IQ is Irrelevant to Intelligence

IQ is Irrelevant to Intelligence

IQ is Irrelevant to Intelligence

(CCO) Photo by Maja R.. — A thinking man can learn more by looking at a pond for twenty minutes, than what a memorizing man can learn by listening in classrooms for twenty years. (Photo modifications by Larry Neal Gowdy)

Larry Neal Gowdy

Copyright ©2023 June 06, 2023

Know the Ingredients of Logic

The previous articles — Structure Thinking To Become More Logical and Flynn Effect Revisited — relate to this article. Accurate logic does not occur without one's personal firsthand experience with the topic being analyzed. All conclusions formed without the existence of firsthand experience, are imaginary, and false.

Know What an IQ Test Is

Several other articles on this website more than adequately give background information about IQ tests. Rather than repeat the same words, the choice here is to be as brief as practical while pointing at the obvious.

The article Pathological Science #14 Beauty gives Lewis Terman's quote: "Certainly no one could have known in advance of experience that intellectual retardation would reveal itself in weakness of the aesthetic sense about as unmistakably as in memory, practical judgment, or the comprehension of language". Terman was wrong. All rational individuals know that aesthetics (especially the lack thereof) is an easy scale of evaluating intelligence. The extreme weakness of the "aesthetic sense" is one of the many markers within normalcy.

Through firsthand evaluations of how normal people are incapable of recognizing aesthetics (i.e. biological structuring, facial expressions, body language, etc.), and by Terman's own words, the Stanford-Binet IQ test was proven to not merely be incapable of measuring above-normal intelligence, but the IQ test also negatively evaluated the designers themselves.

From James Legge, Scholars, Disinformation, Propaganda: "Legge states: #3 "The Master said, "It is only the (truly) virtuous man, who can love, or who can hate, others."" James Legge wrote thousands of similar (and worse) absurdities in his books, but today, the same books by James Legge are still selling, and yet very few people have noticed Legge's contradictions, while numerous scholar-philosophers are now claiming that Legge was "brilliant" and a "genius". The point here is that the normal person (regardless of IQ and school papers) is mentally incapable of recognizing contradictions and absurdities within the English language. The questions in IQ tests are themselves contradictory and absurd, but the IQ test questions are sensible to individuals whose thoughts are similarly contradictory and absurd. IQ tests offer no allowance for, nor are able to measure, anyone with an above-average intelligence.

In the fifth grade, we students were mandated to memorize multiplication tables. Within my own thoughts, I was accustomed to multiplying through my own self-created system of summing quantities, and though I was displeased with the mathematics classes' extremely primitive two-dimensional manner of summing, I did recognize that the simplified primitive method arrived at an accurate sum of the intended numbers, albeit the sum was absent of the surrounding complex variables that enabled the sum. Having been forced to use the primitive math of memorization, I was no longer permitted to self-think of multiples, which resulted in my gradually and permanently losing the full ability to sum quantities naturally (all schools always dumb-down the students). It was much too easy to score at the ceiling of IQ tests' mathematics sections, because, the IQ tests only evaluate primitive memorized two-dimensional mathematics. IQ tests were created by primitive two-dimensional thinking people who used primitive two-dimensional mathematics, and thus the IQ tests could only measure primitive two-dimensional intelligence. Never in all of eternity will an IQ test be able to measure an intelligence that is higher than the designer's intelligence.

According to science and all schools, a man and a woman sums to the number 2. End of story. Intelligent people, however, know that a man and woman includes marriage, talking to each other, eating together, traveling together, interacting together, making decisions together, and reproducing. A man and a woman absolutely do not sum to the mathematical number of 2 — nor do any other duality of objects anywhere in the universe sum to 2 — but, proficiency with primitive two-dimensional mathematics is precisely what is required to score well on IQ tests.

All known IQ tests were created by average people with average intelligence, and no known IQ test was ever created in a manner that was not contradictory nor reliant upon two-dimensional thoughts and two-dimensional mathematics.

Individuals of strong mental cognition may score well on IQ and mental cognition tests, but most individuals of high IQs are unable to score well on mental cognition tests, which illustrates that IQ scores do not relate to above-average functional intelligence. [1] IQ tests cannot measure above-average intelligence, and thus, [2] IQ scores cannot reflect above-average intelligence, and thus [3] IQ scores are irrelevant relative to above-average intelligence.

A simple (and greatly humorous) test of mental activity is to cut a piece of paper into eight specific shapes, and to then see if an individual is able to assemble the jigsaw puzzle. At present, only two known individuals have been able to assemble the pieces. 100% of all sciences, academics, philosophies, and ideologies have already proven that they are unable to assemble the pieces. Normal people cannot assemble the pieces, nor are people with the highest publicized IQs able to assemble the pieces. The world's topmost expert scientists cannot do it. All of science's theories prove that scientists cannot do it. If the pieces were so simple to assemble, then someone in the past would have done so during the past two-thousand years: it never happened. (I solved the puzzle at two years old. I married the lady who could also solve the puzzle.)

Observable Intelligence

The smartest person I ever met, had been given a 115 IQ on one of several IQ tests taken. The IQ test was taken while the person was severely ill with a flu. Later, when the person took another IQ test while not feeling ill, the score was much higher.

Another known individual scored over 140 IQ while strongly suffering from pellagra, beriberi, and a headache due to caffeine withdrawal. The individual scored much higher when not ill.

The same two individuals' high scores on the SQ test of mental cognition remained the same regardless of illness. The SQ test validates the intelligence behind the outward 'job performance' of answering IQ test questions. The SQ test permits the test-taker to express their thoughts within their own language and with their own forms of expressing measurements.

In a manner of phrasing, the SQ tests measure actual functioning intelligence, while IQ tests are fully dependent on memorized man-made languages. Regardless of how intelligent you might be, you will score poorly on an IQ test if you have not yet memorized an IQ test's man-made language. A valid example is the word . No known European scholar-philosopher, ideologist, sciencian, dictionary, nor Oxford University employee has ever been able to accurately define what the word means (nor any other word for that matter). If an IQ test were to ask for the answer of what " people" means, then what would be your answer? The only hint needed is that the lower portion of the word vaguely implies 'heart'. People with functioning intelligence are able to discern and to describe what the word means, but if a person is incapable of discerning the word's meaning, then the person will receive a low IQ score. English is not everyone's first language, not even within England and the USA. For myself, English was not so much as within the first five languages learned, and the only reason I begrudgingly chose to learn English was so that I could communicate with the parents. IQ tests are intensely biased in favor of people who use two-dimensional thinking, two-dimensional words, and two-dimensional mathematics.

To some of us, has depth of meaning, while English words are as nonsensical cavewomen's bleatings.


This topic could much too easily continue for hundreds of thousands of words, but what has been presented ought to be more than ample to press-home the fact that IQ tests do not and cannot measure above-average intelligence. The following article's topic focuses on some scholar-philosophers' crazy claims that people with high intelligence have autism, and, the crazy claims crazily claim that their proof came from a small email survey of Mensa members (lol).