Aspies For Freedom

I went to school where I learnt how to think in pictures and thereafter I got a lot better grades afterwards.
I was  IQ-tested about 7 years later and the problem i was going to solve was:

-I was told a story about  a men who had eggs in his car.(...)

If I had not learnt thow to think in pictures at school i wouldnt have remembered a word of this story...

I got a top result on this test.Perfect!!!
So there you go.
If i hadnt learnt this tecnique I would have had the worst result and therefore a lower IQ.

Another test was to look at a picture of two faces which could also look like a vase.I was asked to tell what the picture looked like.
Since i paid attention at school,I remembered the answer...and i scored a few more points...?

So dont come and tell me iQ is related to genes...
IQ can apperently be learnt...

A perfect illustration of what I've said before - any IQ test only records how well you can solve that IQ test. There are huge numbers of books out there with similar problems to practice solving. Any psychiatrist/ologist that thinks that a test measures some intrinsic intelligence hasn't any of their own!

Been there...I once had a pedagogical something who made a question to me in a metaphore.I couldnt understand what the heck she was talking about so I just stood totaly still and did not speak a word.
My mind was blanc.
Then I realised I would have to answer something so I made a "down to earth-answer."
I felt as if she did it on pupose.
Afterwards she looked very sad...like-"Oh my..I really pity you..."

Exactly!!!

It really defeats the purpose of an intelligence test if you have to study questions to get good marks. It's supposed to test your intrinsic intelligence after all.

But does it? How is it possible for the same person to achieve wildly different scores on two test that presumably measure the same thing?  What is the use of IQ scores?  Do they measure success? Do they indicate genius?  It appears that the answer to both of those questions is, "No."  So what, exactly, is an IQ score good for?

According to this norwegian science magazine IQ can increase if people continuously meet daily challanges that require mental thinking.

Both are correct. You can learn to do better at IQ tests, but it's also related to genes. Just like you can learn to be a better athlete, yet be well endowed from nature already.

The thing is, the more you train, the less you gain. It shouldn't be possible to gain more than, I dunno, 10 points on an IQ test if both tests are under ideal conditions (e.g., you're not tip-top one on one of the test days and feeling bad the other, you had good sleep both test days, and so on).

That, of course, is not to say that IQ necessarily is a good indicator of G, that elusive "general intelligence". in fact, Flynn (who discovered what is known as the Flynn effect, the increase of IQ from one generation to the next) has recently said that this is not due to intelligence increasing as drastically as would be indicated by the IQ scores (a hundred years ago, the average might've been in the range of "mentally retarded").

my iq raised 15 points its now 99

I belive its often like a man without one foot can get to a shop just as a man with two feet,but it just take longer time for the man with only one foot.
A less gifted person can achive good in life but it takes less of an effort for the gifted compered to the person with less IQ.

I also believe some people are a bit sat back at a sertain age but grow slower but then might reach a sertain point where the person become "grown up" in those parts in the brain,fks.in the broadmans aeria 8 or whatever its called.
Remember I might be wrong,though.

The history of the sciences and the arts has quite a few late bloomers, i.e., people who did nothing remarkable before they were pretty far in their lifespan. Whether they grew more up or were intelligent all along, only didn't realize their full potential, I don't know.

But then again, you don't have to be a master scientist or artist to do well in life. You can be a great, intelligent, kind person without ever doing anything that society at large will deem "remarkable".

As it relates to IQ, remember that IQ, for whatever it is now, wasn't designed to differentiate between the smart and the dumb. The first IQ tests were, if I remember correctly, used to single out boys in school who needed extra attention and special attention, i.e., it was kind of like AS tests, a diagnostic tool.

Thats true,my great hero is Mother Teresa.
She was a person with a good heart!
Gandi was great,too.

"Verbal" area of an IQ test requires very little intelligence?  That was the only area I did well in!

Wtf...

I don't believe in the concept of IQ anyway (probably strange for someone who has a high IQ hehe).

Firstly: IQ can be trained, intelligence is constant
Secondly: IQ-tests have always a different share of different areas - some is verbally oriented, some has "too much" math, some too much spatial tasks etc.
Last but not least:IQ tasks are easy, it comes down not to how smart you are but to how fast your brain can solve those easy problems. But intelligence is the ability to solve complex problems, no matter the speed(the speed can be used only as a tie-breaker between two people who can solve problems of equal complexity). If one can solve easy problems very fast it doesnt matter he can solve hard problems fast too. And also other way around - if one is extremely slow and/or dyslexic - and therefore fails an IQ-test - that doesn't mean he cannot solve complex problems.

Intelligence is not constant.