Yes, I was trying to decide whether that post is genuine trolling or just comical ignorance.
To be fair to PhDs, every day on CNBC & BBG you have regular finance BSDs overstepping their bounds and saying stupid crap. I cant count how many times Ichan acts like an expert on something he clearly isnt. Being a billionaire also doesnt make you an expert at everything.
it depends on what kind of PhD. i believe i read somewhere in the past year or so that social sciences and biology PhDs have an average IQ of ~120, hard science, business, economics and engineering have an average IQ of ~130 and advanced PhDs (e.g. theoretical physics, specialized sciences, mathematics) have an average IQ of ~140. the average is somewhere near 130 for all PhDs. this is an average so there are definitely some in the 105-120 range, particularly in the softer and social sciences.
i’m around the 130 mark and i think most PhDs are idiots, mostly due to their limited knowledge base. then you get one guy who is on another planet in terms of intelligence and you feel like a 3 year old. i work beside a theoretical physics thinktank so there are a good number of these superstars around.
So the claim that you _ need _ an IQ _ above _ 135-145 is balderdash.
I should have said so.
I saw this and my first reaction was “The rest of this post is going to to be garbage.” Not because the numbers don’t necessarily agree, but because the interpretation of those numbers is God-awful.
Just like the CFA, you are going to need at least above average intelligence in general thinking skills in order to get into and through the program, but you don’t really need an extreme IQ.
What you need a basic level of intelligence not unlike what doctors and lawyers and financial types have, and then you need enough stamina and grit and dedication to the field to make it through the process. The people that get weeded out tend not to be substantially less intelligent, but the ones who discover that they don’t have enough interest in the topic (or that the topic wasn’t as interesting as they initially thought) to get through the lonely process of writing a dissertation while earning next to nothing.
Yes, at the best universities, you are competing with other hyper-intelligent people, and so to stand out, you need to be competitive with them, and that means that if you have a lower IQ, it will be harder for you to get in to a good program, but if you could magically get past the admissions process, you don’t really need massive amounts of intelligence. Mostly you need dedication and grit. Plus, there are lower-tier programs that are less competitive and will still give you a Ph.D.
That said, some things like mathematics and physics, you either have mathematical abilities up to snuff or you don’t. Given that mathematics is often used as a measure of intelligence, that could mean that those disciplines show up with higher IQ scores, but you can be a math genius that is an idiot about pretty much everything else. And I’ve met some of them.
It’s also true that people with high IQs are encouraged to become academics more than those with low IQs. But there are plenty of PhDs that are only somewhat above-average intelligence, but extremely knowledgeable and capable within their field. That’s really all that’s required.
That said, the exposure and constant discussion with other smart people does tend to push people’s IQs further and further up over time simply through exposure and brain exercise. So the causal relationship of what’s required to be able to get a PhD vs what happens as a byproduct of doing the program needs to be teased out.
haha. i quoted you but really was aiming my response to mr. above 135.
and this would go down as the most boring study in study history.
I think there are probably more boring articles. “Phenomenological explanations of TAS3R gene expression in e-coli: a neo-feminist perspective” seems worse.
questionable… i’m sincerely curious about a neo-feminist perspective on that topic.
Ah cr@p! Now I have to go write that article.
^Please post and make it a sticky.
Phenomenological explanations of TAS3R gene expression in e-coli: a neo-feminist perspective
Abstract : Metaresearch on the TAS3R gene shows a conspicuous absence of testing for differences of broccoliphobia in male and female subjects. This has long been an issue in medical research more broadly and has implications for gender relations because broccoli tastes like complete sh!t to those with the TAS3R gene, thus exposing both men and women to negative utility accumulation. We suggest that women with TAS3R gene are advised to eat the devil-weed more frequently than men because nutritionists are afraid to challenge men because of historically constructed power relations known more commonly as privilege. By inserting the gene into e-Coli, a bacteria for which male and female have no meaning because the bacteria reproduce by asexual division, we examine the expression of the TAS3R gene in a true gender-neutral context after being sprayed onto randomized supermarket broccoli in a double-blind test. Results show that only men and women without the TAS3R gene actually eat the broccoli and that they die in approximately equal numbers, but only after controlling for the fact that women are smart enough to go to the doctor as soon as they get symptoms, while the men pretend that nothing is wrong until they drop dead in front of the playstation, oozing liquefied faeces from every orifice. Results for those with the TAS3R gene are inconclusive and require an additional $5MM in grant research funds to deepen our understanding of this urgent public health threat to women.
Are you sure that $5MM will be enough?
Also, “bacteria” is a plural; I believe that you meant “bacterium”.
Granting organizations can be sticklers.
Bacteria is used here as a collective unit. A bit like talking about “a people” and their value system. 
Edit: I did see where I accidentally used “bacteria reproduces” instead of “bacteria reproduce”. Thanks for the helpful peer-review!
and you call yourself a phenomenologist… for shame.
Had never heard of phenomenology and had no idea what it was. Looked it up and read about it for 15 minutes, and still have no idea what it is.
Do the Most people who are disagreeing with what I said actually have a PhD ?
Source:
I am a Phd student myself.
S2000 has done more without a PhD than most people with them could hope to accomplish in their life. I would also imagine he has the brains to get one if he really wanted to. I know quite a few people with PhDs that I wouldnt consider to be highly intelligent human beings, they were just good at their specialty and the biggest thing I think most PhDs have is drive. It can be very demanding and depressing at times from what I hear, takes a lot of dedication to see it through.
What did you study in school ?
Does that mean you have a minimum of 135-145 and had some books around the house when you were a kid?
I certainly can’t tell by the contents of anything you’ve posted up to now. It is possible, however, that you may be a math wiz of some kind, so the intelligence doesn’t show up when you write.