I’ve decided to revisit the Lost Column Archives with this reprise of a 1987 column I wrote about Mensa. Enjoy.
Mensa BumblersWhy would anyone join a club where people brag about their intelligence? This has to be the most irritating and boring group of people imaginable.
And, of course, I’m talking about Mensa, the most famous club of smarties. The funny thing is, now I’m not so sure that they’re smart
Well, at least that’s the impression I get when I see a Mensa mini-test in a recent issue of Cosmo.
Cosmopolitan, this month, had one of those “”theme” features where it discusses all aspects of intelligence. In one of the sidebars there was a mention of Mensa and a sampler of a Mensa smartness test. Let’s take it.
There are five questions. They are:
1) Unscramble the following word: HCPRAATEU
2) What number is one half of one quarter of one tenth of 400?
3) The same three-letter word can be placed in front of the following words to make a new word: LIGHT, BREAK, TIME.
4) Pear is to apple as potato is to…(a) banana (b) radish (c) strawberry (d) peach (e) lettuce
5) If two typists can type two pages in two minutes, how many typists will it take to type eighteen pages in six minutes?
You’ll be astonished at the bogus answers given by Mensa. They got four out of five wrong. I couldn’t believe it. Their answers were as follows: 1) PARACHUTE, 2) five, 3) DAY, 4) b. both grow in the ground, and 5) six.
How could these people be so mistaken? And they purport to be geniuses. Give me a break. The correct answers are:
1) A trick question with no answer. HCPRAATEU is not a word. The question says that it is. If they asked you to “”make a word from the following scrambled letters” then it would spell parachute. That’s not what they said.
2) This question is so easy it’s dumb. Take a calculator and put in .5 X .25 X .1 X 400 and you get 5. A ten year old could do it. Big deal. Is this the mathematical prowess needed to join Mensa?
3) Add the word DAY to these words and you get NO “”new” words. You get a bunch of old words that date back to the 16th century. What’s so “”new” about the word DAYBREAK, for example? The real answer is “”BUD.” You get BUDLIGHT, BUDBREAK, and BUDTIME. All are “”new” words.
4) The answer is lettuce. Both a potato and a lettuce make salads. While a potato and a radish both grow in the dirt they are both served differently. Since all the references are to food, one must assume food aspects. Therefore, where something grows has nothing to do with it. Otherwise the word “”gopher” would be picked if listed. Obviously, the correct answer is lettuce.
5) Another trick question. The answer as to how many typists does it take to type doesn’t exist. It’s a variable. It depends on how long they chat with each other, who is the supervisor, and whether they get a break during the job. Six typists (the MENSA answer) may take forever.
So MENSA gets four out of five wrong on its own test. I sure don’t want to have anything to do with a group that gives these naive and fallacious answers to sometimes complex questions.
–end
Column © 1987 by John C. Dvorak. This column first appeared in the San Francisco Examiner on Sept. 15, 1987.
#61 bobbolicious
“whatever”
Whatever? You sound like a 14 year old girl.
“The piece was also an attack on Mensa.”
No. I don’t think it was. I quote “#47 — I wasn’t casting Mensa in a negative light..I was attempting humor. – JCD”. See even now you don’t actually get the humor.
“yes you were being synchofanatical”
Why do you try to use words you don’t understand and cant spell? Again my point was to alert the anal retentive people like yourself that the article was not an attack on Mensa. Both members and non members responded to it as if it were. Members responded because they were offended and non-members because they thought they would find support.
“Not “only” scizhophrentical, but yes-that”
Bobbo once again you use words you don’t understand and cant spell. WHY?
“Not just an attack and it was done with humor. Can you handle mispeelings and more than one characteristic at a time?”
Read the above quote from JCD. Yes I can handle misspellings but only when I think the person actually understands the word they attempted to spell. Characteristics? Do you mean humorous and insulting at the same time? Well I would give you that if JCD didn’t say “I wasn’t casting Mensa in a negative light….”
“I did note before my own entry that you did not include me in your anally presented list of violators. ”
That’s because you didn’t say anything stupid up until post #59. Hey BTW your wife may know me. Tell here to look up the names that start with J in Region I. It is a very small group.
“Gave me a sense of pride and accomplishment.”
How sad for you.
“People should be complimented for good work done, what makes you think otherwise? ”
Uh? The attack you made on me for complementing JCD on the article and its humor.
“How many people read the post and comments, saw the humor, saw the tangential and misunderstanding comments, and chose not to respond?”
Don’t know. Maybe a lot. Maybe none. Unless you have the web stats and the ability to question each viewer neither do you. The only evidence you have is what is posted in the comments.
“In today’s world of political correctness and faux outrage, maybe it is nice to hear people being somewhat aggressive, belligerant (ok, that one I can’t spell), and iconoclastic. ”
ABOUT MENSA? Are you kidding me? If you have that much aggression toward a group of people that have done nothing to hurt anyone you should seek some mental help.
“Must everything be tapioca pudding?”
I like chocolate
“Relax and enjoy–I assume John does…. I don’t think heis looking for regular stroking–course, I could be wrong.”
I do enjoy. I don’t think he NEEDS a regular stroking-course but he would be lying if he said he doesn’t like it when people do complement him. Again it wasn’t to complement him as much as it was to point out the the humor challenged that it was not an attack piece.
Has someone pissed in your Cheerios today? Up until your assine attack post I didn’t say anything that harsh about anyone (and nothing negative about your posts)and yet you seem to be fixated on my statements.
#62–J==you crack me up. So earnest. I came across some of my high school creative writing exercises from years back. Fun to see what/how I thought back then. You might be amused yourself should you copy some of these threads. See what you think in a few years?
So let me pick thru your droppings and see if there are any kernels of interest.
1. Whatever? Yes, responding in kind. 14 is about right.
2. Attack on Mensa–so who says JCD is correct in his assessment? The Cop in the KKK outfit thinks he was being funny too. As I said, funny AND attacking. In fact, you may be missing the humor in quite a few posts.
3. Words. Nothing funny there huh?
4. Compliments. I was not clear on that, sorry.
5. Web stats? That’s funny. I guess I deserve some of my own treatment.
6. I haven’t shown “any” aggression re MENSA. Recall I also complained about those who were attacking MENSA members. My dear wifey is one, or could be if she suffered a brain injury.
7. Yes, when others attack, it is terrible. When you attack, its just information for their own good.
Hey, more than I thought. Don’t sweat the small stuff, and just remember its all small stuff. Peace, Love, and Harmony, bobbo.
# 63 bobboleeno
“Attack on Mensa–so who says JCD is correct in his assessment?”
He wasn’t making an assessment. He being funny!!!
“The Cop in the KKK outfit thinks he was being funny too.”
Nice way to confuse the issue. Strawman!
“As I said, funny AND attacking. ”
And once again you are wrong! Read carefully this time “I wasn’t casting Mensa in a negative light..I was attempting humor. ” -JCD
“In fact, you may be missing the humor in quite a few posts.”
Really which one? I am always for getting the joke.
“Words. Nothing funny there huh?”
bobbo have you taken your meds?
“Web stats? That’s funny. I guess I deserve some of my own treatment.”
No it is actually sad that you ask a rhetorical question in an attempt to create a false evidence platform as proof that I am missing something. The truth is you have no idea if anyone got the humor or not unless they stated so in their comments and that is a FACT.
” I haven’t shown “any” aggression re MENSA. Recall I also complained about those who were attacking MENSA members.”
But you did say “maybe it is nice to hear people being somewhat aggressive, belligerant (ok, that one I can’t spell), and iconoclastic.” ? How bipolar of you.
“My dear wifey is one, or could be if she suffered a brain injury. ”
Like I said have her look me up under Region I and maybe we can all go out for drinks. I am sure my wife would love to meet the people I play rat tat tat on my keyboard with.
“Yes, when others attack, it is terrible. When you attack, its just information for their own good.”
No when I attack it is usually because someone has posted something that is stupid that pisses me off and I feel like letting them know. It is up to them if they choose to see the errors of there ways. I have on occasion had to insert my own foot in mouth because I posted before thinking but I don’t do it nearly as often as most.
#64–J==you lost me at “He being funny!”
I walked you thru it twice, not going for the third strike.
Catch you on the next thread.
# 65 bobbo
Yes thank you for the correction. He was being funny. Does that help? You are a funny one to point out grammar errors.
You walked me through it? Oh F***ing please. You are wrong and you know it. I PROVED IT with JCDs own words!!! Hard to face it when you are hit with undisputable facts huh? You condescending jerk!
#66–J==ok, “slowly I turned.”
Lets go on one very small exact point.
You say Johns posting is humorous because John posted that he was being humorous==right?
The cop dressed up as a KKK member because he thought he was being humorous.
Now, in both cases, “the actor” describes their behavior. Those actors may be right or wrong, combination of the two–but, importantly here, what the actor says about their own conduct is not dispositive of the issue.
If its not dispostive, then it is open to evaluation and discussion which cannot be stopped by appeal to “He said it.”
If that were true, every psychopath murderer would get off because they will honestly tell you they were just picking flowers.
Do you agree?
#67 bobbolatte
“ok, “slowly I turned.””
Wow. you must have been turning so fast that your brain slipped out.
“You say Johns posting is humorous because John posted that he was being humorous==right?”
No I said it was humorous and clever because when I read it. I thought it was. I didn’t think he meant any ill will toward Mensa nor it’s members. Not that I needed it because I can see humor when I read it my belief was confirmined when he posted “I wasn’t casting Mensa in a negative light..I was attempting humor. ” -JCD
“The cop dressed up as a KKK member because he thought he was being humorous.”
Strawman argument. A cop making a paper KKK costume and wearing it is patently offensive to any reasonable person. What JCD put in his article is not. What JCD did is called tongue in cheek humor and IT WAS OBVIOUS!!!! What the cop did is called racist by any reasonable person. The asshat cop who played KKK dress up knew exactly how his actions would be interpreted.
“what the actor says about their own conduct is not dispositive of the issue.”
Not true at all. In the case of the cop his actions are clearly defined and interpreted as offensive and inappropriate by any reasonable person and his intent is very clear despite what he says. JCDs article was humorous to any reasonable person because they were written in a manner as to NOT be interpreted as offensive. He confirmed it for the illiterate by saying “I wasn’t casting Mensa in a negative light..I was attempting humor. ” -JCD Perhaps his sarcasm skills were not as developed as they are today but they were none the less funny AND clever.
“If its not dispostive, then it is open to evaluation and discussion which cannot be stopped by appeal to “He said it.”
You are killing me with your strawman argument and poor logic. You base your conclusion on precepts that you define and then claim your conclusion is one that is just based on your self defined truth.
“Do you agree?”
LOL Absolutely not!
Again your whole argument is a strawman.
69–J==3 strikes, I’m out.
# 69 bobborino
“3 strikes, I’m out”
Because you have no argument which in your case is quite common.
#55-bobbo==Yeah you’re right. I was hoping to do something similar to that. Hopefully I can get to a local meeting here before the end of the semester.
#70–J==no, lots of arguments–but to what end? An exchange of ideas, something that might change my mind/offer another perspective is what I’m after. Can’t get that with the way you argue.
There is an expression in debate circles: “You have a right to your own opinion, but not your own facts.” and that is my problem with your posts. You substitute your opinion as facts (or logic?).
Like the skit in Monty Python, I want an argument, not an endless series of nay-saying.
Now, if you disagree with the above, you are only agreeing we don’t have the common ground necessary for each of us to enjoy the exchange.
#71–Student==keep the hope alive.
# 72 bobbo
“You have a right to your own opinion, but not your own facts.”
Show me proof that anything I said is false. Better yet show me one place I have stated my opinion as fact.
YOUR CLAIM IS FALSE!
You have no foundation for your attack on my post. Then you stoop to to ad hominem attacks and strawman arguments because you missed JCDs post and realized you backed yourself into a corner and your argument hade no merit.
#73–J==my post #67 is a good example. Your response to it did not advance the conversation and became unpleasurable for me, so I quit.
To advance the argument on your terms, maybe I posted something wrong, but I posted much that was accurate. From your response, I believe you will continue to focus on some interpretation to lessen the value of the interchange rather than use your intellect to advance the conversaton.
I feel some obligation to respond when challenged, questioned, disagreed with, but I have my own limits.
You make a claim and I ask you to show proof that anything I said was false. You instead change the debate by claiming that my response to your post did not advance the discussion. Your post #67 was all based on a false premise. You make false assumptions and then base your entire argument on them. Who is the one that states their opinion as fact? Methinks it’s you. NOTHING I SAID IS FALSE!!!
“To advance the argument on your terms, maybe I posted something wrong……..”
Did you read a new book on debate or something. You seem fixated on this “moving the debate forward” thing as evidence by your posts on other threads.
In regards to that…….Nothing you posted is accurate nor is it relevant to what started the debate. You fucking hypocrite. You fling of accusations of people being tangential and then you proceed to take the debate which consisted of me defending my compliments to JCD and the cleverness of his article then you swing it around into an asinine debate about whether or not the fact that JCDs comment that he “wasn’t casting Mensa in a negative light” is valid because it “is not dispositive of the issue.” THAT IS A FUCKING STRAWMAN ARGUMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think it was a funny article and JCD intended it to be a funny article. If you didn’t get the humor then so be it. Too bad for you. You missed out on a very clever and non-offensive article. Same goes for anyone else who didn’t get the humor. Pro or Con.
#75–J==There must be more in this cappachino I’m drinking than just expresso.
I agree I’ve hit a run of folks who can’t argue their way out of a paper bag. It does provide a disincentive.
Likewise, you are overusing Strawman as your own Strawman for everthing deficient in an opposing argument. Make the dictionary your friend.
Either you “get it” or you don’t. Either you see and understand the “critical elements” in John’s humorous review or you don’t. Few things are only one thing. That would be simpleminded don’t you think?
So, maybe I am seeing two things where only one exists. And maybe you are seeing only one thing where two exists.
Now, “humor.” What makes something funny? Usually it is a juxtaposition of two conflicting elements. Key word here being “two.” Until you can identify exactly what made John’s post humorous, you have no basis to reject any potential conflicting element. I think John was gently mocking the Mensa types for missing what the Cosmo readers got. Mocking is a form of attacking or being negative. Not enough to defeat the obvious humor, not so minimal to be missing.
Lets see, did I get anywhere near your request? Probably not.
# 76 bobbonobraino
“Likewise, you are overusing Strawman as your own Strawman for everthing deficient in an opposing argument. ”
No I keep having to repeat it because your argument is just that. A cop who played KKK dress up and makes an excuse for it and equating it to JCD directly stating that ” I wasn’t casting Mensa in a negative light..I was attempting humor. ” That is the very definition of STRAWMAN. You describe a position that superficially resembles an opponent’s position but is easier to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent.
“Few things are only one thing. That would be simpleminded don’t you think?”
You seem to think I didn’t understand your argument. I did. I just refute it.
JCD VERY CLEARLY STATES ” I wasn’t casting Mensa in a negative light..I was attempting humor. ” -JCD
“Now, “humor.” What makes something funny?”
Now you want to debate does comedy contain truth or what the is the definition of comedy I am not interested. I was a student of Del Close and I have discussed it with him many times before his death. Any discussion with you would be pointless. The fact that you seem to think you understand what comedy is show that you know nothing about it.
#77–J==I think you are advancing the conversation in that I do find your posts funny. I was looking for an intellectual exercise and missed the humor completely.
Thank you.
# 78 bobbodanono
Well good. I am glad you can laugh at yourself.
Congratulations
#79–J==very good. You see how you “turned the tables” on me? Well, you argue with the same technique, to the same effect. It is funny though.
# 80 bobbo
Yeah but I am better at it than you.
81–J==Lets keep it that way.
# 82 bobbo
Once again you didn’t understand what you read.
#83–J==How do you know that?
# 82 bobbo
By your response of course. It is clear that you only understood one of the two meaning behind what I said.
#85–J==Well, I gotta say you are right. I think your post shows ONLY that you are an idiot, but I must admit that if you are clever enough to post that in fact your post had “two” meanings, then your potentially are an idiot AND something else? I can only take comfort in your not saying what other element is, but the inherent insight you finally displayed is troubling==troubling you don’t go with it instead of the dribble you chose initially.
Potential.
# 86 bobbo âne sourd-muet
There you see? ad hominem attacks. You have no foundation for you silly claims and arguments so you resort to name calling. Do you even see how pointless your 2 meanings argument is?
Boboo seriously. You need to get some help. You have falling into the Republican trap of actually believing the nonsense that you post. You make claims that are blatantly false and then base your entire position on them. Perhaps you have been arguing with Republicans too long. Every time I show you proof that your position is a poor one you side step to another issue. You may think that keeps you from losing the debate but actually you just lose even more.
I will concede to you if you can accurately post anything I have said here as false. Not an opinion but factual proof that something I have said is false. Without that, you have lost because I have shown PROOF that your position is incorrect. Don’t bother to bring up the KKK dress up cop. It is old and tired and you know the two issues are NOT related.
#87–J==was there anything “negative” at all in John’s posting?
# 88 bobbo
Yes his promotion of alcoholic drinks. LOL
I can see where a person “COULD” interpret his writings as satire. However that person would have to be as dense as lead. There are three reasons.
One. The form JCD choose was written clearly as an attempt at tongue-in-cheek humor. He wasn’t as subtle about it as one would like for that type of humor but rarely is anything that JCD says or writes subtle. lol.
Two. He said “I wasn’t casting Mensa in a negative light..I was attempting humor. ” To it to be classified as satire his intent is vital. This clarifies that he was not attempting satire but instead tongue-in-cheek humor.
Three. Satire consists of the author pretending to approve of that which they lampoon. He did not pretend to approve. He did the exact opposite.
#89–J==was there anything “negative” at all in John’s posting?
# 90 bobbo
HOW DENSE ARE YOU????? I just gave you my answer!!!!
Oh I see you don’t understand the difference between satire and tongue-in-cheek humor. That explains your repetition.
So I will clearly state for you is simple terms you can understand. NO! It was not satire it was tongue-in-cheek humor.
Since you don’t seem to know the difference I don’t know why you even tried to debate it with me.