Theory: Openness peaks at 155-160 IQ, and Bastion as profound giftedness simulator

An update to: https://aeolipera.wordpress.com/2015/09/04/high-iq-dysfunction-peaks-at-about-iq-155/, which refers to dysfunction.

Here’s Cooijmans:

Intelligence, when reaching the very highest altitudes, somehow reduces the frequency of genius; it has been pointed out that geniuses tend to have high, but not the highest intelligence; that those with the very highest I.Q.s are typically not geniuses. I do not know the precise mechanism yet, but relevant is my own finding that, in the high range, there is a significant negative correlation between I.Q. and 1) psychiatric disorders in oneself; 2) psychiatric disorders in one’s parents and siblings (which reflect genetic disposition); 3) disposition for psychiatric disorders as measured by personality tests.

Perhaps the very highest I.Q.s tend to go with just a bit less than the needed extreme conscientiousness and associative horizon (both of which are forms of disposition for psychiatric disorders)? Perhaps those with the very highest I.Q.s are too neurologically “normal”?

This possible limiting effect of the very highest I.Q. levels is something I am less certain of yet than of the other two thresholds.

https://paulcooijmans.com/genius/genius.html

Terman:

Genetic Studies of Genius revealed that gifted and genius children were in at least as good as average health and had normal personalities. Few of them demonstrated the previously-held negative stereotypes of gifted children. He found that gifted children did not fit the existing stereotypes often associated with them: they were not weak and sickly social misfits, but in fact were generally taller, in better health, better developed physically, and better adapted socially than other children. The children included in his studies were colloquially referred to as “Termites”.[16] The gifted children thrived both socially and academically. In relationships, they were less likely to divorce.[7] Additionally, those in the gifted group were generally successful in their careers: Many received awards recognizing their achievements. Though many of the children reached exceptional heights in adulthood, not all did. Terman explored the causes of obvious talent not being realized, exploring personal obstacles, education, and lack of opportunity as causes.[10] Terman found that high childhood IQ was correlated with many great adult achievements. Participants in his Genetic Studies of Genius had adult socioeconomic and educational outcomes that were greater than what would be expected based solely on their childhood socioeconomic status.[17]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Terman

Well over half of men and women in Terman’s study finished college, compared to 8% of the general population at the time.[30] Some of Terman’s subjects reached great prominence in their fields. Among them were head I Love Lucy writer Jess Oppenheimer,[31] American Psychological Association president and educational psychologist Lee Cronbach,[32] Ancel Keys,[33] and Robert Sears himself.[31] Over fifty men became college and university faculty members.[34] However, the majority of study participants’ lives were more mundane. By the 4th volume of Genetic Studies of Genius, Terman had noted that as adults, his subjects pursued common occupations “as humble as those of policeman, seaman, typist and filing clerk”[35] and concluded:

“At any rate, we have seen that intellect and achievement are far from perfectly correlated.[36]”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_Studies_of_Genius

Jumping to the end for a moment, what I’m predicting is that the profoundly intelligent (at IQs of 180 or so) will appear to the merely gifted cohort (at IQs of 160 or so) to be ISTPs. That is, craftsmen who happen to do mundane things with great competence. That would include the most mundane thing of all, which is remaining alive, since IQ is a better predictor of longevity than smoking.

The basic, established pattern is that, in the vast majority of the bell curve from IQs 70 to 130, the general factor of personality rises with IQ. We’d expect a person with an IQ of 75 to be:

Introverted
Closed-minded and incurious
Disagreeable
Lazy
and Neurotic

Or, in MBTI terms a mentally unstable ISTP.

On the other side of the spectrum, we’d expect a person with an IQ of 125 to be:

Extraverted
Open-minded and curious
Agreeable
Conscientious
and Resilient.

In MBTI terms, a stable ENFJ.

Above 130, all of these associations reverse except for Openness, which continues to rise with IQ. That means we’d expect a person with an IQ of 155 to be:

Introverted
Open-minded and curious
Disagreeable
Lazy
and Neurotic

In MBTI terms, a mentally unstable INTP.

I should note here there are differing accounts on the neuroticism aspect. It appears most likely that the difference is socially mediated by the times a person is living in. During eugenic times like 1930s America or the 16th century, a high-IQ person will be highly adaptive. During times like these it appears profoundly gifted people tend to be much better adjusted, possibly because their gifts are appreciated and they feel connected to human society.

Euler, for example, was a highly adjusted aristocrat and probably the #1 mathematician in history.

In 1760, with the Seven Years’ War raging, Euler’s farm in Charlottenburg was sacked by advancing Russian troops. Upon learning of this event, General Ivan Petrovich Saltykov paid compensation for the damage caused to Euler’s estate, with Empress Elizabeth of Russia later adding a further payment of 4000 roubles—an exorbitant amount at the time.[27] The political situation in Russia stabilized after Catherine the Great’s accession to the throne, so in 1766 Euler accepted an invitation to return to the St. Petersburg Academy. His conditions were quite exorbitant—a 3000 ruble annual salary, a pension for his wife, and the promise of high-ranking appointments for his sons. All of these requests were granted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonhard_Euler#Personal_life

This suggests that his talents were appreciated.

Compare to Korean wunderkind Kim Ung-yong, who was so underappreciated he had to flee America and get his Ph.D twice.

He went to work for NASA[citation needed], where he worked for ten years. In 2010, Kim said of his years at NASA, “At that time, I led my life like a machine―I woke up, solved the daily assigned equation, ate, slept, and so forth. I really didn’t know what I was doing, and I was lonely and had no friends.”[8]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Ung-yong

I suspect that the predisposition to normality has something to do with locus of control. It’s not so much that they can’t make connections between separate domains, as they can’t see domains as separate to begin with.

Average people tend to believe some tacit and naively realistic philosophy. Moderately gifted people tend to believe some conscious and creative reinterpretation of realism. Profoundly gifted people tend to believe an almost automatic anti-realism. The realism assumed by most people doesn’t resonate with them. And I need to explain what I mean by “believe” here. I don’t mean that someone engaged them in a discussion and are convinced by logic or eloquence that an anti-realist philosophy is true. I mean something close to experience, as we believe that a radiator is hot after we touch it. Realism is obvious for someone of average intelligence. For someone profoundly gifted, coming to that perspective represents a significant achievement.

https://cjshayward.com/mindstorm/

And since everything is part of this giant holistic process of oneness where you navigate reality like a spirit journey, everything will feel like a sort of didactic dream of divine providence. It would be difficult to maintain the sort of analytic, “scientific spectacles” that would allow you to create a reproducible meme. Also, since you’re a prickly, incurious ISTP why would you want to spread a new idea anyway?

I think the best expression of this experience of life is the indie game Bastion.

Just that mechanic of the world assembling itself around you is very “gifted ISTP craftsman who reinvented steam turbines at age 5 without thinking about it”.

Furthermore, where the moderately gifted person has a “skill collection”, the profoundly gifted individual has what might as well be magic powers…Profoundly gifted individuals have been known to do things like reinventing the steam engine at age six. Some of them can walk into a room and in an instant infer what kind of presentation is going to be given, and what kind of organization is going to give it. They have been known to make penetrating observations of connections between vastly different disciplines. Some have written a book in a week. Others remember everything they have read. Verbatim. Another still has invented a crude physics and using it to solve problems before she was old enough to talk. It’s entirely plausible for a profoundly gifted individual to think for a few hours about a philosophical school he’s just read about, and have a better grasp of the assumptions and implications surrounding that school than scholars who have studied the discipline for years. Many accomplishments are less extreme than that. Some are more extreme. I said that they might as well be magic powers because they are no more believable to many people than levitation or fairies granting wishes. Moderately gifted achievements are envied. Profoundly gifted achievements are disbelieved, and one social lesson the profoundly gifted learn is that there are certain accomplishments that you don’t talk about… which feels the way most people would feel if people were shocked and offended when they tried to say, “I can read,” or for that matter, “I can breathe.”

These people do not think of themselves as having magic powers. Their impressive abilities are no more breathtaking or astonishing to them than our impressive abilities of walking through an unfamiliar room or understanding a children’s book are to us—and if you don’t believe that walking through an unfamiliar room or understanding a children’s book is an astonishing mental feat, just spend a year in artificial intelligence.

https://cjshayward.com/mindstorm/ again

I can also imagine that the artistic choice, in Bastion, of making all the NPCs friends and family who were “frozen in time” in the big catastrophe represents the experience of profoundly gifted people interacting with other humans. On the one hand, there’s the sense that these are people you’re supposed to have relationships with. On the other hand, there’s the sense of deadness and inhumanity to them that gives you a feeling of loss, like they were taken from you. So you’re surrounded by these literal shells of people in the game.

The more I think about that game, the more it fits. High-IQ people constantly have dilated pupils, because they’re taking in more information. Woodley said they wouldn’t let him into a club once because they thought he was so high on something, but he’s never done drugs. In the game, you feel this way because the art, music, and voiceover are so psychedelic, colorful, and overstimulating.

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Theory: Openness peaks at 155-160 IQ, and Bastion as profound giftedness simulator

  1. Isus says:

    “High-IQ people constantly have dilated pupils, because they’re taking in more information”
    Interesting observation. I just noticed that my pupils are always dilated, which would also explain why I am nocturnal.

  2. LOADED says:

    Aeoli, this DNA test said I had a significantly above-average cognitive ability. According to 47 SNPs. Wow. I think I am finally worthy.

    https://imgur.com/a/3867W7b

  3. aiaslives says:

    Sometimes I think that the Terman study was a bunch of people practicing headbinding to make their children join the Melonhead administration.

    > The more I think about that game, the more it fits. High-IQ people constantly have dilated pupils, because they’re taking in more information. Woodley said they wouldn’t let him into a club once because they thought he was so high on something, but he’s never done drugs. In the game, you feel this way because the art, music, and voiceover are so psychedelic, colorful, and overstimulating.

    Also, in the end he has to make a choice, whether to live and let live or to reverse everything. He gets to keep all his upgrades in “New Game Plus” and can then make a different choice.

    Bastion – T-Back

    Transistor – M/T Dualback

    Pyre – “Pure” MT

    Hades – TM

  4. Dexter says:

    Woodley? Which Woodley are you talking about?

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      Michael Woodley of Menie.

      • Dexter says:

        Thanks for clarifying. I thought as much given what you like to write about and Woodley’s obvious intellect. He’s very cogent and has of course been prolific in intelligence research esp. with his paper on reaction times and declining g.

        What would you put his IQ at? I would say at least 3sd above the mean, but your post seems to suggest that he is well above that, right?

        Regarding pupil dilation, I would associate this with zoning out/daydreaming because when doing this you’re not interacting with the physical world around you as much and so are not focusing on anything in particular. I’ve found this occurs quite often, especially when somewhat inebriated. Maybe it’s because of the lowered inhibition.

        I’m a newcomer to this blog but scrolled through a few posts on 21st – I have some questions on masculinization of the mind and bodily manifestations, but I’ll save these for later.

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          >What would you put his IQ at? I would say at least 3sd above the mean, but your post seems to suggest that he is well above that, right?

          Dutton suggested in conversation he was about 160 and Woodley didn’t respond either way. He’s mentioned before he’s verbally tilted, so I’d probably guess 160 verbal and 150 quantitative or something like that.

          • Dexter says:

            I was similarly basing the 148+ on the fact that he’s clearly smarter than me (135 approx according to WAIS-IV) and so the 150-160 range seems correct – I would doubt PG suggestion due to sheer rarity and the fact that he’s not THAT weird, just weird.

            Since you mentioned him, would you hazard a guess about Dutton’s IQ? He doesn’t have the smart person archetype personality which I guess is ENTx with low N. Although he’s logical, this personality means he overstretches sometimes and relies on a lot of conjecture to come up with what seems to him airtight conclusions. Still, though, reasons well logically and is clearly very quick-witted. 145-150?

            Regarding masculinization of the brain, I am trying to figure out how male-brained I am. I score a high average on Systematizing Quotient, but I am less interested in physical systems and precise details (but still do like facts, and use them to back up arguments) than abstract logic and consistency. Though I’d say the latter is quite masculine, it doesn’t feature that heavily in autism quizzes. Furthermore, I don’t have a penchant for strict routine in day to day life. Like you, I’ve done an OD triathlon where I was quite thorough with planning, but I’m not obsessive about routine. Agreeableness definitely below average but moderately altruistic I guess. I just don’t ‘reason’ with the heart. You may have guessed by now, but my MBTI is INTP.
            – Thoughts?

            • Dexter says:

              I meant that I think D’s type is ENTx with low N. INTx would be smart archetype
              No need to approve this comment

            • Aeoli Pera says:

              >he’s not THAT weird, just weird.

              Part of it is performative. I’m pretty sure the man-bun is just to piss people off, for example.

              >Since you mentioned him, would you hazard a guess about Dutton’s IQ?

              He’s around 140 with more of a verbal tilt than me (so maybe 150 verbal, 130 quantitative).

              >I score a high average on Systematizing Quotient, but I am less interested in physical systems and precise details (but still do like facts, and use them to back up arguments) than abstract logic and consistency.

              Masculine-brained people tend to specialize in one or the other (abstract vs. practical), so that’s not abnormal. Dutton is like you, for example, and very masculine-brained.

              >Furthermore, I don’t have a penchant for strict routine in day to day life.

              That might be an upbringing thing, but it could also be temperament as you’re assuming.

              My guess is overall you’re extremely masculine-brained, 90th percentile or better for white genpop males.

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          He’s definitely smarter than me (~140) but there’s no significant communication gap, which is why I’d put him around 150-160.

          • Dexter says:

            Not able to reply to the other reply chain so I’ll do so here.
            Thanks for the prognosis, cleared some things up. Re Dutton’s IQ, what are you basing the quant score off? Isn’t that hard to discern given what is publically known of him? I suppose you could estimate that split given his reliance on verbal argument without much sophisticated mathematical backing… he does like correlations, though! Woodley of course excels with both types of reasoning.

            My favourite guest (i.e. the one I enjoy watching on TJH the most) of Dutton’s has to be Emil Kierkegaard, though. Less moody, revels in unPC research (I am partial to some Alt-right-related topics) and very tech-savvy.

  5. Pingback: Add Starbound to ISTP master race aesthetic palette | Aeoli Pera

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s