Attorney, journalist, and Elon Musk biographer Seth Abramson eviscerated both Elon Musk and his ā€œfanboysā€ who have attempted to use the billionaireā€™s IQ as an indication of his intellectual prowess in a series of messages shared on X Thursday evening and into Friday.

  • LorindĆ³l@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    Ā·
    5 hours ago

    Iā€™ve never taken any preparatory courses for anything and Iā€™m not really good with mathematics, so no and no again.

    And why I put the quotation marks around good is a reflection of my native language, we do that when one wishes to express their personal disbelief or doubt. I am well aware that the ~140 score is considered a good one by the designers of the test.

    I served in the late 90ā€™s and there have been several refresher courses but Iā€™m not at the liberty to discuss any specifics of service matters publicly. If you have done military service you know this.

    • theUwUhugger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      Ā·
      3 hours ago

      IQ tests went out of fashion mid 80-ties and they were only ever required in the very very top universities! There is no military academy in the world where you would have been asked for one!

      140 is not a good a score! 140 is fucking legendary!!! Which would have been again explained to you if you ever achieved that, which again you would remember since its the equivalent of winning an olympic! But you donā€™t have a singular fucking clue what a 140 means on an IQ testā€¦ How very curiousā€¦

      Ones military service starts at the end of their training, then you will be required to put your oaths down! Your bulshitting couldnā€™t even be chalked up as a semblance of protecting your anonymity! Graduation lists of military establishments are not public and even if they were there are 70-200-ish cadets in every year!

      And soldiers can and do talk constantly about their service (ps thats how you can spot valor stealers on the internet, ppl like you :))! They are not allowed to talk of restricted info and missions! If you were a career secret sevice agent, you would not talk about being a soldier on the internet!

      Another thing that makes absolutely no sense are the refresher courses and is a quite stupid attempt of weaseling out of the question! Most manuals were written in the 60-ties and have yet to be updated! And if you received new equipment you would not be sent back to uni! You would be taken to a field to practice with it!

      Now tell me! Does your minsicular penis feel larger for lying and pretending to be a big man on the internet?

      • LorindĆ³l@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        Ā·
        16 minutes ago

        You are quick to leap to wild conclusions.

        The army test is taken by every conscript at the beginning of the mandatory military service. It is an aptitude/IQ test which had a lot of similiarities with the Mensa type test I took later. You need a high enough score to get into NCO or officer training. The ones who graduate from the officer training may apply to the military academy after their mandatory service is over.

        And like I clearly wrote in my original comment, the test I took later was a Mensa type test, using similar questions. It was a part of cognitive science or psychology departmentā€™s student thesis, not a Mensa test. I majored in educational psychology, so I do have some understanding of what IQ tests are. I got a high score in one and it resulted in absolutely nothing in my life.

        I have not claimed to be a career officer. I am a reserve officer, I did not wish to apply to the military academy, therefore the refresher courses. And even if my soldierā€™s oath would not prevent me from discussing service matters with aggressive strangers on the Internet, my common sense would.

        You are indeed a peculiar one. On my first comment I tried to validate the very point you made of IQ tests being poor indicators of true intelligence by sharing a personal experience (even though I know the fallacy of empiric experiences) on the matter. Yet you vehemently attacked my statement and accuse me of lying.

        Lastly, your opinion of me is irrelevant, only the truth is relevant. One would gain nothing from lying to strangers. Perhaps practising some restraint on your part would result in more fruitful and pleasant dialogue in the future?