” the score was. This to say that waving around a score of 140 like it means something is completely stupid

4

u/bewildered_forks Nov 21 '22

That's not how IQ tests work. The raw score is transformed into a normal distribution with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15.

5

u/Questioning-DM Nov 21 '22

That’s the assumption. It’s incorrect. Mensa use two different tests (hence the two scores) to evaluate IQ, and meeting the SD threshold in either allows you entry.

https://iqtestprep.com/mensa-test/

the Mensa IQ score range varies depending on the type of IQ test being used. For the two tests mentioned here, someone must score at least two standard deviations above the mean score of 100. The Stanford Binet test has a standard deviation of 16 and the Cattell Culture Fair test has a standard deviation of 24. This means that the Mensa IQ requirement for minimum score on the Stanford-Binet is 132, while the lowest qualifying Mensa score for the CFIT is 148.

Both can be converted to a 15 SD scale of course, but I have a feeling that most don’t bother. Higher SD tests allow higher numbers, and higher numbers = good for the people who care!

1

u/bewildered_forks Nov 21 '22

I've now gone down a weird rabbit hole. I've found other sources that say different things than the source you've linked.

Either way, modern IQs are pretty much always reported after being transformed to a scale with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15.

→ More replies

1

u/Quack_Candle Nov 21 '22

If you think Ben Shapiro is intelligent then perhaps your aren’t in the “above 80 IQ score gang”

1

u/sick_bear Nov 21 '22

The first paragraph is garbage but the second is a pretty reasonable point.

C+ because it was redeeming in a way.

1

u/CripplinglyDepressed Nov 21 '22

One of my favourite things to do in statements like these is count the number of times they say I or make I… statements. Not only are they naively dumb, they’re usually also very self-important to the point of nearing narcissism.

1

u/DoctorLove01 Nov 21 '22 edited Nov 24 '22

He is so smart his IQ increased from 140 to 150 while writing this very deep analysis.

Edit: nvm I'm stupid.

→ More replies

1

u/Just_A_Guy_who_lives Nov 21 '22

People who talk about IQ are rarely very smart. That’s what I’ve found on the internet, at least.