Ron Paul and IQ

-

IQ over 189
In all of human history only about two dozen people have been this smart. William James Sidis is one example. He lectured Harvard mathematicians on four-dimensional mathematics at age 11 and was a professor of mathematics at Rice University at age 14. He easily mastered many more languages than the then 'world record' of around 40. He would do the entire New York Times crossword in his head. Because of his eccentricities, academics and the press mercilessly hounded him. At the age of 22 he published a book discussing black holes a full 15 years before Nobel Laureate Chandrasekhar thought of them. He eventually refused to do anything academic or have anything to do with academic society. Who knows what these people think about or what they think of the rest of humanity.
back to top

IQ 172 - 188
Keynes-who used to intimidate Bertrand Russell-was probably in this category. John Stuart Mill and Bobby Fischer are also in this category. While still of primary school age only around one-in-a-thousand university professors can look them in the eye intellectually. They tend to read competently before they are three years old. They find even grand system building relatively easy. They are seldom understood or appreciated. Most feel profoundly isolated from society-even when they are appreciated. A large proportion of this group opt out of society and never make revolutionary contributions in the standard academic fields or professions. It seems to be very difficult to motivate them to play the academic/ scholarly/professional game because they regard even the most venerable of traditions and institutions as absurd or silly. Consider that their intellect is as far above that of the average person as the average person's intellect is above that of someone with mental retardation. Even the mind of the average professor appears to him like the mind of the average brick layer would appear to the professor.
back to top

IQ 156 - 171
The smarter Nobel Prize winners and most historical geniuses (people like Einstein, Hawking, Byron, Milton, Kant, Newton, Russell, Rand) are to be found in this category. Most exceed the average postgraduate in academic competence-even professors-while still in primary school, and probably knew more than their teachers from about the 6th grade onwards. Their powers of comprehension and reason are such that they can see that many alternative systems (theories) account for the essentials inherent in abstract hypotheses and may be able to compare these in turn and bring them within the ambit of a single grand formal system (theory). They can and do read philosophy for pleasure well before puberty. They can read at the university level before the average person can comprehend their first reader, i.e. 'I see a cat.' They can probably perceive several logically consistent ethical systems and may find themselves struggling with the problem of constructing a grand ethical system. A common experie nce with people in this category or higher is that they are not wanted-that the masses (including the professional classes) find them an affront of some sort. Fortunately they are plentiful in absolute numbers, so many of them do rise above the envy and hostility.
back to top

IQ 140 - 155
Most professional mathematicians, physicists, philosophers and high court judges or very senior counsel, can be found in this group. They are autodidacts par excellence. Highly regarded original academic work rarely occurs with lower IQs. Some in this group exceed the average university student in academic competence while still in primary school. They garner most academic honors like Phi Beta Kappa election, Rhodes scholarships, math Olympiads, etc. Many Nobel laureates and some historical geniuses, like Sartre, are also to be found here. Their reasoning powers are sufficient to enable them to build intellectual systems (theories) out of the essential features (not superficialities) of a situation. They can read anything and probably read philosophy for pleasure. Morality is now a matter of self-chosen ethical principles held to a standard of logical consistency. People in this category make up the society's intellectual leaders. Most original ideas start with these people, however their contribution tends to be in bits and pieces rather than a whole new system or new way of seeing things.
back to top

IQ 124 - 140
This group forms the bulk of the better doctors, lawyers, engineers, accountants and other professionals, U.S. Presidents, CEOs of large companies and academics. This category of people and all those above them don't require assistance to learn. They can find the information and master the methods by themselves. They are capable of postgraduate work, including PhDs, but may struggle with a few subjects such as post-graduate mathematics, physics and philosophy. They usually appreciate that abstract hypotheses can be systematized and often attempt to do so (try to form theories), but for the most part they tend to miss the essentials and build systems out of superficialities. Reading philosophy and legal tracts with comprehension is possible. Morality is decidedly a matter of principles for this group but nevertheless they tend to accept established systems, rarely is the principled system a self-chosen one. These people tend to be the keepers, and transmitters, of knowledge and the higher points of any culture, but can't create it themselves. .
back to top

IQ 108 - 124
Their best work level is that of most teachers, low to middle level management and military officers, substandard to fair professionals and some elected national or provincial politicians. They can learn via the typical university format of lectures and textbooks. At times they might struggle at the university level, but graduation is not difficult. Abstract, what-if hypothetical thinking begins in this group but is still superficial. Some may be aware that their hypotheses could form part of a coherent whole but cannot draw out the whole themselves. Their best reading level is editorials, magazines like Time, The Economist and Scientific American, and classical novels. Principled morality also begins in this group, i.e. they can see there are nonarbitrary principles or laws that should govern ethical behavior and thought. They can also see that these laws are social constructs and have not come down from heaven or other ultimate authority. This group makes up the moral, intellectual and practical leadership assistants of society.
back to top

IQ 92 - 108
This is the average person, able to function at the level of skilled blue-collar, clerical, sales or police work. Learning varies from explicit coaching with hands on experience to study guides and textbook work with some practical experience. They should be able to deal with a high school curriculum and graduate but quite a few, even with hard work, won't do well enough to enter university. Their reasoning is proficient but pretty concrete at the level of non-essential surface details, and their reading level is, at best, news stories (not editorials), popular magazines and novels. Morality is conventional, a matter of serving the social order and tradition or doing your duty as defined by some authority like the church, a teacher, a parent or the state. This large group is the glue of society but given the wrong authority it (and the two groups below it) may do horrible things in the name of morality.
back to top

IQ 76 - 92
Life is tough at this level. Anything other than unskilled labor is a trial, though simple semi-skilled work is possible. Learning is slow, simple and needs to be supervised closely to be effective. With application they may graduate from primary school but will nevertheless flounder quite badly in high school. Their reasoning is very superficial and concrete and they cannot see the essential form inherent in many examples of similar things. Most will never be functionally literate and the rest will not understand anything more complex than a popular magazine. It has been estimated that people in this category commit about 75% of all petty and violent crimes. Morality is very much of a primitive conventional sort, i.e. the good is whatever pleases himself or significant others and the bad is anything that displeases them. The vast majority of serious social problems are associated with people in this category because there are so many of them statistically.
back to top

IQ 60 - 76
In the old days, these people used to be called morons or feeble minded. At least some intermittent outside assistance becomes necessary. At this level and below people are inevitably functionally illiterate even if they have been taught to read for at least four years. Their communication and social skills are reasonable but by social/communication skills I am not referring to negotiation skills or wit, but basics like washing hands, dressing, brushing teeth, using toilet paper, looking at the person addressing them and finding the local doctor. They are socially and vocationally adequate (at menial labor) given special training and supervision. Many are able to lead a relatively independent life. Real (if superficial and concrete) logic appears in this category. Conventional morality also begins to appear in this category, i.e. the good is whatever pleases significant others and the bad anything that displeases them. At this point or below the law begins to regard them as being too stupid to know the difference between right and wrong and won't hold them responsible should they commit a serious crime.
back to top

IQ 44 - 60
Limited support becomes essential and with extended special education a maximum of Grade four could be attained by age 18. Their social and communication skills are fair but there is little self-awareness. They can function vocationally in a sheltered workshop. They need supervision in their living arrangements and cannot live independently. Their thinking does not involve much in the way of logic. Their ethical thinking is pre-moral, i.e. involves conditioning, but there is the beginning of a quid pro quo sort of morality.
back to top

I am 100% positive (educated guess, but willing to bet) that Dr. Paul does not put much faith into something like an IQ test. The IQ test is designed to put people into boxes. Dumb/Smart/Average. Then, it is used assign people postions in their lives and limit their freedom. Indeed, Dr. Paul might appreciate the novelty of various tests, but would not take them seriously. On the other hand, schools and goverments take these tests very seriously and will limit individuals based on these tests.

For instance, you could take a group of kids in elementary school. You can say that, only kids of a certain IQ (some bull.t quotient that some official pr.ck came up with) can take Japanese language. Or, you can let all the kids take Japanese laguage and find that the most unsuspected kids (a.k.a, the dummies) do better than the supposed geniuses.

All I am saying is that Dr. Paul would not be a fan of such tests limiting peoples freedoms or potentials. After all, these tests will only end up being used for that purpose.

If I had to guess, I would say he is probably around 140 as 186 is huge and 200+ is astronomical. Dr. Paul is intelligent but with some of those numbers he would be a genius twice over.

Ludwig Von Misses Probably had a 160+/- and he founded and developed austrian economic theory - an evolution of Smith's free market. Von Mises's brother Theodore helped develop numerous science/math/engineering theories - he is famous in those areas and probably had only 160+/-.

Intelligence comes in so many forms. I have met brillant math professors who couldn't remember to put on a coat and boots in subzero temperatures. Einstein's wife often pinned notes on his jackets telling the conductor where to put him off the train, because his brain would be so filled with the physics of the universe that he would forget where he really was.

Dr. Paul has that rare and wonderful combination of great intelligence and common sense. It allows him to be a thinking and functioning human being. Add to that, he is a man of conscience, so unlike the typical D.C. sociopath and it is clear just how extraordinary a man he is. He certainly is worthy of being one of the founders of New America, a nation rebuilt on its original Constitution.

Pat

BOHICA!!

I like our odds. In the freedom category RP's IQ has got to be over 1,000. But the whole IQ stuff is bullshit imo. If you have a high IQ does it mean you can play the piano, be a ballet dancer, or write great novels? No. Does it mean you'll be successful in business? No. Does it mean your family knows you love them? No. So it's a bunch of BS so a group of people can separate themselves from other people and call it an improvement. It's just a very narrow type of test.

But yes, I am proud of him, too.