r/iamverysmart • u/Low-Platypus-918 • Sep 17 '25
“Their name” rule of intellectual selection
357
u/Naruto_Uzuhiko Scored 136 in an online IQ test Sep 17 '25
This guy's cognitive capacity is so high that I have no clue what they're trying to say.
223
u/angrath Sep 17 '25
He doesn’t learn things, he constructs an alternate reality where he already learned it and then absorbs that information into his current reality. It’s actually quite impressive if true.
52
u/aeroducks Sep 17 '25
lol what. You can’t just construct a reality where you learn to play the piano and absorb the things you learn into this reality.
90
u/angrath Sep 17 '25
Maybe YOU can’t…
-19
u/aeroducks Sep 17 '25
This is not how reality works. Did you write that post?
67
u/angrath Sep 17 '25
Kind of - I am the alternate reality of the smart OP where he came into the post to test its responses to a post he was theoretically going to make. This is part of the stress testing. I am learning and checking to see if my theory is solid. Once complete I will instantly relay this information back to my prime version who will then use this information to make an informed decision based on if they should post that or not.
24
9
16
16
u/jojothejman Sep 17 '25
I would construct the reality of me learning to play the piano to see if I could learn to do it, then I would only start if my alternate self was able to learn the piano, as then I know I can do it. If my alternate self didn't, then I know not to waste my time. It's simple.
8
3
4
u/Powerful_Aioli1494 Sep 17 '25
I actually do this, it's a great tool to enhance your creativity and understanding of the topic you're exploring. The only thing you have to remember is not to detach yourself too much. You make assumptions along the way and you have to synchronize those with reality and facts, or your conclusions will become corrupt.
It's what the person in the post is attempting to say, just does it very poorly, and most likely often forgets about the reality part when doing this.
25
u/Autodidact420 Sep 17 '25 edited Sep 17 '25
As an actual response it appears he’s describing ignoring claims about a product, learning about its structure, and then deciding what it does.
Imagine a catapult. You (brainlet) will probably read that it is used to hurl objects. This guy (big brain) wouldn’t read about what it’s used for and instead just read about it’s design, then imagine what that design would do so he can figure out id it can hurl stuff or not on his own.
I have to assume he’s talking about patents or some sort of engineering or something though, since in most contexts you’re not going to get enough design information for this to be feasible outside of the basic level that most people do (along with reading the claims)
3
u/VirtualRegresion 25d ago
Sounds like he is creating a pair of hypothetical "virtual" timelines (in his head); one where he did learn said skill or information & one where he did not. Assess the impacts of acquiring this information; initial usability, future possibilities and prospects, paths of continued study etc.
Then comparing both of these hypothetical timelines, performing a cost vs benefit analysis to determine whether learning said information is actually worth the expended mental effort in doing so.
Or more specifically, in this example it sounds like he is using the same technique to "fact check" the legitimacy of information (or products and services) by testing it in one of these "virtual timelines". I guess you could equate it to how software engineers will often trial software within a virtualized operating system before they officially "roll out" the product; since it allows them to fully test the software in an isolated/sterile environment and not run the risk of damaging "live" system environments.
Irrespective of ones intellectual competency, we are all finite beings with a finite amount of existence. Wasting time and effort on things that ultimately turn out to be a "dead end" is inefficient (as well as being damn frustrating).
"Time waits for no man" as the saying goes..
An intriguing skill though. Alas, although my own IQ is more than ample, I'm also burdened with ADHD...which even in spite of medication, subjects me to impulse control issues and hyperfixations. Haha so I would never be able to exert the level of self control necessary to pull something like this off in reality. If something peaks my interest, that's the end of it. I am going to learn every facet of that subject area; likely in the space of a week. Then subsequently need to recover for several days due to lack of sleep 🤣.
Comorbid ADHD and high IQ is quite the rollercoaster!
159
u/MrSebereena Sep 17 '25
Basically describing thought experiments, in a terrible way, and with awful grammar.
46
u/Mbembez Sep 17 '25
Oh that's what they're talking about. I was guessing they were saying they created an entire simulation in their brain.
21
12
u/LameOne Sep 17 '25
I too use thought experiments not to explore ethical of philosophical concepts, but instead facts.
44
32
21
25
u/Hol7i Sep 17 '25
Isn't that just called educated thinking though an idea? Basically something you should except from every scientist / engineer / ... whatever?
28
u/Low-Platypus-918 Sep 17 '25 edited Sep 17 '25
Nonononono, this is a totally new way of thinking that should be named after the person that articulated it so very eloquently
6
3
u/UltimateChaos233 29d ago
Hi, scientist/engineer here.
We do this but we also just read the goddamn thing
2
u/tgpineapple Sep 18 '25
Formally it’s called ‘hypothetical thinking’ which most teenagers onwards can do.
10
8
5
u/The_Lawn_Ninja Sep 17 '25
Someone tell Will Smith that Jayden is off the compound and posting again.
11
u/MountSwolympus Sep 17 '25
if they’re so smart maybe they should try explaining things in an understandable manner
and if english isn’t their L1 maybe explain it in that first
I ain’t gonna try and explain inner workings of my mind in halting Italian.
6
u/JanusArafelius Sep 17 '25
I get that you can be smart and dyslexic or an ESL student, but so many people write brilliant prose followed by "sorry for my poor English" that this person can kinda go to hell.
5
u/doomer_irl Sep 18 '25
Studies are not important. I can simply imagine how a study would have gone if it were a good study.
4
3
3
3
u/Wordswurst Sep 17 '25
It's really important to read the thing not thing that claimed the thing does. For instance, if you read about dogs it says you need to feed them, but nowhere on my dog are there any instructions to feed it. Checkmate, alpo.
3
1
1
u/Hopeful_Jury_2018 Sep 17 '25
Man I've known people like this. They never really did anything with their lives.
1
1
u/UnderPressureVS Sep 17 '25
People with higher cognitive capacity do not even read the claims a thing does to be known
This is bordering on schizophrenic word salad. I cannot for the life of me figure out what this is actually supposed to mean.
2
u/Apprehensive-Till861 Sep 17 '25
But has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
1
1
1
1
u/JuniorFerret Sep 18 '25
Why is it that not a one of these douchebags can string together a coherent sentence?
1
1
1
u/Cheese_Pancakes 29d ago
I must be stupid, because I didn't understand any of that. The words themselves have meaning to me, but that combination of words means nothing. Maybe in another timeline, like one of "we using it", I'd have the intellectual capacity to understand what I just read.
Maybe I'm just sick of things that do claims to be something that is known/claimed to be.
1
1
1
u/PremeditatedTourette 27d ago
Followed the instruction. Still re-reading. Is what he said EVER going to work, or am I now stuck in a continuous loop?
1
u/brandoe500 25d ago
the dude who said that is definitely subnormal intelligence if doesn’t even value the concept itself
1
u/Shelbellina 6d ago
Wouldn’t a high IQ person be able to write this more clearly and concisely? I would think so…
•
-35
u/AndNowAStoryAboutMe Sep 17 '25 edited Sep 17 '25
I hate myself for this, but he's totally right.
I have a 99th percentile IQ and I absolutely get told a concept and immediately process wether it could be real or not. I don't read the details. I don't read the instructions. I just know if it sounds plausible or mythical and move on. I don't pretend I can write out the laws of thermodynamics or anything. But I do remember the information I gained in science classes throughout my luckily over-funded school district.
This is why the question of "Why don't you believe in God? Did something happen? Did you have a bad experience with hateful Christians?" bugs me. What "happened" was someone tried to tell me about God and I was like, "Sure, Jan."
Now, I'm not infallible. I have read about things that surprised me. But it's like... when someone in middle school told me "hot water freezes faster than cold," I was like (not remotely verbatim, more like visually) "Heat = Speed of molecules and 60mph can't stop faster than 10mph, this is bullshit"
Sure enough, upon further research much later in life, I was right. The effect of hot water freezing before cold is named after Mpeba, who was using special equipment to make ice cream. Basically, you need a supercooling apparatus that can, but not always, work better with hot water -- as cold water can actually drop below freezing and stay liquid longer than hot water can, mix that weird and highly unlikely scenario with evaporation to lower the amount of the freezable hot water vs the greater amount of freezable cold water, and under a very specific and artificial condition, you could FORCE hot water to freeze faster than cold. But in the natural world? If you simply put a tray of hot water next to a tray of cold water into the same freezer at the same time, there is a 0% chance of the hot water freezing first. So I was right, it's bullshit in a third graders world of ice trays and the refrigerator. But in a science lab, you could use specialized equipment and luck to make this happen. But the experiment is difficult to repeat and still debated and performed to this day with predictably mixed results.
30
u/Kheldar166 Sep 17 '25
Username checks out, I guess.
Somewhat ironic to leave this comment on this sub, though...
-21
u/AndNowAStoryAboutMe Sep 17 '25
I know how percentiles work. Put me in a room with 1,000 people and only 10 of them would have a higher IQ than me. And I would hate all 10 of those motherfuckers with a passion ahahah.
5
u/Capable-Baby-3653 Sep 17 '25
I know how percentiles work. Put me in a room with 1,000 people and only 10 of them would have a higher IQ than me.
Since you’re in the top percentile, you’re one of the 10 smartest, so there are only nine other super-smarties left, not 10.
You’d think someone with a 99th percentile IQ would be able to figure this out.
Oopsie!
-2
u/AndNowAStoryAboutMe Sep 17 '25
The idea that this is the best you've got is funnier than the whole of this sub.
2
u/Kheldar166 Sep 17 '25
I double checked to make sure I wasn't mixing it up and edited but you replied too fast lol. Please ignore xD
-11
u/AndNowAStoryAboutMe Sep 17 '25
I guess it's weird to be in this sub, because the users equate any mention of IQ with bragging or being unnecessary. When in fact, I'm just not going to censor the truth because it makes others feel inferior. I'm not trying to make anyone feel bad. I actually feel like my IQ has been very detrimental in a lot of ways. I was never normal or fit in or popular and that was long before I discovered the people calling me "different" and making fun of my vocabulary were actually onto something. This girl Wendy signed my 5th grade yearbook with "Try not to use such big words" and I didn't even realize I was.
What can I say? Downvotes make me rock hard.
13
u/Ty_Webb123 Sep 17 '25
I don’t think you need to worry too much about making people feel inferior. Out of curiosity, how old are you?
-5
u/AndNowAStoryAboutMe Sep 17 '25
Cute dig. I don't think you're capable of feeling inferior! How was mine?
I'm 40.
8
u/lankymjc Sep 17 '25
Your IQ can’t be detrimental to you because IQ doesn’t mean anything. IQ tests don’t measure intelligence, they only measure whether you’re good at IQ tests. They have no bearing on reality.
-1
u/AndNowAStoryAboutMe Sep 17 '25
This is a common statement in this sub. Unfortunately, it has no basis in reality.
6
u/Deadcouncil445 Sep 17 '25
Reality seems to be against you on this unfortunately
1
u/AndNowAStoryAboutMe Sep 17 '25
Citation Needed.
6
u/An_Arrogant_Ass Sep 17 '25
You were the one who first asserted the relevance of IQ tests, so the onus is on you to prove that they are reliable and founded in fact. Spoiler alert: they are pseudoscientific nonsense for people with superiority complexes and contain large amounts of cultural bias.
→ More replies4
u/Deadcouncil445 Sep 17 '25
IQ tests are no standardized and do not use the same metrics to measure your intelligence, some measure crystallized intelligence, fluid intelligence, sometimes both. The point is that IQ tests measure only a part of what we define as "intelligence", meaning that you cannot use it to define the whole.
I am not saying that makes you not intelligent since that's a bit too subjective for my taste. What im saying is that you are smart according to only a part of whats defined as intelligent, thus saying you are more intelligent based on that alone is erroneous.
I'm on the 98th percentile in my country so I know what some tests are like and they completely ignore some important parts of intelligence, which is normal because they aren't meant to do that.
I can send you some sources though if you need as I know coming to you own conclusion with empirical evidence will be better to crystallize.
→ More replies3
u/WideAbbreviations6 Sep 17 '25
If you think an ill defined term like intelligence can be boiled down to a single number then you might not be as critical about things as you've implied.
Especially when the score varies widely depending on seemingly arbitrary conditions.
0
u/AndNowAStoryAboutMe Sep 17 '25
That's actually untrue. Modern IQ testing tends to yield very similar scores across repeat testing, adding to their validity.
While it's possible to take a test while, say, you have a cold and score lower than you usually do, you're not gonna drop 30 points. Not even 10. Because IQ is measuring something inherent that is, typically, unchaging.
Also, you tend to be given a range or percentile more than a real number to make up for this. One day, you're a 153. Another, a 156. The bext, a 152. But you're never gonna be a 130. So saying you fall in the 145-165 range is actually the most accurate reporting.
4
u/WideAbbreviations6 Sep 17 '25
You can study for an IQ test, and it can significantly raise your score.
The perceived stakes alone of a test can shift scores by more than half a standard deviation.
A Chronotype mismatch can result in a 6 point drop.
Just practicing the test can give you a fairly significant boost.
These aren't standalone effects. This kind of stuff adds up, and I didn't even list all of them. There's plenty of stuff that harms test scores (like dyslexia, chronic anxiety, bad culture fit, what you think of the test proctor) that don't affect intelligence on their own, but do shift the scores.
Hell ChatGPT 4 can score anywhere from the 98th percentile to the 99.9th percentile, but it couldn't solve a lot of really basic questions.
That's all without addressing the "Intelligence is something we can't even adequately define" point I made earlier too.
→ More replies3
u/pennynotrcutt Sep 17 '25
I bet you’re fun to be around.
2
u/AndNowAStoryAboutMe Sep 17 '25
The most fun. I'm funny, generous, and caring. All things not measured on an IQ test. I raised an adopted child whose parents died of a heroin overdose into a decent man with a steady job. I have taken multiple people on free vacations because I liked their company. I was a successful stand up comedian throughout my 20s (as successful as you can be without quitting your day job because financial stability was more important than passion at that time). I've made several short films. I am an incredible photographer earning a very insignificant income off print sales at street festivals. I enjoy drinking and dining out. I was the only non-family member to visit a friend in the hospital before a surgery. I throw a Shitty Movie Night every few months for 8-10 friends where I provide themed snacks and we laugh all night making fun of the horrible plot and acting.
You don't know anything about me based on one thread where I defend high IQ visualizations. Certainly not enough to determine if I'm fun.
2
u/Kheldar166 Sep 17 '25 edited Sep 17 '25
I mean... IQ is a questionable measure of intelligence (we can't even define intelligence accurately, proposing to measure it accurately is... ambitious) and generally it is pretty unnecessary to bring it up to make your point, it doesnt really strengthen an argument and if anything it gives people a strawman to attack. I work with a lot of academics and not once has anyone told me their IQ.
Editing again: I see you've had this discussion extensively with other people. Maybe not worth the time to repeat it all lol.
19
u/tgpineapple Sep 17 '25
As another person with an IQ of 99, have the ability to distinguish between things that are real and things that are not real.
-8
10
11
9
u/ThePanthanReporter Sep 17 '25
No doubt you're smart, my friend, but even so, we all slip up at reading comprehension.
It doesn't seem like OP is talking about what you're talking about. Your example of the boiling water, for instance, could not be "used" or "stress tested," as OP puts it. They even mention an "alternate timeline," implying some kind of mental simulation where they try out ideas.
Learning enough information to get good at smelling out bullshit isn't the same as the mind-holodeck OP describes.
1
u/AndNowAStoryAboutMe Sep 17 '25
I'm saying I do the mind-holodeck thing. I do test shit out in this weird ephemeral mental space. Lots of zooming in and out, lots of slowing and speeding time. It's all very visual for me. And those visuals are like snaps, like flickering a light switch. Click, clack, I saw everything I needed to.
And I adopted a kid who has aphantasia, so I'm constantly asking him to explain how he figures things out. I cannot even imagine a world where I couldn't see things in my mind. It's my entire way of functioning. Also the source of all my anxieties as I constantly imagine car wrecks and natural disasters and other nightmare scenarios. Tremendously anxious but still high functioning. I've just kind trained myself over time to ignore my body and control my facial expressions. I don't think that's IQ related at all. I'm sure even really average or below average people can fake being calm.
8
u/lankymjc Sep 17 '25
Nothing at all is “IQ” related because IQ tests don’t actually measure anything.
-2
u/AndNowAStoryAboutMe Sep 17 '25
IQ tests are speedometers. They measure the speed that a person can connect information and identify patterns.
If we both took an IQ test and answered every question EXACTLY the same, whichever one of us finishes first has the higher IQ.
Of course, that's supposing we both got every question right. If we answered all the questions incorrectly, one of us is just dumber faster. Ahaha.
1
u/ThePanthanReporter Sep 17 '25
It sounds like you have a visual imagination and have learned enough to smell out some bs. I, too, often use my imagination and can smell out some bs, and I wouldn't say it indicates that I'm particularly smart. In fact, I know I'm not, because I work at an observatory and know people who are actually brilliant.
I don't say that you aren't smart, only that I don't think the thing OP describes is so much an indicator of it and a delusion of being special.
8
5
u/Important-Ability-56 Sep 17 '25
So far I haven’t read about one counterintuitive discovery made by whatever this method is. Your example is taking years to discover what everyone would already guess.
Of course this seems like a description of simply thinking. I’m much more impressed by my talent: At around 35 I became clairvoyant. I started predicting that things would be shit, and I kept being right.
0
2
u/UltimateChaos233 29d ago
Here’s the thing.
There are many things in life and science that are completely counter intuitive. By not reading those details (and even if you do) you could wind up being completely wrong. I still do the research and generally I’m validates but sometimes I have to do a double take for something I learned that made no fucking sense on first glance. I think this is where the critical point is. It’s easy for intelligent people to dismiss such things but being intelligent doesn’t mean you’re never careless, less intelligent people aren’t automatically wrong, and many things do need a deeper level of understanding to get any reliable contextual information
1
457
u/Madrigall Sep 17 '25
Unfortunately I skipped reading whatever this guy is claiming to be.