Vigilant on Reddit
I have never told anyone that, like that, nor would I. In fact, I would tell someone that if they don't understand what I've written, ask for clarification. I would never think of a failure to understand as being due to a person not being "bright enough." That's rude. It is possible that a person doesn't have the background to understand, but they could be supported in understanding if they ask. I would also never say that I have "an 1Q of nearly 160." If I said it somewhere, it was an error, and here is why:Well, you see...
Abd aka Dennis George Lomax will tell you that he's got an IQ of nearly 160 and that he sat in on lectures with Feynmann and so he's terribly, terribly smart and it must be that you're just not bright enough to understand his genius gibberish
IQ, Intelligence Quotient, is a test result, not something that someone "has." It measures something, to be sure, but what it measures is controversial. So the fact is that my IQ was measured once, when I was in high school, maybe 15 or 16 years old, and the test result was, as I recall, 157. With that and 25 cents, at that time, I could have gotten a ride on the subway.
Yes, that's very high. If it was accurate, that would place me well into the top 0.1% of people my age at that time in performance on that test.
I might also be "terribly smart" and be a terrible writer who does not know how to explain things so that "ordinary humans" will understand them, and that would be my responsibility.
There are people who do understand what I write. Are they "smarter" than others? Maybe. Or maybe they are not loaded with preconceptions that inhibit understanding. Or maybe something else.
Yes, I sat through Feynman's 1961-63 lecture series. More to the point here is what it took to have that opportunity. Performance in high school. Interview with Cal Tech representative. SAT scores also off the charts. (Verbal aptitude 794/800, Math aptitude, 784/800, Math Achievement 800/800 -- which was relatively common at Cal Tech.) National Merit Scholar. Full scholarship.
None of that gives me the right to claim that I am correct about something "because I'm so smart," and such a claim would be offensive.
Nevertheless, I sometimes write about, ah, unusual topics, and might use terms very familiar to me and not to some readers. But that's not about the readers not being "bright," It would be a simple and remediable communication failure.
If the reader isn't interested in the topic, they will likely not tolerate exposure to it. If a reader is actually averse, if what is being said seems to them to contradict what they "know," it is even less likely they will understand, because it takes patience and detachment to move ahead in those conditions, and if it's complicated with hostility, the probability of successful communication falls even lower.
But first contact understanding of some of what I write in some areas is not necessarily common. Yet someone like Dysklyver seems to understand immediately. And Vigilant has written about my answers to questions in r/sudoku as dismissing the people there as stupid, when, in fact, I get thanks from newcomers and others constantly. I also get obvious signs of gratitude on Quora (it is measurable there) where people who ask questions appreciate detailed answers. So Vigilant is blowing smoke, as he always does.
Oliver D. Smith wrote:
Apparently Einstein's IQ was never measured. So that's an estimate people have made, which could be wildly off. People who are not-so-smart have strange ideas about what intelligence means.Have you not realised yet no one believe a word you say?
I mean… take this example:
“When I was in high school, my intelligence was measured at 157, which was more or less off the charts, the test was not designed for that.”
An IQ of 157? Albert Einstein had an IQ of~ 160.
Your posts are always filled with blatant absurdities like this.
Smith takes a factual claim (a test result) and rejects it as absurd, which is what stupid people do (more accurately, people attached to their own ignorance and arrogance). If that test result were from some anomaly, it would be meaningless, but the claim still factual. As quoted, I deprecated possible interpretations.
Yet there is plenty of evidence indicating I'm not exactly "normal."
And so what? If we look closely enough, "normal" is an illusion, it's all relative, and people are both unique and alike.
Smith went on about this:
"Anyone"? Doesn't it "take one to know one"?The people with IQ’s above 150 are notable savants and geniuses. That totally excludes you; anyone who looks at your website and your own biography can see you aren’t a savant or genius.
But thanks for once again proving you are a massive liar.
But I did not claim that my IQ was 157, only that a test score was that, over sixty years ago. This is typical with Smith -- who is now allied strongly with Vigilant.
Take what someone says and distort it to create a desired impression. It has been working less and less for him, he is now widely known and rejected. But, hey, it seems Vigilant believes him and his brother!
In this line:
Right. He's never heard of it, so proof that it's a lie. Ignorance as evidence, lovely. I responded in more detail there.Are you still claiming you were a midwife (whose heard of a male midwife) who delivered hundreds of babies? lol
I don't claim I delivered hundreds of babies. I assisted in about 30 births. I delivered the last four of my biological children, and I had the advice (but not the presence) of an obstetrician for the first of these home births (and his assistance in later work, until he died). He also did the prenatal care for us, and later, we insisted on all mothers having professional prenatal care).
He said that "God delivers the baby, the woman gets out of the way, and the doctor is the Messiah." Medical humor, but carrying some truth. When a doctor delivered my wife's first child in San Francisco, I wanted to kiss him! It was so amazing and I was so grateful!
In fact, he'd made many mistakes and was basically an asshole, and when we realized that, this led us to consider home birth for the next. And the rest was history. Because we had done it, people asked us to help. I founded the Arizona School of Midwifery and my ex-wife was licensed and delivered about 200 before she left the state. That School accomplished its mission, from a later journal article I cite on that blog comment section.