5
   

The IQ of interesting people (A fun thread)

 
 
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 02:01 pm
Used with permission from the author
John P


One Man's Blog - Specialization is for Insects.



In 1945, an army psychologist named G.M. Gilbert, was allowed to examine the Nazi leaders who were tried at
Nuremberg for war crimes. Among other tests, a German version of the Wechsler-Bellevue was administered. Here are the results:
Adolph Hitler IQ 147

1
Hjalmar Schacht
143
2
Arthur Seyss-Inquart
141
3
Hermann Goering
138
4
Karl Doenitz
138
5
Franz von Papen
134
6
Eric Raeder
134
7
Dr. Hans Frank
130
8
Hans Fritsche
130
9
Baldur von Schirach
130
10
Joachim von Ribbentrop
129
11
Wilhelm Keitel
129
12
Albert Speer
128
13
Alfred Jodl
127
14
Alfred Rosenberg
127
15
Constantin von Neurath
125
16
Walther Funk
124
17
Wilhelm Frick
124
18
Rudolf Hess
120
19
Fritz Sauckel
118
20
Ernst Kaltenbrunner
113
21
Julius Streicher
106
IQ Score

Traditional Ranking System

140 + (~.25%)
Genius or near genius
130 - 139
Gifted
120 - 129
Very Superior Intelligence
110 - 119
Superior Intelligence
90 - 109
Average/Normal
80 - 89
Dullness
70 - 79
Borderline deficiency
- 70
Mild mental retardation
35-50
Moderate mental retardation
20 - 35
Severe mental retardation
< 20
Profound mental retardation (1%)

The Highest IQs On Record

People Still Alive




People off history














  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 5 • Views: 13,221 • Replies: 35
No top replies

 
Krumple
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 02:22 pm
@Alan McDougall,
This thread means absolutely nothing...

There is no consistency in how the IQ tests are designed. They also do not reflect any of the potentiality for a wide range of knowledge, so placing them into one large list like this makes them all meaningless. So you can oooh and awww over the list but when it comes down to it, you could make a list of names and put any numbers after them as far as I'm concerned.
GoshisDead
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 02:31 pm
@Krumple,
Awe Man I R Retarded
0 Replies
 
Alan McDougall
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 May, 2009 10:17 pm
@Krumple,
Krumple wrote:
This thread means absolutely nothing...

There is no consistency in how the IQ tests are designed. They also do not reflect any of the potentiality for a wide range of knowledge, so placing them into one large list like this makes them all meaningless. So you can oooh and awww over the list but when it comes down to it, you could make a list of names and put any numbers after them as far as I'm concerned.


"Absolutely nothing to you", i am perplexed why you even read the thread if this is Absolutely Meaningless to you

It might be interesting to others?

There are no absolutes, this was meant as a "fun thread" you might be surprised who many people are interested in these types of lists and comparisons

Are you an expert in the field of human psychology? , eminent people take great credence in these test, even NASA astronauts are selected partly by their IQ

In the huge corporation where I worked, before retirement, you could not join the company unless you passed an entry IQ test
Dave Allen
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 May, 2009 06:12 am
@Alan McDougall,
Isn't this list somewhat spurious?

Adolf Hitler was dead by the time of the Nuremburg trials.

Martin Luther? He was dead long before IQ tests were even invented.

Actually, loads of these people were.

Is this just what someone reckons people in the past might have scored?
Alan McDougall
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 May, 2009 11:10 am
@Dave Allen,
Dave Allen wrote:
Isn't this list somewhat spurious?

Adolf Hitler was dead by the time of the Nuremburg trials.

Martin Luther? He was dead long before IQ tests were even invented.

Actually, loads of these people were.

Is this just what someone reckons people in the past might have scored?


Would you like me to remove it?

In 1945, an army psychologist named G.M. Gilbert, was allowed to examine the Nazi leaders who were tried at
Nuremberg for war crimes. Among other tests, a German version of the Wechsler-Bellevue was administered. Here are the results:
Adolph Hitler IQ 147

These people were tested, read my introduction again please

The Highest IQs On Record


"These people Still Alive"



The others are based on estimates like having reached the level of a highly intelligent very informed educated adult of twenty five by the age of five

Average IQ known by modern testing 100

chronological age 10 = age of intellect, learning , knowledge 25
GoshisDead
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 May, 2009 11:15 am
@Alan McDougall,
Don't Worry Alan, it is a fun post, and you knew darn well that every time IQ gets brought up its a hot button.
Dave Allen
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 May, 2009 12:31 pm
@Alan McDougall,
Alan McDougall wrote:
Would you like me to remove it?

No, but I feel within my rights to point out that it's just a lot of baloney. Do you want me not to post that sort of thing and just let you blithely claim to have the IQ numbers of historical figures who died hundreds of years before IQ testing was invented?

[quote]Adolph Hitler IQ 147

These people were tested, read my introduction again please[/quote]

Yes I did read it, but it doesn't change the fact that Adolf Hitler was dead by the time of the Nuremburg trials. How did GM Gilbert give an IQ test to a corpse?

I find it quite funny how Sharon Stone is "alleged" to have an IQ of a certain number, but that the IQ of people who died during the renaissance isn't under any seeming doubt.

---------- Post added at 01:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:31 PM ----------

Alan McDougall wrote:
The others are based on estimates like having reached the level of a highly intelligent very informed educated adult of twenty five by the age of five

So you claim Martin Luther, Napoleon and Wittgenstein had the mental age of well-informed 25 year olds when they were 5?

Look I hate to break it to you - but this is just piffle.
Alan McDougall
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 May, 2009 02:52 pm
@GoshisDead,
GoshisDead wrote:
Don't Worry Alan, it is a fun post, and you knew darn well that every time IQ gets brought up its a hot button.


Yeah some people are really serious, I did say it was just a fun did I not? Smile

It is so hard for them to be friendly.



Quote:

Dave Allen posted
So you claim Martin Luther, Napoleon and Wittgenstein had the mental age of well-informed 25 year olds when they were 5?


I did not say anything remotely like that, there were child prodigies that had adult mental ages at chronological age of 5 They are not on the list


Below is what I meant



William James Sidis
http://cdn-www.cracked.com/articleimages/wong/prodigy/sidis1.jpg

Some consider William James Sidis the smartest man who ever lived, with an estimated IQ of 250 to 300. For the sake of comparison, you only have to have an IQ of 136 to be a mere run of the mill genius, and your average person is somewhere in the 85 to 115 range. Surprisingly pictures of Sidis reveal that his head was only marginally bigger than average and not a throbbing translucent beach ball-sized dome. Word is he wasn't even capable of shooting psychic death rays.


Sidis could read at 18 months, had written four books and was fluent in eight languages at age seven, gave a lecture a Harvard at nine and entered Harvard at 11. Despite his brilliance in the fields of mathematics and cosmology, we do have to question Sidis' intelligence in one key area as he took a vow of celibacy his entire life and likely died a virgin.

It's unfortunate because nothing gets the ladies hot and bothered like a dissertation on the theory of cosmological reversibility.



Quote:

Look I hate to break it to you - but this is just piffle.


If it is PIFFLE then no less than NASA is using PIFFLE to select candidates for space travel like the info below

Why why must people like you always have something negative to say why for the love of god why????

Were did I say the above heck that is not my list or ranking it is from a
John P blog

Do you know what a referral web link is I give it again


Used with permission from the author
John P



One Man's Blog - Specialization is for Insects.


Here is a load of NASA PIFFLE


University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston 77555.

INTRODUCTION. The screening and evaluation of astronaut candidates often includes various measures of cognitive and intellectual capacity. There are indications that use of such measures is of equivocal value in identifying functionally significant differences in a population of highly accomplished and highly screened individuals.

METHODS. Analyses of group differences in IQ as measured by the Multidimensional Aptitude Battery (MAB) were conducted across Shuttle astronaut candidates exploring differences between and within sex, selection and job category.

Factor analysis of the subscales was undertaken to validate the compilation of IQ scores for the MAB which differs from many other IQ scales in grouping Arithmetic with Verbal components.

RESULTS. Arithmetic subscale clustered with Performance subscales and not with Verbal subscales as originally designed. A reformulated Verbal and Performance IQ score was computed on prorated subscale scores regrouping Arithmetic with Performance.

Subsequent analyses of the original and revised Verbal and subgroup Performance IQ scores found substantial subgroup differences in findings between these versions.
0 Replies
 
Dave Allen
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 03:12 am
@Alan McDougall,
I didn't say IQ testing was piffle - I referred to ascribing IQ scores to people who were long dead before IQ testing was invented as piffle. Now you go on to claim that when you said "The others are based on estimates like having reached the level of a highly intelligent very informed educated adult of twenty five by the age of five" you meant a particular prodigy.

Wouldn't it have been better to bring this up at the time, rather than broach the subject in the light of criticism? So William James Sidis fits your model - what has he got to do with Martin Luther or Napoleon?

I have followed your link - it takes me to the front page of someone's blog - none of the posts on the front page seem to have anything to do with anything you're going on about. Or the second page. I don't want to spend all day reading someone's blog in the hope that they might corroborate your clearly misleading claims. Even if this blogger came up with your list - doesn't make it less objectionable unless he gives better reasons for the numbers.

As for being negative - this forum is one dedicated to philosophy - which I would hope means we can discuss matters here without dishonesty and can try to verify claims with maturity. To me, much of the list you posted is unverifiable and highly dubious. I do not believe that top Nazis waiting to be tried for war crimes were happy to give IQ tests, and even if they were Adolph Hitler was dead at the time.

I don't "always have to be negative" - but I reserve the right to apply critical thought to something which strikes me as baloney. Isn't that what philosophy is (at least partly) meant to be about?

I don't think my tone was initially impolite. I said I thought the list was spurious and pointed out the problem of Adolph being a corpse.

Instead of supplying a straight answer to straight questions about how these numbers were obtained you start telling me to "read my introduction again" or asking "do you know what a referral link is" - so I don't actually think it's me with the defensiveness issue.

It seems like supplying a straight answer to a straight question like "How did GM Gilbert give an IQ test to a corpse?" is beyond the remit of your thread, which was only supposed to be "fun" after all.

If this is the case I apologise for wasting your time and hope I haven't overly upset anyone.
xris
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 04:59 am
@Dave Allen,
Dave Allen
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 May, 2009 07:15 am
@Alan McDougall,
He was no more cryptorchid than he was a living person during the Nuremburg trials who was happy to do IQ tests.
0 Replies
 
Elmud
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 May, 2009 07:07 pm
@xris,
<wonders how much IQ tests take into account circumstances and culture. Some people are smart at some things, some people are smart at other things. Good thread Alan. Is kind of fun.
0 Replies
 
Zetetic11235
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 May, 2009 03:45 pm
@Dave Allen,
Dave Allen wrote:
-


So you claim Martin Luther, Napoleon and Wittgenstein had the mental age of well-informed 25 year olds when they were 5?

Look I hate to break it to you - but this is just piffle.



William Sidis might have......
List of accomplishments:

Here is a partial list of William James Sidis' extraordinary capabilities and accomplishments:

    [LIST=1]
  • Given IQ is a purely anthropocentric means of assessing intelligence, Sidis' IQ is crudely estimated at 250-300.
  • Infant Billy listened to Greek myths read to him by Sarah as bedtime stories.
  • Started feeding himself with a spoon at eight months (after two months of trial and error).
  • Cajoled by Boris, Billy learned to pronounce alphabetic syllables from blocks hanging in his crib.
  • At six months, Billy said, "Door." A couple months later he told Mom he liked things, doors and people, that move.
  • At seven months he pointed to Earth's moon and called it, "moon." He wanted a 'moon' of his own.
  • Mastered higher mathematics and planetary revolutions by age 11.
  • Learned to spell efficiently by one year old.
  • Started reading The New York Times at 18 months.
  • Started typing at three. Used his high chair to reach a typewriter. First composed letter was an order for toys from Macy's.
  • Read Caesar's Gallic Wars, in Latin (self-taught), as a birthday present to his Father in Billy's fourth year.
  • Learned Greek alphabet and read Homer in Greek in his fourth year.
  • Learned Aristotelian logic in his sixth year.
  • At six, Billy learned Russian, French, German, and Hebrew, and soon after, Turkish and Armenian.
  • Calculated mentally a day any date in history would fall at age six. Absolutely fascinated by calendars.
  • Learned Gray's Anatomy at six. Could pass a student medical examination.
  • Billy started grammar school at six, in 3 days 3rd grade, graduated grammar school in 7 months.
  • At age 8, Billy surpassed his father (a genius) in mathematics.
  • Corrected E. V. Huntington's mathematics text galleys at age of eight.
  • Total recall of everything he read.
  • Wrote four books between ages of four and eight. Two on anatomy and astronomy, lost.
  • Passed Harvard Medical School anatomy exam at age seven.
  • Passed MIT entrance exam at age eight.
  • Intellect surpassed best secondary school teachers.
  • At age 10, in one evening, corrected Harvard logic professor Josiah Royce's book manuscript: citing, "wrong paragraphs."
  • Attempted to enroll in Harvard at nine.
  • In 1909, became youngest student to ever enroll at Harvard at age 11.
  • In 1910, at age 11, lectured Harvard Mathematical Club on 'Four-Dimensional Bodies.'
  • Billy graduated from Harvard, cum laude, on June 24, 1914, at age 16.
  • Billy entered Harvard Law School in 1916.
  • Billy could learn a whole language in one day!
  • Billy knew all the languages (approximately 200) of the world, and could translate among them instantly!
  • More recently, in late 2005, we commence recognition of Billy's probable (perhaps only intuitive) adeptness in ancient Judaic Gematria and Hermetics. Doug - 8Dec2005. Again, refer Sam Rosenberg's conjectures. Perhaps there is even more than Sam decrypted. Billy: quanton(Hyde,Jekyll).

[/LIST]
Dave Allen
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 May, 2009 04:47 am
@Alan McDougall,
Sure, but as we discussed earlier why would William Sidis provide a model for Martin Luther or Napoleon?

I haven't read any biographies of Luther, but what I know of Bonaparte he was a decent, but not brilliant, pupil who always struggled to fit in with Parisian polite society in later life - and apparently warred so constantly at least partly because he was a spare peg at court. Such qualities neither confirm or damn the assertion that he had a high IQ. Wittgenstein was academically bright, but not to the standard of a 25 year old at age 5.

It strikes me that whoever made the list wants to promote the idea that only those with high IQ scores can make historical acheivements. Furthermore, whilst I doubt there's anything sinister behind it, I can't help the feeling that people who say "look, all these top Nazis were mental giants" - without any evidence to back up their claim - are in some way seeking to legitimise something about top Nazis.
xris
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 May, 2009 04:54 am
@Dave Allen,
Maybe he had a seance.."Is there any body there"... "yes Hitler".."what is the square of 69?"
0 Replies
 
Dave Allen
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 May, 2009 05:05 am
@Zetetic11235,
Zetetic11235 wrote:

    1. Billy could learn a whole language in one day!
    2. Billy knew all the languages (approximately 200) of the world, and could translate among them instantly!
    3. More recently, in late 2005, we commence recognition of Billy's probable (perhaps only intuitive) adeptness in ancient Judaic Gematria and Hermetics. Doug - 8Dec2005. Again, refer Sam Rosenberg's conjectures. Perhaps there is even more than Sam decrypted. Billy: quanton(Hyde,Jekyll).

Hyde and Jekyll as references eh? 200 languages?

Come on!
0 Replies
 
Lily
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 May, 2009 07:52 am
@Alan McDougall,
OLOF PALME! Smile Smile Go sweden! :a-ok: sweds are so smart:Glasses:
0 Replies
 
pinkpanda
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 May, 2009 05:15 pm
@Alan McDougall,
Well I had fun reading it, don't feel bad Alan McDougall. :a-ok:
Zetetic11235
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 May, 2009 11:58 am
@pinkpanda,
Not a hoax, unless the new york times circa the early 1900's was worthless and some highly intelligent person has decided to give up his rights to his work so that he can say that Sidis wrote them.
check this out:

Sidis Archives

Young Sidis, 'Harvard Prodigy,' Sentenced To a Year and a Half in Jail... - Article Preview - The New York Times

FEAR IS FELT FOR SIDIS.; Harvard's Boy Scientist May Never Resume His ... - Article Preview - The New York Times

A Savant at Thirteen, Young Sidis on Entering Harvard Knows More Than ... - Article Preview - The New York Times

BOY OF 10 ADDRESSES HARVARD TEACHERS; Young Sidis Kidnaps the Elusive ... - Article Preview - The New York Times

My university library has a copy of one of Boris's(his father) books. The Sidis family is well documented.

---------- Post added at 02:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:58 PM ----------

Hitler was by most measures someone who could be considered bright, and Rommel was perhaps even more so. I don't know about the other officers, but one thing to keep in mind is that this is true of most strong armies. You need to be sharp to be an officer, and you need to be very sharp to be any sort of a decent general even today. Look at Petraeus, doctorate from Princeton, according to wikipedia (I know, I know)

In Mosul, a city of nearly two million people, Petraeus and the 101st employed classic counterinsurgency methods to build security and stability, including conducting targeted kinetic operations and using force judiciously, jump-starting the economy, building local security forces, staging elections for the city council within weeks of their arrival, overseeing a program of public works, reinvigorating the political process,[51][52][53] and launching 4,500 reconstruction projects.[54] This approach can be attributed to Petraeus, who had been steeped in nation-building during his previous tours in places like Bosnia and Haiti and thus approached nation-building as a central military mission and who was "prepared to act while the civilian authority in Baghdad was still getting organized," according to Michael Gordon of The New York Times.[55] Some Iraqis gave Petraeus the nickname 'King David',[51][56] which was later adopted by some of his colleagues.[57][58][59] Newsweek has stated that "It's widely accepted that no force worked harder to win Iraqi hearts and minds than the 101st Air Assault Division led by Petraeus."[60]

It seems to me that Gen. Petraeus would likely have an I.Q. on par with many of of the officers on that list. I'm sure that this is true for most good military officers.
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
DOES NOTHING EXIST??? - Question by mark noble
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The IQ of interesting people (A fun thread)
Copyright © 2017 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/16/2017 at 04:42:18