If you have a 100+ IQ, then it's practically guarunteed that, at some point, you've heard someone say "I'm not stupid!," as if it were some sort of golf of wits, and they were assigning a handicap to themselves.

This phrase actually reeks of insecurity, even though it comes from the perception of superciliousness. It could be triggered by any number of things; perhaps you used the word "adroit" in a sentence, or maybe you mentioned that you're interested in high-energy physics, in which case you are likely to be compared to Sheldon Cooper, especially if you are

Now, the thing is, intelligence famously manifests itself in different forms; some may be adept at making connections between disparate facts; others may be more socially aware. However, I think the simple fact of the matter is this: if you were to design a fully-fledged criteria of intellect, accounting for all relevant factors, then some people are going to check more of these boxes than others. Some will be mini-maxers; others will be more evenly keeled. Altogether, however, it is a matter of controversy whether or not each of us have differing "stat points."

I get the feeling that some people, more than others, feel like intelligence is a competition, and that furthermore, those who are just "being themselves," and excel at one skill, are interpreted as trying harder than those with other, or perhaps fewer, skills.

The analysis of intelligence is notoriously thorny, leading to (accusations of, or actual) racism or sexism. It is clear that, on one day, one might read as a sub-100 IQ, and on others, as highly intelligence; or that in different contexts, one's (perceived) IQ may vary. Upbringing is famous for its influence on IQ; less famous is the effect of one's current social network. However, I want to say, that these factors do not completely determine one's intellect. For, suppose you have a group of 5 people, all of the same race, all equally impoverished, formally educated, and so on and so forth; clearly, a hierarchy, or perhaps a heterarchy is capable of emerging among the 5.

Lastly, I wanted to touch upon the relationship between academic giftedness and intelligence. The two do not always coincide, but are highly correlated. This leads to the idea of the "idiot" savant. The evidence seems to be clear: being intelligent does not always result in salubrious, or allegedly "smart" action. Those with proficiency in both mind and action are rarities, even among the higher echelons of either modality.

Thanks/Bragging Rights

I want to thank each and every one of my readers for making this website an inclusive and welcoming space, as well as for providing engaging and stimulating "content" (God, I hate that word!) to make visiting this platform worthwhile. I will not name any specific users, because at the end of the day, the community is what matters; however, this is not to diminish the power of individuals. I have a sense of assurance that what I say is not in vain, and I hope that this receptivity may be found by other (relatively) obscure but high-quality creators. God bless you all.