The original founded one of the oldest hospitals in the world, St Bartholomew's. As a Royal Jester, he was perforce one of the earliest psychologists, and a modest man.
For myself, I was caught up in the extension of IQ testing to kids in the 1960s, when what I was told about myself (next to nothing) caused more trouble than it was worth. That meant I was formally banned from testing again (it's in the maths).
Having lived a worthwhile life, capped by a decent share of the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize (if you look it up, I earned the privilege of actually making the join between Eaat and West Europe), Harley Street caught up with me, testing at Binet 153-4 aged 60. That implies mid-160s, and as I'm part of the reference group, one of those is me. When I looked, it was kind of thin at that level, just a couple on 163. I wonder who the first one was? It's corroborated by the data from the testing, my score when they checked the cohort proifile using a huge general knowledge test. I had a GK of a 14 year old, aged 8y6m. 14/8.5=165%, which was how they calculated it before IQ tests existed.
That's not who I am. I did find my ability to handle volumes of data (a superforecasting skill) stepped up into full seer chanelling by the Church of England, and that works by humility - I'm two degrees from Gandhi, and completed his work. I don't control it, but it did it's thing in full view of the test panel, so I'm officially hyperperceptive. That made the IQ panel MRI me, showing a normal brain lit up like a Christmas tree, so they followed up with a 24-hour EEG. It showed I only have vestigial beta-phase sleep, but my brain runs at 30% at rest and can go up to near 100% before overloading. Given a NeuroTypical has to cope with storing their experience until sleep, within their 10-11%, and becomes disordered after 2 days without sleep, they're using about 5% of their brain for cognition. I'm using up to 70%, so I can hold 14 times as much data as they can. It's not my problem, therefore, that they can't follow me. Take 2 identical computers, one with an operating system which can handle all it's memory, another with an older OS which can only handle 10%. Which needs the upgrade?
So, alongside the IQ, I'm diagnosed with high-performance Aspergers. Which nobody can tell me anything about, because the traits haven't been studied. But the way Peter Attwood argues, that because nobody knows anything about us, we can be dispensed with, we're just Aspies, and so have Autistic Spectrum Disorder. Suddenly, from being a baseline reference for intellect, I'm disordered by an intellectual inadequacy! It's academic laziness of the worst form, not being prepared to discover what you're talking about.
Logic is logic, and if an NT can't cope, that's his problem, not mine. My consideration of significant questions is necessarily nuanced by conflicting or even opposed viewpoints, which doesn't mean I'm indecisive: I was actually the finance supremo on the Crisis Management team of the European State Department.
Thus far, I'm describing someone who doesn't think differently, just more. But I mentioned an X-Skill, hyperperception. About 6 months, Donald Trump talked of genius being able to hack a cypher system. When it was first discussed in the 1980s, I tried it as a proof of concept, using what was to hand, a chunk of code from a banking system. It took me exactly one attempt to find the method and key: the only crib was an imcomplete idea of the content. It actually came to metamorphosis in blind-reading a text I knew nothing about. Or rather, calling on the all-seeing. This isn't normal, but sometimes happens when it matters. So don't ask me the lottery numvers, it doesn't work that way.
That, therefore, is me, and hints at my agenda. We're victims of huge discrimination and denial of our human rights: Dabrowsky's over-excitability hypothesis is simply a confession of his own dullness. We're frustrated at being forced to trogvalong at the speed of the slowest donkey in school, examined by teachers who weren't smart enough to achieve anything themselves, in an academic framework which is disconnected from the real world.
That might mean I'm upsetting a few applecarts. If so, good: you need a Nobel Prize to challenge me. Is that a denial of humility? Only because it speaks my truth, which is a higher value.
For myself, I was caught up in the extension of IQ testing to kids in the 1960s, when what I was told about myself (next to nothing) caused more trouble than it was worth. That meant I was formally banned from testing again (it's in the maths).
Having lived a worthwhile life, capped by a decent share of the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize (if you look it up, I earned the privilege of actually making the join between Eaat and West Europe), Harley Street caught up with me, testing at Binet 153-4 aged 60. That implies mid-160s, and as I'm part of the reference group, one of those is me. When I looked, it was kind of thin at that level, just a couple on 163. I wonder who the first one was? It's corroborated by the data from the testing, my score when they checked the cohort proifile using a huge general knowledge test. I had a GK of a 14 year old, aged 8y6m. 14/8.5=165%, which was how they calculated it before IQ tests existed.
That's not who I am. I did find my ability to handle volumes of data (a superforecasting skill) stepped up into full seer chanelling by the Church of England, and that works by humility - I'm two degrees from Gandhi, and completed his work. I don't control it, but it did it's thing in full view of the test panel, so I'm officially hyperperceptive. That made the IQ panel MRI me, showing a normal brain lit up like a Christmas tree, so they followed up with a 24-hour EEG. It showed I only have vestigial beta-phase sleep, but my brain runs at 30% at rest and can go up to near 100% before overloading. Given a NeuroTypical has to cope with storing their experience until sleep, within their 10-11%, and becomes disordered after 2 days without sleep, they're using about 5% of their brain for cognition. I'm using up to 70%, so I can hold 14 times as much data as they can. It's not my problem, therefore, that they can't follow me. Take 2 identical computers, one with an operating system which can handle all it's memory, another with an older OS which can only handle 10%. Which needs the upgrade?
So, alongside the IQ, I'm diagnosed with high-performance Aspergers. Which nobody can tell me anything about, because the traits haven't been studied. But the way Peter Attwood argues, that because nobody knows anything about us, we can be dispensed with, we're just Aspies, and so have Autistic Spectrum Disorder. Suddenly, from being a baseline reference for intellect, I'm disordered by an intellectual inadequacy! It's academic laziness of the worst form, not being prepared to discover what you're talking about.
Logic is logic, and if an NT can't cope, that's his problem, not mine. My consideration of significant questions is necessarily nuanced by conflicting or even opposed viewpoints, which doesn't mean I'm indecisive: I was actually the finance supremo on the Crisis Management team of the European State Department.
Thus far, I'm describing someone who doesn't think differently, just more. But I mentioned an X-Skill, hyperperception. About 6 months, Donald Trump talked of genius being able to hack a cypher system. When it was first discussed in the 1980s, I tried it as a proof of concept, using what was to hand, a chunk of code from a banking system. It took me exactly one attempt to find the method and key: the only crib was an imcomplete idea of the content. It actually came to metamorphosis in blind-reading a text I knew nothing about. Or rather, calling on the all-seeing. This isn't normal, but sometimes happens when it matters. So don't ask me the lottery numvers, it doesn't work that way.
That, therefore, is me, and hints at my agenda. We're victims of huge discrimination and denial of our human rights: Dabrowsky's over-excitability hypothesis is simply a confession of his own dullness. We're frustrated at being forced to trogvalong at the speed of the slowest donkey in school, examined by teachers who weren't smart enough to achieve anything themselves, in an academic framework which is disconnected from the real world.
That might mean I'm upsetting a few applecarts. If so, good: you need a Nobel Prize to challenge me. Is that a denial of humility? Only because it speaks my truth, which is a higher value.