54 Answers

  1. Very interesting! And yet, please allow me to disagree, both with the question itself and with your answer to it.

    1). The fact is that cheloek is not a planar shape. All people have different types of intelligence. Gardner identified nine types of intelligence:

    • naturalistic,
    • music channel,
    • logical and mathematical analysis,
    • linguistic and verbal analysis,
    • existential,
    • interpersonal,
    • intrapersonal,
    • body-kinesthetic
    • and visual-spatial.

    that is, it has 9 dimension vectors, of what you suggested and evaluate with one question. In fact, they also allocate:

    • emotional intelligence is the sum of a person's skills and abilities to recognize emotions, understand other people's intentions, motivations, and desires
    • agile intelligence reflects the speed with which we process information, how well we remember it, and how successfully we can find solutions to problems using logic and reasoning.
    • Crystallized intelligence, in turn, is based on the amount of life experience and knowledge that we have gained over the course of a lifetime. Just crystallized intelligence continues to grow into old age.

    Guided by banal logic, to identify twelve of its types, you will need 12 questions.

    2). And this will only reveal the presence of this or that intelligence. Level (in the “value” contest) – a quantitative characteristic that can only be identified by the user.:

    • the method of comparison with the standard (the street temperature is only a comparison with the temperature of the transition point of the aggregate state of water);
    • by the method of observation, by changing the indirect, that is, by the function-measuring the distance according to the linear velocity indicator.

    To compare it with the standard, we need to perform a representative study and get enough results to form a standard. But, since the human figure is not flat, the measure of its standard is both mathematical and complex.

    As for the function, it is necessary to understand what is observed in the response, should serve as a basis for believing, not only the presence of this in the respondent, but the value. This means that with the assumption that it is possible to measure the level of intelligence in this way, you need to request a formula, substituting variables in which you can see the resulting level.

    in general, to represent a formula or define a standard as a measure – the Nobel Prize for Intelligence! ))))

  2. One question is difficult, more or less the level of intelligence can be estimated by having dinner with a person) But if the level is measured by IQ tests, then try to ask directly: has your interlocutor ever measured his IQ using the Eysenck test? Or how does he feel about such tests?�

    From the answer, you will find out if he knows who Eysenck is, but the figure will give you a certain level: if the average indicator is 110-120, and the good one is 135-140, the maximum is 200, and below 70 is rarely found among thinking people, then you will have a field for reflection)

  3. You can draw an objective conclusion about the level of the other person by analyzing the form in which they express their thoughts:

    How consistently (i.e. logically)are the judgments related;

    * Are the statements themselves clearly formulated;

    * whether their speech is relevant, relevant (adequate) in the current situation, how well and quickly they understand information from you and other sources;

    * Can the same thing be explained in a different way, in other words;

    how diverse and expressive is speech in general, whether the vocabulary is rich, and whether phrases are constructed correctly;

    * does it see the place of a particular question in the larger picture, is interested in the reasons and details (i.e. analysis), and uses comparisons and analogies (i.e. synthesis)?;

    Whenever possible, he answers concisely and directly, and does not hesitate to admit the limitations of his knowledge, because he clearly understands the boundary between reliable and problematic.;

    distinguishes the main thing from the secondary, is able to focus on the essential.

    You will have to come up with a specific question or questions that you will use to check the interlocutor yourself, because they will depend on the specific communication situation. Keep in mind, however, that it will be quite easy to estimate differences in level for those who are intellectually lower than you, but you will only be able to estimate exactly how much higher you are for those who are higher than you.

    And always remember the main thing: these signs will help you figure out a person with good intelligence, but developed intelligence does NOT mean:

    o that the person is not wrong in this particular issue;

    – that he really knows the subject he is judging well (although this can also be clarified with similar questions);

    that he has good intentions and is not trying to deceive you.

  4. Yes, however, you can always determine the level of human development with general questions:
    “What are you interested in?”
    “What do you want?”
    – What is the most important thing in life?
    “What's the point?”
    It is rather not the level of intelligence that is revealed, but the level of maturity, development, morality, wisdom and originality, in other words, what more objectively shows the level of real intelligence, rather than a certain erudition or reading that allows you to use template phrases to answer tricky test questions, but people often perceive general questions about life as something personal and therefore answer them honestly.

  5. Most likely , there can be no single and universal question. Simply because it is impossible to evaluate such a complex and multifaceted property as intelligence based on the answer to a single question.

    It is much easier to determine the lack of intelligence.Here it is often enough to get only one single answer to a question that requires the possession of intelligence.

    And the number of such questions is innumerable. It is precisely because of the versatility of the concept of intelligence.


  6. In some Soviet film, there is a scene where the heroine asks the interlocutor if he has read Chingiz Aitmatov's novel “The Block” and from the negative answer concludes that the comrade is not too smart. In all seriousness. I'm more reminded of an old joke about a professor who asks a redneck student at an institute if he knows Marx and Engels and says that there is nothing else to talk about. To which the applicant asks a counter question: does he know Fedka Ryzhy and Vaska Kosoy? And so the professor did not know them, he was surprised: Why then do you frighten them with your own?�

    Such questions speak more objectively about intelligence, although options are possible.

  7. YOU CAN choose two questions so that –

    1) The first question / answer shows a high level of intelligence.

    2) The second question / answer shows a low level of intelligence.

    The reason for this is that everyone has both strengths and weaknesses. Everything is very good To Know, To Be Able, To Understand is impossible.

  8. The only one? Highly questionable. Or rather, it doesn't exist. Since the concept of “intellectual level” is extremely vague and does not have at least some boundaries. You can specify the amount of knowledge, you can talk about the depth of knowledge. You can even use dialogues and some tests to find out the presence of intelligence as such (in other words, to find out whether the interlocutor is a fool/idiot/moron in the medical sense), but you can not identify the intellectual level. Especially with one question.

    You may ask why? I'm responding. All these IQ tests help to identify a person with strong logic, but not smart. No offense taken. Do you consider yourself a smart person? For sure! You can quote this, that, calculate one, the other, and so on. Just like me and many others. Good. Now use your wits to get on a raft somewhere in the Pacific Ocean. Okay, you're not the only one on it. And tell me in which direction and how far to swim to the shore, whether it is large, whether there is vegetation there, what else? Alas! And I can't. But some Polynesians, to whom the name Pushkin does not mean anything, and who do not solve a simple problem, will be able to. Here we are intellectuals and giants of thought, and there we are dumber than a felt boot. That's the whole price of an intelligent level. Here is an opportunity to determine this level. One, well, not a question, but a test.

  9. I think you need to ask any question that can't be answered immediately, but you need time to think.

    A smart person should answer “I need to think” and take time to think.

    Because a smart person is used to doing just that: if he doesn't know the answer to a question, then he will start moving his brain to find this answer with the help of intelligence.

    And stupid people are too lazy to think and the option of “taking time to think” is not even considered by them. They refuse to answer, saying “I'm too lazy,” “I'm not interested,” or just start pointing at the sky and sorting through the answers, trying to guess. Also, stupid people usually do not understand the difference between logical riddles in a joking form and ridiculous riddles with stupid answers, they simply do not see the difference.

    An illustrative case of one journalist: he condemned the problem in which the old lady Shapoklyak diluted alcohol with water) The point was that Shapoklyak sold Cheburashka 50% of the contents of the barrel, and then refilled the water to the top and again sold 50% and so on several times (a problem that has a strict mathematical solution), it was necessary to find out what degree remained in the barrel. The journalist first began to guess that the correct answer would be “you can't sell alcohol” or “you can't sell alcohol to children” or “Cheburashka doesn't need alcohol”. As a result, I compared the problem about Shapoklyak with the problem about “Two crocodiles are flying, one to the south, the second is green”. The journalist has a complete inability to see logical connections, as well as an unwillingness or inability to look at the problem from different angles.

  10. Tell us what you don't know but would like to know.

    The answer will delineate the boundary of the unknown, by which you can judge the scope and scope of a person's existing knowledge, as well as his ambitions and even the way of thinking-abstract/concrete.

  11. By the way, the level of intelligence is often compared with education and well-read, and they rely on knowledge of the environment in which they are located. But if, roughly speaking, many people who make such a comparison are approached by an indigenous person from Africa and start asking them questions about their culture, how many of them will be able to answer these questions? So if they didn't know the answers, then he had a right to think they were stupid.

  12. There are quite a lot of such questions. The oldest of them is the legendary question of the Sphinx:
    – Answer me, will I eat you? If you tell the truth, you'll still be alive.
    There was a quick-witted fellow who gave the right answer, and the Sphinx drowned himself in grief.
    In our time of universal tolerance and tolerance 🙂 it is indecent to ask a person such difficult questions. So make it easier. With an innocent look at the interlocutor, thoughtfully say:
    “Interesting… Have Americans ever been to the moon?
    🙂 🙂 🙂

  13. There are a lot of scientific studies on this topic�

    If you think that the Americans were not on the moon, antivirus software manufacturers produce viruses themselves, oil corporations block the development of alternative energy, and so on.GMO causes infertility, then it is quite possible that you have a difficult life and a high level of stress and low level of intelligence. The authors believe that it is precisely because of stress that a person becomes susceptible to suggestion: “Stressful situations impair the ability to think analytically. If a person experiences a stressful event in their life, then they are more likely to have a certain type of thinking, for example, to recognize certain patterns and connections [between events] that do not exist. Therefore, stressful events can sometimes contribute to conspiracy thinking.” Previous studies have found correlations with a number of other factors, including reduced intelligence, certain political views ,low self-esteem, and feelings of helplessness. That is, there is a whole set of psychological factors. Denial or even doubt about the moon landing, for example , is a sign of such thinking . Ask those who doubt the lunar program what they think about building pyramids. I guarantee you with a 95% chance that these people will tell you about aliens or the Atlantean civilization or whatever, instead of admitting that a simple Egyptian in a reed bandage with a copper kyle in his hands was capable of such an incredible construction. It's not a question of technology, it's a question of attitude, because each of us looks at others through the prism of ourselves. Faith in the Gods. Similarly, various studies show that people who rely more on intuition tend to be more religious, while people with advanced analytical, deductive, and more rational thinking tend to be less religious if they don't believe in conspiracy theories.

  14. No.

    You don't think that dozens of tests to check the level of intelligence people out of boredom came up with?

    When you try to assess the level of intelligence of another person by ear or eye, you first encounter your own limitations.

    Can, and to what extent can, someone who has only heard of the sea appreciate someone who has crossed it?

    Some behavioral signs, such as eloquence or a thoughtful look, can also not be evaluated.

    Excessive eloquence often shows a high level of self-conceit, an attempt to bring fog and confuse the interlocutor, or a passion for this business itself.

    Objectively, you can check the level of knowledge in a particular field. In the event that you yourself are well versed in the topic, and the interlocutor is interested in answering.

  15. Intelligence, in a way , is the ability to reason. This thesis leads to my favorite question: what color is the void? Transparent is not a color. Please answer for yourself. The first thing that comes to mind is white. This is what the filmmakers taught us. But if you start to reason, it turns out that the void is black (proof through black holes, the center of which has such a strong attraction that it does not release even light. Therefore, its center for our perception is the void, the real black void). Try.

  16. So many people don't like being asked questions. T's don't respond sometimes in a rough way. Unless, of course, you are an NKVD investigator. And there is an old wonderful aphorism about a fool who can confuse ten wise men with a question that explores the intellect

  17. To determine how fast a person thinks and how creatively developed they are, you need to ask them to find a rhyme for the word passport. This can only be done immediately by those who have either already encountered this issue, or those who are really gifted and developed – no more than 10% of such people.

  18. When answering the question “What is the meaning of human life?” you can find out in detail the style and content(depth), and the capacity of the other person's thinking by how much their answer will differ from the correct answer.

    The correct answer is: “Learn for yourself and teach others. Help and ask for help if necessary. Don't contradict the Lord.”

  19. Oh, I consider such a question: “How much did your school knowledge help you?”. And those who have real knowledge, after reflection, report that one hundred percent of everything that was learned during school years (mathematics, history, biology, etc.) is used in life in one way or another to understand this very life and interact with the world around it. But those who do not even have basic knowledge begin to sing that school knowledge is not needed in figs, has never been used by them and in general. And the higher a person estimates this percentage (for example, 40% came in handy, 60% of what they learned), the broader they have a broad outlook and the more fundamental knowledge they eventually received. Because we begin to become aware of knowledge by using it. When we refer to historical dates, when we use the Pythagorean theorem to estimate some size, when we understand that water in compote does not change its chemical formula, and so on ad infinitum.

  20. No. Because the other person can't give an objective assessment. His opinion will always have a touch of subjectivity. There are many types of intelligence, which one do you want to evaluate? What does “objectively” mean to you?

  21. Ask just one question: “How do you spend your free time?” You can easily tell by the answer how intelligent the other person is. For example, if your interlocutor says that he reads a lot of scientific literature, watches a lot of videos on scientific topics, is very interested in the world around him, and tries in one way or another to understand how something works in this world, then he may be a knowledgeable person, and most importantly-thinking, and the ability to think is the most obvious sign of high intelligence. It is not possible to have high intelligence if you do not ask questions and do not look for answers to them! If a person with not very high or standard intelligence, then he is likely to say that he spends his free time just playing something, reading some romance novels, or playing mischief in the company of friends or alone. If a person is, so to speak, a fool, then all his pastime will consist in drinking alcoholic beverages, using drugs, giving pleasure – he is either not capable of more, or is disappointed in everything that surrounds him.

  22. No matter how much we evaluate the answer, we can't be completely sure that we understood it correctly at all. After all, the respondent's intelligence may be significantly higher than ours.

  23. From what I saw above, I think the guys were wrong. No question about any preferences and so on, like the answer to this question, can be perceived objectively, only subjectively. Accordingly, it is also impossible to judge objectively, you can only judge in relation to the value system you have adopted and the information you know. So I believe that there is no such question a priori.

  24. Happiness.

    If I had heard this thought before, I would have said that this is bullshit, and the level of happiness in general has nothing to do with intelligence. I would probably even say that a smart person is so busy and not fun at all, and there is rather a negative correlation. This is a widespread stereotype in society that smart people are sad people.

    I fell victim to this misconception partly because of another misconception: I believed that a happy person is immediately visible. I thought he was glowing, laughing, smiling, skipping along. And comparing this portrait of a happy person drawn by society with smart people, I said to myself: �”no happiness detected”.

    I had no doubt that intelligent people are unhappy or something, that they suffer every day realizing the futility of being. What a discovery it was for me to understand that the truth is exactly the opposite, to understand that a smart person is first of all a happy person.

    First, because he's smart. Smart people generally live easier, they see their shortcomings, they recognize them. They see problems that others do not see, both in some external systems and in themselves; and they are easier and faster to solve them, or prevent them. They are better able to understand new concepts, and they are better able to navigate them. Stupid people suffer from their own stupidity: they pass exams worse, make more mistakes at work, and generally perform strategically less profitable actions.

    Well, the smarter a person is, the better his chances of realizing and calmly accepting one thing: his life is nothing, he is finite. And after that, some complex magic happens and a smart person becomes a happy person. He's just enjoying himself.

    Such a person can work as a janitor for food and be happy, a stupid person can plow for 16 hours a day, suffer from chronic lack of sleep and stress, and all for the sake of one goal: to get their cherished happiness. A smart person understands that happiness is not somewhere out there, it is right here. Life itself.

    Although, of course, the income of such people is not bad, because it is better to eat sweets than poop. But if a smart person suddenly finds himself somewhere at the bottom of the social ladder or some other misfortune has occurred, he will not suffer, or his suffering will not be in the same form at all. Because he's not an idiot. His life is nothing. He's enjoying himself. In thequestion, this means:

    Enjoy The Journey

    Well, I think the question should be in the style of ” do you enjoy life/are you happy to live?”. If the answer is yes, then either you have a smart person, or a sectarian, or a liar. Ahaha. Well, this can be determined by analysis! It's just that idiots look like idiots. For example, I can see it.

  25. I've thought about it many times. It is best to ask questions on topics that are not usually studied by a person from third-party sources. I want to point out that I'm talking specifically about logical thinking. You also need to get a fully reasoned response. To do this, you will have to ask a number of questions. Topics of philosophy, the supernatural, faith, and various beliefs are well suited.�

    For example:

    -You believe in horoscopes/divination/God/omens/reincarnation…

    If the person says ” yes ” then:

    “Why not?” What exactly does your answer imply,…, why so?

    Answers like: “so they say” – indicate that the person leads a low-profile lifestyle. Therefore, we can conclude that the level of logical thinking is low.�

    If the person says “no”, ask them to also argue.�

    If it didn't give the right result, ask what is the meaning of life and go into a discussion.�

    Conclusion: One question will not give an accurate idea of the level of intelligence. And you need to be able to identify logical errors yourself.

  26. What are you thinking about? 🙂 I would try asking this one. And I looked at the reaction, which will show both the degree of sincerity, and the degree of inner comfort, and, perhaps, well-read

  27. Yes, it couldn't be simpler:

    Tell me, what are you reading now?

    And the needs, cultural level, and intelligence are immediately clear. At least approximately forming an opinion about a person is excellent. Provided that you yourself have enough knowledge, intelligence and horizons.

  28. “There are �two chairs…”
    “With a fork in the eye, or in… “
    ” Forest and ocean…”
    There are no such questions – a person's intellectual level is assessed based on subjective views.

  29. I think we should ask him if he is a supporter of this or that pseudoscientific version. And the more questions, the better. It is also necessary to take into account how he will say about it.

  30. Sure. For example. Can God create a stone that he can't lift himself ? Try to answer this question yourself. It is interesting to read the answers. Go for it.

  31. You can ask a person if they like Russian comedies (I don't mean all of them, but the vast majority, like “Women against Men”, “Fast Moscow-Russia” and so on). If the answer is yes, then draw the appropriate conclusions.

  32. I may be wrong, but I determine the level of intelligence ( not exact, of course) based on the interlocutor's story about what they are most interested in. You can roughly understand the way of thinking (concrete, abstract), ambitions, confidence, by building sentences and speech, you can assume that a person thinks for himself or only borrows other people's thoughts and ideas(of course, if you understand the topic at least a little), and so on

  33. Of course, there are such questions and there are quite a lot of them. One of the most suitable options for such a question is given in the title. If your opponent says yes, you're a moron…

  34. Which is greater than 0.5 or one second.

    It will help you immediately see how fast a person thinks and operates with their brain. Yes, and the question itself with humor that is not allowed to make the situation stupid.

  35. Just ask if the Americans were on the moon. If he starts foaming at the mouth to prove that they were not, to talk nonsense about the waving flag, etc. – then he is a finished moron.

  36. I once created a survey on my social network, whether you believe more in creationism or Darwinism. Evolution won the poll by a narrow margin. But even for a small number of respondents, I drew conclusions. The first ones are supposedly believers, I don't know about all of them, but I know for sure about the rest of my friends that they didn't read the Bible or biology (we don't take school knowledge into account), the second ones (mostly guys)- they did not answer, thus showing that either they never thought about it, or they believe in the third theory (which is unlikely, since such people wrote to me in a personal account) and the third-they agree with Darwinism, people in life are ambiguous, difficult, but interesting and argue far from patterns and stereotypes. This is a very subjective statistic, but it provided food for thought. In a conversation about evolution, you can draw certain conclusions about a person. Of course, this isn't a basic question or a first date question, but the answer will never be simple or meaningless.

  37. “What kind of music do you listen to?”, ” What is important to you in people?”, or any other question related to setting priorities. �You can try to discuss politics with them (or whatever you want) and follow the movements of the slider on the “Fanaticism” scale. Something like that.

  38. well, for starters, there are different types of intelligence �maybe you should use a question from the sphere of your interests=) �if you like music, ask about musical tastes �if sports are about sports

  39. No it doesn't exist. Rather, it is determined by tests . Yes, everyone's ability to think is different basic tests that calculate your digital potential, for example, on Lumosity LPI or BPI, They determine speed, memory, reaction, flexibility. But first of all, it is not always immediately possible to understand the yoke. If there are games for vocabulary, then I have less vocabulary in Angi than in Russian , and even less in other languages. In principle, tsts determine the speed of neurons at the moment, and not what the brain is really filled with. The brain needs to be razvmvat otherwise it becomes stupid . 716 LPI is not an idotka, of course, but it's a long way from genius. previously, about seven years ago it was 150, but “religion and asceticism” did their job). If you want to learn the potential abilities of your partner at the first glance, look at your hands , the mobility of your fingers, as well as your tongue, may depend on the development of the cerebral cortex.. Everything else depends on what it is filled with.)

  40. Exists. I call it the “chaverman-army test”. It shows all aspects of the personality of a stranger of any gender.

    1 “Does a man in the Russian Federation need to serve in the army”?

    2 “Is it healthy to eat shaverma”?

    The answers to these questions show almost the full socio-cultural level of a person, the ability to understand life around them, be responsible for their words, the pattern of thinking, the ability to eat independently, and so on.

    I do not know any questions that would tell you more about a person from scratch.

  41. I think that objectively it is hardly possible, but there is one funny and simple question that I asked my friends, acquaintances of friends and ordinary passers-by. It turns out that the harsh realities of Russian reality are as follows: 48 people out of 53 consider the North star to be the closest star to earth.

    Param, param, pam.

  42. The other day, after a small near-intellectual conversation with a friend near the bar (smoke break), we decided to continue the conversation at the table, where the wildest embarrassment almost came out.�

    The essence of the dispute was relatively uncomplicated – my interlocutor is inclined to believe that the HIV virus does not exist, at least none of the scientists managed to “grab” it – I opposed the fact that this is almost the most studied biological substance on the planet (according to some biologists), and there are even photos of the virus entering a living cell and a large number of experiments related to RNA.

    So, it turned out that it is not always possible to continue this conversation in a bar with ease, because one of those who was sitting at our table ran away from us in horror, then came back to yell at us, then demanded answers “why did we start this argument in the first place”, and eventually left us in anger at all (okay, I didn't start a fight).

    In general, who as above discusses intellectual issues, someone mixes tolerance, someone talks about the level of IQ, attribute different levels of intelligence for “krymnashest or vashest”, but sometimes the conflict can break out of the blue, without even having time to start.�

    So be careful, my smart ones. It is not always and everywhere worth demonstrating your commitment to the social group “Intellectuals”. In some places, they can beat you up just for having glasses, in general.

  43. First, we need to determine what exactly we want to know about a person. How much a person knows is erudition, well-read, that is, how much information is stored in his long-term memory. The mind is not about storing information, but about processing it – the ability to reason, draw conclusions and conclusions, and build logical chains.
    You can know all the classics by heart and be an incredibly cultured person, but in practice you can be a complete oaf and idiot. Or you may not have a deep knowledge of something, but be able to think and draw logical conclusions using even a small amount of initial information.

    Therefore, to test the mind, you need a question, the answer to which does not require specific knowledge in any field, but requires a conclusion based on publicly available information about the reality around us. In other words, the question should test not so much a person's knowledge, but rather their opinion and how they form it. Therefore, it is most convenient to ask about things about which there are several points of view.

    For example, you can ask how a person feels about LGBT people. The answer to this question does not tell us anything about the mind of a person, since attitude is a personal matter for everyone. But this question will allow you to ask another question – why is it so relevant? And here it is necessary to follow the course of his thoughts.
    If a person comes out on shit, and begins to operate with such arguments as” this is not natural”,” this is sodomy”,” this corrupts children ” and bases his opinion precisely on hatred, under which he tries to adjust unreliable facts – well, here we can safely talk about low-mindedness.
    If a person creates his own conclusion based on actual reliable information and real reality, then perhaps the person is still smart.

    In general, irrational hatred is always a sign of a poor mind. Not that all good people are smart, but smart people are often still kind.

    Again, the question doesn't have to be about LGBT people. You can ask something similar about, for example, politics or society. The main thing is to be able to observe the course of a person's thoughts, and not whether they know something or not.

  44. The basis of intelligence is long-term memory (the dry residue of education) and logic. This is if we talk about the intelligence that is measured by the generally accepted IQ scale (and not emotional, musical, etc.). Accordingly, it is worth asking a question-task for logic and listening to reasoning (IQ tests consist of this). You don't have to be afraid to ask questions for interviews in Google, you can also come up with them yourself. The main thing is that the questioner himself has enough intelligence to check others )))

  45. See Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligence.

    1) Verbal intelligence — the ability to generate speech, including mechanisms responsible for phonetic (speech sounds), syntactic (grammar), semantic (meaning) and pragmatic components of speech (use of speech in various situations).

    2) Musical intelligence — the ability to generate, transmit and understand the meanings associated with sounds, including the mechanisms responsible for the perception of pitch, rhythm and timbre (quality characteristics) of sound.

    3) Logical and mathematical intelligence — the ability to use and evaluate relationships between actions or objects when they are not actually present, i.e. to abstract thinking.

    4) Spatial intelligence — the ability to perceive visual and spatial information, modify it and recreate visual images without resorting to the original stimuli. Includes the ability to construct images in three dimensions, as well as mentally move and rotate these images.

    5) Body-kinesthetic intelligence — the ability to use all parts of the body when solving problems or creating products; includes control over coarse and fine motor movements and the ability to manipulate external objects.

    6) Intrapersonal intelligence — the ability to recognize your own feelings, intentions, and motivations.

    7) Interpersonal intelligence — the ability to recognize and distinguish between other people's feelings, views, and intentions.

    I, of course, do not recognize all of these points, but you understand the essence – there are many types of intelligence, as well as authoritative theories about these types, not to mention the subjective opinions of different people. Everyone is smart in their own way. I know an elderly electrician who is as poor as a boatman, and his knowledge of prose, theater, and poetry is simply second to none, and he is also good at history, although his education would seem to be technical. I like to say, “He's good in this area,” or “in his own way,” but I can't say anything about intelligence, because I don't know the units of measurement. You can, in principle, come up with your own question for each of the seven templates above, or to your own. Sorry for the scope. And don't be silly.

  46. Yes, there is such a question. More precisely, not one, but two of them, the second follows from the first.

    The question is: “Are you a sucker or a prankster?” The answer “sucker” has no continuation. The answer “joker” is followed by the second question: “Did you suck your dick?” The “prankster” should answer that he sucked, because he is a prankster.�

    A great way to test your intelligence level. If you are asked such questions, then the questioner is a moron. If you answer such questions by giving in to provocation, then you are also a moron. If you believe that there is a question, the answer to which objectively (!) shows the intellectual level of the interlocutor, then you … �

    Well, you know who.

  47. Why do you think you can assess how smart or stupid another person is?

    (You can also rate this question as an answer to your question.)

  48. I would ask, ” What's your IQ?” Although scientists say that these tests do not quite correctly reflect the level of human intelligence, but you can try it.

  49. “What would you say about yourself to a stranger who is pleasant, interesting and attractive, according to your taste preferences, without having any information about the person of the interlocutor?”

    The answer to this question will not show wit, and will not show the level of knowledge. But it will show how a person sees himself, and what is important to him. Based on this, we can draw conclusions.

  50. Offhand, the simplest one: “Do you believe in horoscopes?”

    Fast, simple, unobtrusive, and perfectly filters out most of it from the very beginning. You can apply it in any conversation.

  51. How many stars are there in the solar system? When I hear “billions”or” millions ” in response, I simply say that one star named the Sun. Oddly enough, the level of intelligence approximately shows

  52. This question is just that. It is impossible to make even a very approximate image of a person from one answer, and the question does not matter.�

    In addition, intelligence is generally a relative concept, depending on the environment, time, scope of the question, and in general everything.�

    And we still do not take into account personal qualities, such as closeness, the desire to appear smart…�

    In general, it's like a bullet and a gun, in practice there are too many variables

  53. Unlikely. Mainly for the reason that “intelligence level” is not some kind of value on a linear scale. There are many different aspects of intelligence that are weakly dependent on each other and cannot be evaluated in droves (many cannot be evaluated “objectively” at all, by the way).

    You may notice, for example, that each of the previous answers contained a way to evaluate one aspect of intelligence: outlook (statistically most valuable for users in this question, judging by the pros), erudition (the respondent poorly formulated and picked up the cons, but in principle erudition can also serve as a way to evaluate intelligence, in a private way, of course) and, I would call it, “ethos” (an even more ambiguous parameter, rather an assessment of “intelligence” in some private sense than intelligence, but we understand, on the other hand, that the man who says “all niggers – monkeys”, “beats means loves” or something similar, also to some extent characterizes your intelligence).

    Intelligence is not limited to these, so to speak, facets – you can evaluate wit, quick thinking, mindset, cunning, unconventional thinking, and much more. All this will to some extent characterize the intellectual level, but it is unlikely that it will be possible to fit the assessment of all parameters into one question.

  54. With an accuracy of one, you will not recognize its IQ, but you can conduct a kind of adequacy test.

    How can I check whether a person is adequate or not? Often, it is easy to do this with the help of provocation. For example, ask a person how they feel about sex minorities. To the current political situation. How does he feel about people who listen to some genre of music that this person does not like at all? This list goes on and on, and whatever you think of, just ask.

    The response to such questions often shows the level of adequacy of a person, which often correlates with the level of intellectual development.

Leave a Reply