"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.
"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.