When I was reading ‘Supercrunchers’, there came a short section detailing the standard deviations among IQ and the associated bell curve distribution. Based on what I tentatively know about my IQ, an this chart, I am between 2 and three 3 standard deviations above normal. (I offered more than 3 but Andi firmly informed me of where I was. (She would know because she is probably more than 3 above) At two standard deviations above normal I have a higher IQ than all but 2.5% of people. Since I am between 2 and 3, I would put this as less than 1%, but I really have no idea. But I wonder if I am smart enough? this link on the future of neural enhancements points to a new world where people take loads of drugs to enhance neural outputs, which just sounds so appealing to me……also very scary since the pre-cursor world of professional sports shows what happens to those who drop out of the arms (steroids, HGH, GBH). Either you opt in, or loose. As the article hinted at, if 25% of people start taking these neural enhancers, everyone else would be defined based on them….

Really though the article just made me think….I don’t think I am smart enough at better than all than.5%. I think this is still not smart enough for anything really interesting….I think my IQ just puts me at the level to make me aware of others’ staggering limitations. more painfully aware of my own limitations (based on higher contextual standards) and my painful awareness of both these facts.

Is my only option to get in this arms race before everyone else…certainly not in the EFL world….no great need here :-)