With all due respect, the "huge difference" is a matter of opinion. Both are characteristics largely based on genetics.
We have a difference of opinions when it comes to whether it's about "being offended" or not. Granted, English is not my native language, so I may miss some of the nuances. Still, if people feel differently about one feature characterizing a person compared to another, then there is a reason for those feelings. Perhaps "feelings of inferiority" is a better expression. It's a rather common reaction since cross-culturally humans tend to be intimidated by very intelligent individuals.
We do agree on the importance of valid argumentation.
When the poster ("Suckafree") mentioned his alleged IQ, he was replying to the original post about head shapes and skull sizes (bigger, heavier etc.) and his answer should be read in that context. Since you said you are studying for the 2nd BA, I can assume that you don't have a Ph.D. in psychology, and therefore should perhaps refrain from making psychological evaluations (or worse, statements) about people's motives. There are MANY different ways to interpret Suckafree's message and "seeking validation" is not the only one. It's the one that you choose.
"Pretentious" is a subjective value, thus it's a non-argument. You are free to feel that something fulfills the criteria for it in your perception, but it might be wise to remember, that an opinion is still just an opinion and probably doesn't reflect reality from another person's point of view.
My point was that I don’t know Suckafree, nor can I comment on his head size. I do, however, possess the ability to research the head size of a public figure who has a high IQ.
Can you not see that a random individual claiming a high IQ in this way comes across as pretentious? He adds nothing by using himself as a point of comparison as none of us can verify his claim.
As to your comment on my studies. I don’t want a PHD because I don’t intend to work in academia. I will get a masters at some point, but I wanted to expand my understanding before I did that.
"Can you not see that a random individual claiming a high IQ in this way comes across as pretentious?"
Yes, some people would interpret it like that. I tried to explain to you, that it's a matter of personal interpretation, which is a choice. Not an objective truth. There are multiple reasons why we interpret things the way we do. In our personal, subjective way.
As to your studies, I respect you for the fact that you are willing to educate yourself.
My point was related to the idea of "let's not try to make psychological profiling when we're not qualified to do so, have not met the person in question, and have not studied his/her personality. And even if we were/had, we should be careful and understand that we can be wrong in our opinions."
Perhaps pretentious was not the right word. My main point is that we aren’t able to do anything with the information he provided at face value.
This is a research forum at its core and in order to verify his claim we would need more. This doesn’t mean I doubt his claim, or that what he says is false, just that it adds nothing to use himself as an ‘exhibit’ in the argument and makes him ‘come across’ as pretentious in the attempt.
He would be better served to use well known examples like Einstein as evidence of the point he was making. We could verify his point with a cursory search and his point would stand. However, as a result of his unverifiable example, his point was missed entirely.
With all due respect, the "huge difference" is a matter of opinion. Both are characteristics largely based on genetics.
We have a difference of opinions when it comes to whether it's about "being offended" or not. Granted, English is not my native language, so I may miss some of the nuances. Still, if people feel differently about one feature characterizing a person compared to another, then there is a reason for those feelings. Perhaps "feelings of inferiority" is a better expression. It's a rather common reaction since cross-culturally humans tend to be intimidated by very intelligent individuals.
We do agree on the importance of valid argumentation.
When the poster ("Suckafree") mentioned his alleged IQ, he was replying to the original post about head shapes and skull sizes (bigger, heavier etc.) and his answer should be read in that context. Since you said you are studying for the 2nd BA, I can assume that you don't have a Ph.D. in psychology, and therefore should perhaps refrain from making psychological evaluations (or worse, statements) about people's motives. There are MANY different ways to interpret Suckafree's message and "seeking validation" is not the only one. It's the one that you choose.
"Pretentious" is a subjective value, thus it's a non-argument. You are free to feel that something fulfills the criteria for it in your perception, but it might be wise to remember, that an opinion is still just an opinion and probably doesn't reflect reality from another person's point of view.
My point was that I don’t know Suckafree, nor can I comment on his head size. I do, however, possess the ability to research the head size of a public figure who has a high IQ.
Can you not see that a random individual claiming a high IQ in this way comes across as pretentious? He adds nothing by using himself as a point of comparison as none of us can verify his claim.
As to your comment on my studies. I don’t want a PHD because I don’t intend to work in academia. I will get a masters at some point, but I wanted to expand my understanding before I did that.
"Can you not see that a random individual claiming a high IQ in this way comes across as pretentious?"
Yes, some people would interpret it like that. I tried to explain to you, that it's a matter of personal interpretation, which is a choice. Not an objective truth. There are multiple reasons why we interpret things the way we do. In our personal, subjective way.
As to your studies, I respect you for the fact that you are willing to educate yourself.
My point was related to the idea of "let's not try to make psychological profiling when we're not qualified to do so, have not met the person in question, and have not studied his/her personality. And even if we were/had, we should be careful and understand that we can be wrong in our opinions."
"I wanted to expand my understanding..."
This mentality gets a "hats off" from me.
Perhaps pretentious was not the right word. My main point is that we aren’t able to do anything with the information he provided at face value.
This is a research forum at its core and in order to verify his claim we would need more. This doesn’t mean I doubt his claim, or that what he says is false, just that it adds nothing to use himself as an ‘exhibit’ in the argument and makes him ‘come across’ as pretentious in the attempt.
He would be better served to use well known examples like Einstein as evidence of the point he was making. We could verify his point with a cursory search and his point would stand. However, as a result of his unverifiable example, his point was missed entirely.