1.Your definition of what constitutes an attack differs from mine clearly 2. Agreed, I was wrong there, my bad 3. I think not, if I had wanted to keep arguing I wouldn't have ended in such a placid manner or attempted a truce. But thanks for your 2cents, really helped this issue. Very insightful and full of interesting thought...
We had some tests in our school and I took some online ones. It varied from about 120 to the highest of 136. I think anything 130 or above is "genius." These tests are so flawed, especially the online ones. I do feel like an intelligent person. I can analyze things well, which what IQ tests are mostly about. However, with a decade of hard alcohol and drug abuse I'm sure I've slipped into the 100 zone. Fuck it, I'm average
IQ = 143 As determined by a psychiatrist and the obnoxiously long test he made me take. To my understanding though, IQ only measures your ability to learn new material and not your actual intelligence so I don't really put much credibility on my number. It's interesting to discuss, but I hate that it tends to become a contest in the end.
my iq is 138 from some online thing i did in a psychology class a coiuple years ago my sat score converted to 147 on that site
So voicing his OPINION counts as an attack? Passive aggression is not REGULAR aggression, hence the modifier PASSIVE. He is arguing his position on the conversation, not his superiority. I would say you have reading comprehension issues.
I've never take a legitimate test, only free shit online. I got like a 106. Hence why I say I'm perfectly average at best.