Reply #134: "OK"?

[iverglas]

"... so what is a good IQ in your book?"

(For some reason that title appears on your post on the main thread page, but not on the post as I respond to it.)

I didn't say anything about a "good" IQ. I said that I have a very high IQ, as I recall. "High" is word used to describe a relative position on a scale, when speaking of numbers or notes, for instance. There is no value judgment inherent in it: a temperature of 100 is higher than a temperature of 99; fa is higher than mi; which is "good", or "better" than something else, is entirely a matter of context.

Since I didn't state, or imply, any value judgment at all about any IQ score at all, your question is not relevant to anything I said, and is not related to anything I have any desire to discuss here.


I'm in the 'smart is as smart does' camp myself since 'smartness' strikes me as an appeal to authority (and I am anti-authoritarian by nature).

Fer chrissakes. Your entire output here has been one great big appeal to an alleged authority: yourself. Your INTJ-ness, for instance, is of no interest to me in relation to whatever argument you have supposedly been attempting to formulate, and yet you go to lengths to assert it as if it were relevant. Behind that, you have obviously adopted the personality quizzies in question as authoritative measurements of something useful, and I'm not quite on board with that, as you've noticed. Self-reporting by self-selected respondents just isn't one of the most reliable measurement methods around.

By the bye, refusing to use words according to their accepted meaning, or to acknowledge the meaningless-ness of the "words" one uses, is not evidence of an anti-authoritarian nature. It's just dumb. Authority can exist without its exercise being "authoritarian". The "authority" in question is the authority of the collectivity composed of speakers of a language, in respect of the meanings assigned to the words in that language; that authority itself is definitional. Rejecting that authority isn't evidence of anti-authoritarianism, it's evidence of contrarianism. Occasionally charming, but hardly worth making an ideology out of.