I'm going to agree with this. There's usually a pretty strong correlation between being, 'Book smart,' and having a high IQ, but the two aren't the same thing.
For example, many of the spatial/perception logic questions that you'll find on an IQ test; they don't teach those in a book; at least, not any book we were presented in school. I remember one in particular where you had to select the picture that didn't belong, but in order to do that, you had to mentally rotate all of the pictures so that a particular part of the picture was either at the very top or very bottom (it either wouldn't have worked if it had been the sides, or it would have been much harder for me, at least)...once you had the correct part of the picture on top, then you had to see how the other objects in the picture related to the part that you now have mentally put on top for all of the pictures. Ultimately, what you ended up with is that most of the little objects in the bigger pictures related the same, except one of the ones had a diagonal aspect that was going the wrong way compared to the others.
Again, they don't teach that in a book! I just remember that one because I ended up getting it right and it was the one that I spent the most time on. I think there was one other similar visual one for which I couldn't figure out the gimmick, so I just guessed. Maybe I somehow guessed that one (it was one of the few multiple choice) right and got 2-5 undeserved IQ points.
That said, I couldn't count cards because I find Blackjack boring as hell and, quite simply, absolutely would not have the patience to do that. I'd rather sit at a machine and smash buttons waiting on a must-hit to pop because I can at least read something on my phone with my opposite hand.





Reply With Quote