Concerning the validity of I.Q.

Author: zedvictor4

Posts

Total: 134
#61
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
That is not what intelligence is at all... That is applicable knowledge, which, contrary to popular belief, isn't that. Intelligence is the ability to understand and comprehend concepts
If I may offer, I do not believe you'll gain much from this exchange with zedvictor. It's apparent at this point that he's seeking your "kowtow" rather than guesses at his esoteric puzzles (hence, his "taunt" above at supposedly the entirety of DART for not indulging this farce for several days.) If I were in your position, I'd just let this thread plunge into the annals of subjects forgotten. Just some friendly advice.
Topic's author
#62
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Athias
@Theweakeredge
Exactly....You lack the relevant data needed, to be able to understand a simple puzzle concept....Just like Mr Athias.

Which was my original point....I.Q. can only test what you know.

Mr Athias is very good at long words and philoso-speak for example....It simply boils down to what one has and has not learned.
#63
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@zedvictor4
That's not what intelligence is....Anyways. Even if someone were to have the necessary information, its also a matter of actually knowing to apply that knowledge to the problem. That is your fault, you designed the puzzle-like that intentionally, no? In actual puzzles, they give you the context, that way you can actually see your mental acuity. 
Topic's author
#64
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Theweakeredge
You're just as intellectually lacking as the next person....As are we all.
#65
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@zedvictor4
So you were discovered, figured out, the fact is... you didn't and don't know what you're talking about, and now you want to pretend like you had some point the entire time. You haven't, you discovered to be lacking in your reasoning and are now trying to cover yourself. 
#66
drafterman
drafterman's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 5,653
3
6
9
drafterman's avatar
drafterman
3
6
9
-->
@zedvictor4
This was the puzzle I posed:
1 2 5 20 1 4 5 20 ?
What is the missing number.
3
#67
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,597
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
I am back from my shift at the  Large Hadron Collider and I agree with drafterman as that can be the only answer.
Topic's author
#68
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@drafterman
@FLRW
@Theweakeredge
Nope....I'll tell you the answer.

18.

But do you possess the intellectual ability to tell me why.

As I've stated all along, it's a very simple, basic, puzzle format that any keen puzzler would have cracked in a couple of minutes....It's just a case of what you know and how you consequently think.
#69
drafterman
drafterman's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 5,653
3
6
9
drafterman's avatar
drafterman
3
6
9
-->
@zedvictor4
Nope....I'll tell you the answer.

18.

But do you possess the intellectual ability to tell me why.

As I've stated all along, it's a very simple, basic, puzzle format that any keen puzzler would have cracked in a couple of minutes....It's just a case of what you know and how you consequently think.
Sorry, you're wrong. It's actually 3.
#70
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@zedvictor4
Its almost as if you had context to a puzzle that no one else had. hm....
Topic's author
#71
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Theweakeredge
Obviously.....That's the whole Idea of a puzzle....You're supposed to work it out.

So do you actually possess the where with all, to be able  tell me why the answer is 18?.......I somehow think not.

One is only as clever as what one knows, and how one is able to manipulate that knowledge......I.Q.......Currently, yours isn't looking very formidable.

So ditch the excuses and prove me wrong.
#72
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,597
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@zedvictor4
But do you possess the intellectual ability to tell me why.
Yes, you made it up.
#73
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
What? I don't care about your games here. KNowledge - as in information relating to a subject. IQ - The ability to grasp concepts and apply that knowledge. Not knowing something, has literally nothing to do with it. You have not rebuked a single argument against you, you, evidently have literally no idea what you're talking about. I could care less about proving you wrong, whenever your own ignorance proves you wrong for me. I could just give you a shit answer and say, "I don't know, al of the numbers beside the 20s add up to 18?" But that's not a logical course of action (and it's also a pattern, which you said it wasn't so, nope) But that literally doesn't matter, your framing is incorrect. 
#74
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,597
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@zedvictor4
THE 18 COMES FROM ADDING UP 1,2,5,1,4,5=18, LIKE I SAID, YOU MADE IT UP.
Topic's author
#75
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@FLRW
Someone else sadly lacking the where with all....Dumb a**e excuses are seemingly all that you are capable of too.
#76
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,597
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@zedvictor4
Thank you, I accept your apology since you said too.

11 days later

#77
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@zedvictor4
Obviously.....That's the whole Idea of a puzzle....You're supposed to work it out.

So do you actually possess the where with all, to be able  tell me why the answer is 18?.......I somehow think not.

One is only as clever as what one knows, and how one is able to manipulate that knowledge......I.Q.......Currently, yours isn't looking very formidable.

So ditch the excuses and prove me wrong.

FLRW:
THE 18 COMES FROM ADDING UP 1,2,5,1,4,5=18, LIKE I SAID, YOU MADE IT UP.
So it was a guessing game. Zedvictor, you do realize that merely from the numbers you provided, the answer you provided, and the method in which it was obtained, "figuring it out" could've employed a virtually infinite number of rationalizations (e.g. excluding the "1's" or "5's" instead of the 20's)? If this is a "puzzle," it's a bad attempt at one.
Topic's author
#78
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Athias
Nope. Incorrect.

As I've stated previously, it's a standard puzzle.  It just requires a little bit of thought, and any keen puzzler would work it out in seconds.

It just a case of knowing how very common puzzles work....If you don't know, one would expect someone with a good "I.Q." to work it out fairly quickly.


#79
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@zedvictor4
As I've stated previously, it's a standard puzzle.  It just requires a little bit of thought, and any keen puzzler would work it out in seconds.
No, it's a guessing game for which its "rhyme or reason" was known to just you (like I stated earlier.) You may think it's a "puzzle" because you understand its reasoning; and you understood its reasoning for a time because, as FLRW pointed out, you made it up. There's nothing in your "puzzle" that would make one "keen" to excluding the 20's and taking the sum of the remaining numbers until you said the mystery number was 18. Had you said the number was 48, it would've meant excluding the 5's and taking the sum; if you said the number was 56, it would've meant excluding 1's and taking the sum. If you said the number was 200, it would've meant excluding the 20's and taking the product. By presenting the series of numbers as you did without providing much information, any of the aforementioned rationalizations could have been true, as well as a virtually infinite number of other rationalizations. It wasn't until you and you alone provided some context that was known just to you that it was worked out.

Case in point, solve this "puzzle" zedvictor:

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, ?

What's the mystery number? I'm sure a keen puzzler who's familiar with the workings of common puzzles will be able to work it out in seconds. And while we're on the subject, care to shed light on your second "puzzle"?


Topic's author
#80
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Athias
Perhaps puzzles aren't an American thing.

Nonetheless:

The second puzzle, tells you the answer...All that is required is a bit of General Knowledge.


As for your puzzle......Applying basic puzzle formats, one initially doesn't need to come up with anything other than 6.....


As for my first puzzle.....Try applying the basic puzzle technique of converting seemingly random numbers to something else.
#81
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@zedvictor4
Perhaps puzzles aren't an American thing.
Perhaps, because we all know that mental acuity and geographic location are biconditionally related.

The second puzzle, tells you the answer...All that is required is a bit of General Knowledge.
Once again, I have no intent on attempting to throw guesses at these alleged "puzzles." I thought since you relented the answer for the first, you might do the same for the second. My mistake.

As for your puzzle......Applying basic puzzle formats, one initially doesn't need to come up with anything other than 6.....
So your answer is "6"? There's no need to separate yourself from your answer by stating, "one initially doesn't need to come up with anything other than 6..." And no, the answer is not "6." (You were close, though.) You see, I can't expect you to figure it out just from its mere presentation--not even for a "keen" puzzler like yourself. Of course, you're going to state that it's "6" based on the only reasoning you can grasp from its presentation, and that is its order. But if I keep the rules to myself, how can the answer be determined by you or anyone other than guessing at the rules? Presenting a series of numbers and making one of them a mystery doesn't necessarily make it a (number) puzzle. Now I can drag this out like you did and pretend that I'm testing your "mental acuity," but I won't. The answer is 23/4 (or 5 and 3/4.) And the rules are rather simple: the mystery number is based on applying an order of operations incorporating each of the previous five numbers. Also the mystery number is necessarily greater than five, but less than six.

(1^2  x  3)/4 +5

I couldn't expect anyone to discern this merely from looking at the series of numbers as I presented them. One would literally have to guess. And that's the folly with your number puzzle: once you declared that your series of numbers was not a sequence, you declared it to be absent of a consistent rule. Thus, it became a guessing game, whether you acknowledge it or not.
Topic's author
#82
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Athias
Nope. An ardent puzzler would have instantly recognised a random set of numbers all with a value of less than 27....As I said you just do not understand basic puzzles, simply because you have not learned the methodology.

Which was what my original contention with I.Q. was all about....You either know something or you don't.

The second puzzle is so simple...Just ask a Greek.
#83
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,597
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@zedvictor4
Is the seventh Uranus?
Topic's author
#84
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@FLRW
Nope...Read the question and it tells you the answer.
#85
Jasmine
Jasmine's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 126
0
3
6
Jasmine's avatar
Jasmine
0
3
6
Is the number 10?
#86
Jasmine
Jasmine's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 126
0
3
6
Jasmine's avatar
Jasmine
0
3
6
How tf do you get 18?
Topic's author
#87
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Jasmine
As I stated above....What you see is a random set of numbers all with a value of less that 27.

But hey....... Lets make it easier.

1. Numbers

2. Conversion

3. Rearrangement

4. What's missing

5. Convert back to numbers.

All standard puzzle methodology, if you know what you're doing.....I.Q.
#88
Jasmine
Jasmine's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 126
0
3
6
Jasmine's avatar
Jasmine
0
3
6
-->
@zedvictor4
Bro, what?
Is it just all the numbers added up without the two 20's?
Topic's author
#89
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Athias
@Jasmine
That's my point.

You obviously are not interested in puzzles, so you have never learned the methodology.

Even when I showed you the process, you were unable to comprehend anything other than a sequence of seemingly random numbers.

It's simply a case of what you know.


Even Mr A our resident philosophical scholar and wordsmith is baffled by something so simple.
#90
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@zedvictor4
Except you claimed... there was no pattern, and there is a pattern... not to mention.... you haven't really responded to other's criticism, especially not mine, except with the sterotypical, "Ah.. man, you just aren't smart enough to do i, you-you-  just aren't smart enough." With nothing of substance besides that. The real fault I find is that you seem to have, in this one thread in particular, a hard time substantiating your claims. In fact earlier, I showed and proved that typically speaking - number puzzles have context for the person to have a logical method to reaching the described goal, otherwise, you are literally just guessing the goal. You can claim that one way is the "way to solve it" but you have yet to prove it.