Pictured: Outlier (155 IQ, 1650 testosterone ng/dl) carries control (110 IQ, 800 testosterone ng/dl).

Submitted as comment to “What must his life be like?” in [email protected], and felt that it justified a whole meme to tie it together.

    • tomi000@lemmy.world
      4·
      3 days ago

      I would say it is a decent indicator for mental qualities that are considered desitable by the current performance-driven economy.

      On the other hand, people can very well be considered intelligent and have small IQ.

      • Komodo Rodeo@lemmy.worldOP
        1·
        3 days ago

        I’ve heard it explained as practical intelligence vs. abstract intelligence. Understanding calculus won’t help you frame a house, produce slate tiles for its roof, cast the iron for a potbelly stove that keeps it warm, etc., but it will help to calculate the trajectory of a space probe that your country is using to investigate an asteroid, or tap the stock market, do your own taxes without error, strategize saving/investment for your retirement, calculate the dimensions for a culvert that keeps a property from flooding, etc.

    • Gustephan@lemmy.world
      4·
      4 days ago

      My personal take is that iq is effectively meaningless. Measuring intelligence is a problem that is extremely hard, maybe even impossible given that what constitutes “intelligence” can be subjective. Some people ascribe value to it iq because it’s an extreme oversimplification of a problem they don’t want to think to hard about, and as a bonus it creates another hierarchy in which they can baselessly feel superior to others.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient#Validity_as_a_measure_of_intelligence

      has a pretty good summary of scholarly debate on that question.

      TLDR: iq has an extremely narrow take on what “intelligence” means, and ignores the vast wealth of what people consider to be human intelligence. For that reason most scholars think it’s nonsense.

      • Komodo Rodeo@lemmy.worldOP
        1·
        3 days ago

        Solid take, I hear more people saying this whenever it’s discussed. Although it’s a pretty decent measure for natural intellectual capacity, a lot of that potential isn’t wholly practical even in modern society. Good for studies, math, science and Mensa, not so useful for nearly everything else.

        • Gustephan@lemmy.world
          1·
          3 days ago

          I wouldn’t even give it that. Imo “intellectual capacity” is entirely a confidence thing. If you have the confidence to give an answer that may be incorrect, you have intellectual capacity. If you give an answer and it’s wrong, you’re learning. If doing that and being wrong over and over again a million times doesn’t discourage you, somebody is probably about to hand you a degree. “Intellectual capacity” is a fairy tale for the privileged to ensure they aren’t discouraged from pursuing an education, and a source of learned helplessness for most others.