I know that INTP and high IQ doesn't go hand-in-hand (hmm or maybe only the smart ones realize that they're INTP and find INTP forums?). It's plausible that INTP's online are over represented in the high IQ department and that the other INTP's are just clueless as to why they feel so outcast.
I've never taken a legitimate IQ test but I am self guesstimating that mine hovers around the 155 range give or take. I know this might be wishful thinking as well but I'm being realistic about it. 135 range just seems too low as people in this range I deem "above average" yet their logic still "pisses me off" sometimes. I've realized that my emotion of getting "pissed off" is actually meaning "frustrated" because I have to explain to someone else in detail what I already know to be true.
Remember that the SD of the IQ bell curve is 15 points centered on 100, with 95% occupying 2 deviations in each direction. In other words, an IQ of 135 is still considered Mensa justifiable and within the top 2% of the population. Also remember that some tests have sub-tests, so scoring above average in one section can and will significantly lower the score you get, no matter what your other subtests say.
When someone proposes a conjecture which I have already theorized and dropped as impossible-- it leads me to believe they are only behind in the race to the solution. My mind is fast and can hold many thoughts simultaneously. My sequential memory is not the best, especially because I smoke so much weed, but my ability to pull pertinent information out of past and current events is unbeatable.
I can instantly make analogies between the most incompatible subjects to elaborate my point and drive it home. The analogies come to me almost in a divine way, as the answer popped into my head. Except, I know the real working mechanism is that my brain can tap itself very easily horizontally, like I have tons of ram, I can process lots of information at once-- but storing that information is another thing.
Very true, and worded very appropriately aka followable. When thinking of my thought process, I do indeed see it as a computer with loads of ram (most likely 64-bit lol) and a multiple cores. Then there's virtual machines which can mimic the operating system of other people (chameleon anybody?) at the expense of hogging up some of the ram.
On the other hand (still agreeing with you {for some reason realized that i love parenthesis {{or is that parenthesi?}}) it seems like the harddrive is always powered off. so whenever i need to pull up information that isn't stored in the gigs and gigs of ram, it takes a while for the drive to spin up and for the appropriate file/schema/memory/whatever to be found. Making sense still?
Sidenote: you mentioned smoking. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to smoke for 2 months or so, but up until then I was smoking everyday. I found that my horizontal thinking was "overclocked" when high, much to my enjoyment. Being sober has given me the chance to think more linearly, but the increase in this areas is not as marked as the increase in the lateral thinking while stoned. /sidenote
And unfortunately, everyone i run into (with the exception of PerC folks, but I don't technically run into them) is just too slow. Thy're running outdated processors, still on WinXP. Always playing the catch-up game.
Here is where the irony sets in: If everyone is catching up, doesn't that make the one ahead the detriment to the group? Because if you don't intend on leaving everyone behind, which I do quite occasionally when it's obvious the person won't get it or when it won't help to explain, then you have to either wait for them to meet up with you on this metaphorical trail or else you have to back-track in the hopes of showing them the way, but expending your own personal energy. Either way, it's just inefficient.
Shen an intuitive turns on his/her "sensing" abilities-- it is impossible to store every external event as a memory. Especially when sensing is new for us and it's like a barrage of info coming at once. We can only filter and process and store what's relevant at the given time.
Using the computer analogy, I would say it is similar to using just a keyboard and a mouse. You can do everything you need to do with these, yet some people augment them with touchpads, drawing pads, webcams, microphones, etc. These allow for different, and
simultaneous input, versus wherever the cursor is located. Maybe that was a good analogy, maybe not.
Attempt #2 at crazy weird analogy: Clicking multiple files in quick succession knowing that they will open as the computer processes them, vs. clicking on them one at a time and waiting for each one to open (N vs. S). Sure, you get the same result, but are they really identical? The first method processes everything
simultaneously, but the chances of an error or mis-clicking are significantly higher than the slower but more tried and true method of opening them one at a time. I can think of many times in which I've rapid-fire clicked and dragged and done the whole works only to be disappointed that one of the files I thought I moved 10 or 12 clicks back didn't actually go to the recycle bin.
After typing this last section, I see that it has no bearing to what I quoted, yet is still relevant enough to be included.
