Yeah, I agree. I just think it’s an odd organization. I don’t know if I would qualify for Mensa, but given the dubious nature of intelligence testing… I don’t know what scoring high on a test does for anyone, personally. I’m sure I’m missing some bigger point about membership, and I don’t begrudge anyone for joining. But I can’t think of any group I belong to that has that criteria for membership… and absolutely nothing else.
I’m surrounded by allegedly “smart” people on a daily basis. Aside from being able to crack the occasional obscure joke and mention current events with the relative expectation that people watch the news and read the paper, I don’t see much difference between my students and faculty colleagues than the guys I play basketball with on Friday.
I wonder if somebody remembers all the “if you get an SAT score higher than XXXX you can get into any college in the country” nonsense that gets thrown at American high school juniors, and just extrapolated it to adult life.
But high school rules rarely apply out in the real world, and in this case they don’t even apply in high school
> Is the life expectancy of a genius any different?
>
> I can see troubled geniuses offing themselves in large numbers, or possibly
> drinking themselves to death.
>
> OTOH, might these be offset by the geniuses who know all there is to know
> about health and wellness, and take care of themselves properly and get all
> their health screenings, etc.?
What little relevant research I’ve been able to find on a quick online research says that higher intelligence clearly means longer life expectancy on average. Of course, you might mean something different if you’re limiting yourself to “geniuses.” By the usual definition that’s relevant to I.Q. tests, a genius is someone with a 160 I.Q. (which is the highest score possible on most I.Q. tests). I don’t know if there’s been any research on the life expectancy of people with an I.Q. of 160 or higher.
Speaking as the person who has had a GPA low enough to get a 34 on the ACT, and not be able to get a scholarship to a state school, and a 98 on the PCAT, and not be able to get INTO pharmacy school, I’d say that I appreciate this sentiment. :o
I’m not sure how this counts as “sour grapes.” One of the founding principles of the whole country is egalitarianism, and I’m a big believer in it. Just because people choose to segregate themselves from the rest of society based on artificial delineators doesn’t mean we have to respect them for it. So the problem with your attitude, IMO, is not that you deny that some people disapprove of Mensa, which you obviously know, but that you assume that their disapproval must stem from jealousy or “sour grapes.” That doesn’t follow. I don’t like Mensa for the same reason I don’t like sororities or the Junior League: It’s an exclusionary group, where exclusion is based on an essentially random line that is IMO artificial and ridiculous. Moreover, AFAICT, the activities on offer would not be interesting enough to hold my attention. Thus, I have both philosophical and personal reasons to say that I’m not a fan. That doesn’t mean I wish I were in it, or that I resent those who are.
IMO, anyone who wants to sit around with the group and do math games should be allowed to. Hard to read “sour grapes” into that, but knock yourself out.
Is some hostility toward Mensa sour grapes? Absolutely. But without polling a statistically reasonable subset of the people who dislike it, I don’t see how someone as theoretically intelligent as you (i.e., a member of Mensa) cannot grasp how incredibly arrogant it is to assume that most or nearly all of it is–or realize that such an attitude is a demonstration of a *perfect *non-sour-grapes reason for disliking Mensa.
Here’sa list of the things that are happening at this year’s convention. Anything interest you? Here are some samples:
What Makes a Good Science Fiction Story
mental_floss : Where Education and Entertainment Meet by a VP of the mag
Interdisciplinary Design in Games presented by The International Game Developers Association
Late Night Poker
Ways to Save Money at the Pharmacy
Eat, Drink, and Be Merry - Etymologies of Things We Eat and Drink Every Day
The Bucktails: Civil War Sharpshooters From Pennsylvania
Clean and Speed Up Your Computer
Your Parents are Getting Old! What You Should Know
Basic Origami or How To Make a Wish Come True
Twelve Times YOUR Lawyer May NOT be on YOUR Side!!
Vampires in Folklore and Fiction
CSI TV Programs - How true are they to the real world of Forensic Science?
An Introduction to Mandarin Chinese
The life of L. Frank Baum, Creator of The Wizard of Oz
The Prisoner --The Most Mysterious TV Show of All Time
Stupid Author Tricks: How to Keep Yourself from Getting Published
Experimental Aircraft - You Build It and Fly It
Why Populations Differ in IQ, Wealth, and Health
Metal Knitting: Chain Mail 101
A Holocaust Survivor Speaks
50 Years Behind the Microphone (and still Demented!) by Dr. Demento
Catch that last one? *Dr. Demento is our keynote speaker. * I feel that he will hold my attention.
Yeah, it’s the arbitrary aspect that I don’t like about it. I don’t care if the group is keeping people out because they’re not smart enough, not good-looking enough, not rich enough, not whatever. And whatever the cutoff is doesn’t really matter, because the problem is that the criteria doesn’t give me even a snippet of information as to whether they would be people I would want to hang out with, anyway. I’d much rather join a group with a common interest, hobby, that sort of thing. Any negative feeling I might have probably stems from the thought of someone assuming that one rather shallow aspect of existance, such as intelligence (as measured by IQ tests), beauty, or financial success is the best possible criteria they could use for choosing friends. There’s a lot of other dimensions on which to judge people, many of which, as far as I can see, are much more indicative of character.
(Also, it doesn’t make me feel any more positive towards the concept when you point out that it’s not so much that you have to be smart, but that you actually have to be the smartest/upper 2%.)
Well, I’ve found another reason to join Mensa – so I can come into threads like this and nonchalantly say “we” did this and “we” did that. and “we” are this or that…
Those do sound fun. But I have little confidence that a local meeting of my Mensa club would be nearly as interesting, and I think the topics at the national convention would be of interest to lots of people, so why the limit to the top 2% of intelligence? None of those topics look like they’d necessarily require vast resources of intelligence to grasp.
Also of note: top 2% of scorers on accepted intelligence tests. That subset does not necessarily correlate with the top 2% most intelligent people who took those tests.
No, an ordinary monthly meeting is not nearly so exciting; no one has the time to organize such a thing.
So what other group would be putting on such an event? The Masons? Nah. Fraternal Order of Police? Uh-uh. American Kennel Club? If not them, who? The fact is, I can’t think of any other organization that would.
If we put ads in the paper saying we were sponsoring a large-scale annual gathering with such a wide variety of fascinating things going on, 100% volunteer-run, all the food you could eat for 5 days for less than $100 registration fee, and had been doing it for decades, people would either think we were lying or totally overrun us. We’re always accepting new members, and guests and family of members are always welcome, but why do we limit it? Because people would kill us to get in.
Even if Mensa would deign to accept this thread as potential evidence, I still wouldn’t apply, since clearly I’m just afraid I woudn’t get in, which is why I dislike the organization. :rolleyes:
I completed a Mensa puzzle from a magazine and mailed it in, just for kicks. They sent me back a registration form and asked for $50. I knew for sure I was a genius when I threw out the form and kept my $50.
I don’t need a little wallet card to know I are smrt.
I looked into it once, and IIRC, would only had to qualify once. Somewhere there are some charts with with a list of standardized tests and the scores which were acceptable ctiteria for membership. I don’t recall which, but either my ACT or SAT score, taken 30+ years ago, were good enough.
My brains have been considerably addled since, by everything from LSD to pork rinds. I don’t think I could pass such a test anymore, but I don’t think I would need to. Perhaps one of our Mensans could step back in to answer this.
I’ve organized quite a few conferences, and I assume you either have sponsors or an exhibit hall to be able to do it for that little money. I’ve seen hotel and convention center prices lists for food.
The topics, while interesting, look like things that random members have expertise in, and are willing to talk about for an hour or two.
I can joining if you are desperate to talk to people who are odd and intelligent. Luckily I’m married to someone odd and intelligent, plus I get plenty of stimulation at work and in my technical activities. Maybe that is why I’ve never run into any Mensa chapters since high school - I’ve always hung around places where they were unnecessary.
My understanding is that your SATs from high school or your GREs from college would still be valid if you decided tomorrow that you wanted to get into Mensa, no matter how long ago you took those tests. Is this correct?
But I have little confidence that a local meeting of my Mensa club would be nearly as interesting, and I think the topics at the national convention would be of interest to lots of people, so why the limit to the top 2% of intelligence? None of those topics look like they’d necessarily require vast resources of intelligence to grasp.