This is just too precious for words:
Discuss! snort
Everyone can take this for what it’s worth (and the interviewer hint’s at it more than once…)
Jessica is brilliant…she knows her strengths, knows her weakneses,respects her fans, and knows how to Market her greatest asset…her “ditzy, clumsy” nature (her own words…)
And guess what? She takes home more Bank than perhaps the Majority of “intelligent” people who tend to mock her…
Work it girl! Jessica is OKAY IN MY BOOK!
Mufasa
Hey now, I definitely think she’s smarter than she’s portrayed. Do I think she’s a genius? Not by a longshot. If I had to guess at an IQ range, it would probably be between 120 and 130.
Not that IQ matters if you never read or otherwise enrich your mind.
Nephorm, an IQ of 120 to 130 is pretty damn high. An average IQ is 100.
I though Hawking was past 200…
Buy maybe I’m taking too much of my worldly information from 5 year old Simpsons episodes. Hate when that happens.
Actually, from what I’ve been reading, 120 is the average IQ of a high school senior these days. (There is some concern that this means the test is flawed, because we all know that teenagers can’t possibly be that smart; just look at how they dress.)
I think most people commit random acts of stupidity on a pretty frequent basis, and those who get caught committing them are labeled as “stupid”.
The other day, I wanted to check my email. So I went into the kitchen, and began looking around for my email. After checking several cabinets, I stopped and stood there trying to remember what I was doing. Then I remembered I wanted to check my email, so – with a smug little nod – I proceeded to open the refrigerator and stare into it for several seconds, wondering why I still couldn’t find my email.
I think you’d be pretty hard-pressed to find that behavior from many people who aren’t profoundly retarded.
Now, there are two kinds of people in the world. There are people who admit to these stupid behaviors, and there are people who try to conceal them. In my experience, the people who admit to these behaviors are more intelligent than the people who try to conceal them.
But then again, I always seem to think people who act like I do are smarter than people who don’t. 
I’m acquainted with the IQ ranges ;-). 120, I believe, is the national average IQ of college students. 120 is also (if I remember my psychology textbook) considered the minimum IQ necessary for “creativity,” whatever the hell that means. But depending on what scale you’re using (there are multiple) 140 or 150 starts genius range. And while Jessica Simpson MIGHT be smarter than the average bear, she’s no genius.
Or she’s an incredibly, incredibly good actress. And I definitely don’t believe THAT.
CDarkLock: I’ve known some very, very smart people who do some dumb-ass things. In some ways, it’s harder being smart because people pay attention more when you DO screw up. I also have friends who “play dumb” for a variety of reasons. It can strain relationships of all kinds when one person thinks the other is “too smart,” plus it’s often easier to get someone to help you when you play dumb. Then there’s the old idea that the less people expect of you, the less you have to do. But all that aside, every single one of these people gives off “hints” that they’re intelligent. It just happens. And I’ve never seen any footage of Jessica Simpson that even hints at that kind of “spark.”
t bone y2j: I believe (could be wrong) that the highest officially recorded IQ belongs to Marie Vos Savant, at 220. She gives inane answers to obtuse questions in a nationally syndicated QA column.
(Remember, kids, just because you have a high IQ doesn’t mean you know anything about anything!)
There are four things that practically everyone I’ve ever met claims to have: a photographic memory, dyslexia, ADD, and a genius-level IQ. I even met one girl who said that since she had both a photographic memory and dyslexia, they canceled eachother out. She was also supposedly a genius. Yah, right. Maybe ingeniously STUPID.
I think I may be the only person WITHOUT a photographic memory, dyslexia, or ADD. As for IQ, I don’t know, I’ve never taken a test. Does the SAT count?
At this point I don’t believe anyone about this stuff. If everyone was a genius who claims to be we’d have cured cancer and discovered a penis-enlarging drug by now.
–
JMB
I once had amnesia and deja vu at the same time.
Photographic memory is the easy one, JMB… no such thing exists. The closest thing psychologists have found is eidetic memory, which usually fades after a few minutes. There is some evidence that eidetic memory can even be trained, but that’s neither here nor there. There was, of course, the infamous ‘S’ who had something very, very close to a photographic memory; he could actually remember random dot patterns 20 years after viewing them. He couldn’t remember faces to save his life.
As far as ADD goes, I’m not surprised given the way our culture panders to short attention spans. ADD is much more commonly a learned behavioral issue than an organic one, in my opinion. It’s also a convenient excuse.
As far as genius-level IQ goes, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: “Genius level” IQ is NOT the same thing as being a “genius.” The word has undergone quite a transformation since the stanford-benet scale was popularized. Originally, a genius was something that was separate from the self… a wise, guiding spirit or muse. Later, it came to refer to those who were extraordinarily innovative or creative, who transformed the way we viewed a field or subject (paradigm shifters, you could say). S-B testing changed it to a measure of computational strength, or aptitude. So while it’s true that there’s a large correlation between high-IQ and high real-world achievement (though there are always exceptions), neither guarantees the other.
The sad thing is that we’ve built up a “genius mythos” that is unattainable by even the best of the species. Combined with a deeply ingrained sense that only the best is good enough, people are likely to lie or fudge a bit, so that they can claim to be in the upper echelon. The best thing to tell these people is that IQ is not an achievement.
Sorry for the rant, I’ll cut it off here.
i cant rember but i think th IQ max is
150 or 160 and that any higher is off the charts and there’s really no way to measure beyond that point. my friend and her daughter both tested over 130
and said that it went to a certain point
and then off the charts… i will ask
again just to be sure. ohhh and jess really cant be that smart, just look how
her husband acts towards her when says
stuff like chicken of the sea…
here we go again…
people react in the same way to “smarter” people as they do to individuals who are bigger than they are. insecurity.
if someone is smarter than you, fine. IQ is just a crude measurement based upon various tests. the reason why certain people do better at them is because the have a better learning environment than others.
besides, one can up ones IQ score by doing IQ tests. familiarity will breed better scores. how many times have you learnt from your mistakes? you can definately increase your score by 10-20 points if you do tons of test and then take one.
genius and insanity go hand in hand 
just my thoughts.
i realise my post might have been a bit aggressive
not directed at anyone… was just checking out the replies on strikers post (photo section) and was inspired to defend…
Wow!
Jessica sure can stimulate intellectual discussion!!!
LOL!
Mufasa
bartonmlee: Different IQ tests have different “ceilings.” The closer you are to the ceiling of the IQ test, the less accurate your results are within your intellectual cohort. If I test at 175, and you test at 180, given a ceiling of 185, we really can’t measure the difference between us very accurately. We can determine that we’re in the “genius range,” but our score differences aren’t really significant. There are some tests that are supposed to have no ceiling. I haven’t researched them, but the best way to test your IQ is to get a psychologist to test it with a standard, high-ceiling test. If you’re into that sort of thing.
shamr0ck: There are certainly problems with IQ tests. The thing to remember is that we do need some sort of objective measure, and IQ is the best one we have. If you’re a psychologist studying intelligence, the only thing you can really do is test intelligence. There are a variety of tests for different kinds of intelligence, and IQ has been shown to be very good at showing aptitude in the areas it tests. It is inaccurate to say that learning environment is the ONLY reason certain people do better on IQ tests. While learning environment IS a factor, certain people are simply born with more horsepower than others. Some people have built in test-taking skill. There are a lot of explanations, but saying “hey, the only reason you scored higher than me is because you had a better learning environment” sounds like something someone would say to make them feel better, rather than saying “my genes aren’t as good as yours,” or whatever.
hey, nephorm.
agreed. although learning environment and familiarity to conformed tests is A factor, it’s not solely responsible.
It’s strange we don’t have people like Da Vinci and Einsteins any longer… seems as though the things that needed to be discovered, were discovered and that’s it. Stephen Hawkins is probably one of the few real geniuses around these days… ?
Stephen Hawking has a very, very good reputation in the lay population. Quite a few physicists, however, don’t think he’s so phenomenal. I’m not a physicist, so I can only relay what I’ve heard.
DaVinci was a renaissance man, which is part of the reason his name gets thrown around in the genius category so often. He excelled in most, if not all, areas of human endeavor at the time. But part of the reason we don’t have that level of achievement today is because human knowledge has expanded so much and in so many areas that it would be impossible to be an expert in very many fields. DaVinci also didn’t have to worry about keeping a day job… in his lifetime, wealthy patrons kept you going while you pursued whatever turned you on.
Nowadays, you can either learn “less and less about more and more until you know nothing about everything” or “more and more about less and less until you know everything about nothing.” Do I think that there are people out there today with DaVinci’s raw talent and brainpower? Absolutely. But it would be unlikely that they’d be able to apply their intellects to basic problems that haven’t already been solved. A great example is mathematics. There are very few “basic” mathematical discoveries anymore. Most new math is arcane and limited in usefulness. Why? Because we’ve had hundreds of years to get the basic stuff covered… now you have to master all the basic, intermediate, and advanced stuff before you even have a starting point for developing something new.
There are great inventors, artists, and scientists out there right now, doing great things. Just look at what the 20th century has brought us.
Btw, I’d check out Feynman or Von Neumann, if you’d like to read biographies of some brilliant men from Einstein’s day.
you know nephorm while i agree, and generally speaking people who have genius IQ tend to be really creative think differently than most people thus
going against the grain. i’m not or dont care about the scale whether your’re off it or on it, it’s what you
do with that mental capacity, nothing
and it amounts to nothing and something
and it reflects. example my friend has
3 majors physcology( damn it spelling!)
law and art all with honors. but she’s
a trophy wife and married to a doctor…
and i tell despite all that smarts she
lacks common sense which really blows
my mind and i tease her for it and it’s
fun, and there’s no deny her IQ…
Barton