Hello Everyone,


I am assuming there may be some high IQs (I am a former member of MinD, or MENSA in Germany) in the Nexus? What have been the challenges you have faced in the world due to this? Has your IQ sometimes been a heavy burden to bear?


Any thoughts on this? Experiences to share?

Views: 3195

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Huh? What do you mean?
IQ's as well as the individual are products of their environment...
that's my 2 cents. Look at how crazy the last 8 years have been.
IQs are a product of both genetics AND the environment, with the bulk of the formulae coming down on the side of hereditary. The professional argument is never about whether intelligence (however it is defined or measured) is caused by genetics or the environment, or even over what percentage of which is responsible for the phenotype (the observed result) of any one person, but over the ratio of the genetic and environmental inputs for the mythical "average" person.

It's the same kind of question which is asked about the more obviously physical characteristics like height and weight, even hair and skin color. They all have a strong genetic component and they are all, to varying degrees, affected by the environmental history of the person. No two people have an identical formula for any of these things.

Another example is the relationship between cigarette smoking and the development of lung cancer. Both genetics and environmental influences are at work here also, but the genetic component is a lot less of a factor for most people.

I stress the words "most" and "average" because some people's genetic makeup tips the ratio in one direction more than the other.

Behavioural science and, indeed, a lot of biological science, is an imperfect science. This is why there is such a reliance on complex statistical analysis to make sense of the data. That is also the reason why pop psychology so often gets things wrong.

The classic layperson's mistake in the nature-nurture debate on intelligence confuses the statistical concept of "variability of hereditary" with the notion of the same fixed percentage of genetic influence operating in every individual. That's not even close to what it means. If we say that the genes provide 80 percent of the variance in intelligence it is something similar to saying that 80 percent of the variation which we see in the total picture of everyone can be accounted for be genetics. (And I don't even know whether that figure is an acceptable ball park average these days.) It says nothing about what the ratio of genetic to environmental influence on the phenotype of any one person. Your expressed and observed intelligence in a particular area might be 100 percent due to genetics while your friend's might be only 50 percent due to genetics. You would both be rare, but not impossible.
I do not know if i have a high iq but at school i generally know what stuff is about and cant really pay attention because it rarely challanges me intellectually.

I am known as a "know-it-all" because i know a LOT of random things that people bring up when they just discovered it.

it is some times heavy to think about things that other people i know never thought about or dont understand, one example is that my class didnt know what a "placebo" was before like a few months ago when i have known it for years... SIGH!

it is quite lonely because people here are very ehm "dense" i suppose and i cant socialise very well, probably doesnt help that my intelligence is very "Introverted"

I have often wondered why topics regarding Mensa (Mensa is not an acronym) often prompt "sour grapes" replies, around about 98% of the time.  


Congratulations if you got it.

all of you who are responding negatively to the high IQers are exactly why they feel like outsiders 0 people are mean buggers!!!  why do we look up to a great athlete?  we can't do that either.  but no, just intelligence . . . if it weren't for all these way intelligent people, you wouldn't be living the way you do!!!!!  jeesh!
Lorryslorrys:  Well that takes care of the other 2% ; D

hi douglas - my son's father is extremely intelligent and always had trouble in school because he knew so much and thought differently. it made him feel very alone.  one time an airforce guy came to his school talking about the air force and and jet technology. my ex knew exactly what he was talking about asking incredible questions for a 2nd grader.  the airforce guy was truly impressed.  he has always felt alone in this sense. he says that one can always tell immediately when he meets an equal and he can just talk and be himself.  he is very verbal.  but, he hates games - the kind that mensa uses to test IQ.  not all very intelligent people like those games.  they do not find every one who is very intelligent.  i'm not mensa material either, although i am not as intelligent as my ex.

(also, i am not very verbal as you can tell - very frustrating.)

another thing - when i first found atheist nexus, i was thrilled to find other people to discuss ideas with - to my disappointment, i have found some pretty low functioning thinkers who really don't use reason or logic in their diatribes.  there are, however, people like you. . .  i do appreciate people who are not as bright if they are good hearted and all people can be interesting. i am not a snob, but i really do enjoy intelligence, which is not always accompanied by emotional 'normalcy'.  many of my friends have more than neurotic problems.  anyway, i just wanted you to know that i totally understand your statement and your feelings about having a high IQ - i am sorry that so many responders to your query are so hostile.  it comes with the territory, i guess, as you know very well.  

hope to hear from you - alexa    (p.s if i am frustrated as to people to really talk to, i know how my ex and people like you must feel :)

i find interesting that i have not found any reference to people with Aspbergers. These people are often highly intelligent, but have no way to connect with other people. as they don't get emotional or social signals from other people, they have to learn to imitate the simple way people respond to each other.  i know a woman whose husband has Aspbergers.  He is a highly acclaimed music critic and has written books (which she has astutely edited) which are excellent, also.  (she's a pretty smart cookie herself with her own psychological problems.)  their middle son also has Aspbergers, but is not as intelligent.  any resonance with any one?
I've been a member of "the club" and while yes, there were some people in said club, that really struggled in social situations, there were plenty that seemed perfectly average and maybe even above average with their social skills.  We used to have discussions among ourselves about what frustrated us the most. Like most people with higher IQ's we have an incredible desire to learn, ask questions, and find it almost impossible to ignore logic and reason.  What I have found to be frustrating, is people with average and even above average intelligence, tend to not ask questions, and give up their logic without any fight.  That's what seems unnatural to me.  I think that is how so many of us end up here in the Atheist or Agnostic club.  We refuse to give up our logic and reason.  The fact that so so many people do just give up these things, seems a human tragedy.....at least to me, and a tragedy that has cost humanity sooooo much in the way of progress.  I live in the bible belt, so my refusal to let go of logic and reason to conform, has cost me, in the way of friends, family, and relationships.  To me though, that is like asking a bird NOT to fly.  My burden hasn't been regret that this has cost me socially.  My burden is sadness, at the opportunities humanity has squandered and continue to squander, because they so easily and readily resign logic and common sense, and choose to be controlled by dogma and fear.  I spend a lot of time wondering what that has cost us in the way of progress.  And the REAL kicker to me, is no matter how hard you try to point out the dangers of this behavior through the lessons of history, NOTHING you say, no Science you put in front of these people, will change it.

One of my former girlfriends was a Psychologist that was rather eager to place my intelligence for her own curiosity. Of course I refused (we were smoking...stuff), but I asked her: "How would you go about testing the machine intelligence of Google Search?" We both knew the answer, and it turned out to be a rather good night.


I suppose being thoughtful is only a burden when I have to lie, or suffer fools, to make others feel comfortable with absurd opinions and positions. I recently had an older religious lady show up for a bbq, and she had the insatiable urge to share with everyone that 'god' had touched her and 'blessed' her. To which I quickly replied: "Does your 'god' also touch pedophile priests?" My property, my rules. Most of the time I'm fairly easy-going though.


IQ is a relative measurement of narrow subsets of isolated domains, and as such, everyone is a genius and a moron to those on their left and their right of the bell curve. My hope is that someone would not misunderstand this narrow measurement as a conclusive quotient for all human capability; hence the doctor that couldn't change a flat tire to save their own life. Binet himself admitted its inherent limitations as a tool.


The complexity of intelligence is staggering: On the bottom layer lays IQ potential (which new research shows is ever-malleable due to neuroplasticity), on top of that sits the personality index, on top of that sits the predisposition towards certain subjects or activities, on top of that sits the socio-economic potential, on top of that sits parental guidance, on top of that sits emotional and physical resilience to overcome hardships, on top of that sits cultural relevance of knowledge, etc...etc... how far down the rabbit hole would you like to go?


The sum is greater than the whole of its parts. Emergent behavior, indeed.

I think, that there are two ways or forms of being intelligent, that are very different, even though the IQ measured by tests is the same.  
One type enables to make intelligent decisions concerning goals, attitudes, values, critical evaluation of the own behavior, self-control and long-term thinking are stronger than instincts and impulses from the subconscious.   This is more than what is usually defined as 'emotional intlligence'.
The other type is intelligence as a tool serving instincts and irrational goals of any kind.   

The first kind of intelligence avoids wars in favor of peace and progress for all people and attempts to overcome obsolete impulses like the ingroup-outgroup instinct. 
The second kind of intelligence serves such instincts like the ingroup-outgroup instinct to construct the most efficient weapons and methods how to kill the most of who is considered an enemy.  

The first kind of intelligence makes people atheists, the second kind makes them jesuits.

Whenever subconscious archaic instincts are stronger than high intelligence, it gets dangerous.  




Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service