Comedian's IQ

[Lestat]

This doesn't surprise me. One of the first things I replied to Andy about was that most comedians are quick-witted and have the ability to "think on their feet". This was also my contention to YOU about salespeople, negotiators, etc. But had I made this connection (between salespeople and comedians), ealrier I would have realized that Bob Newhart was of all things an accountant before turning comedian and I would have toned down my response to you regarding math minded people performing competently in the sales world.

I still say that Newhart is an exception and that for the most part, mathematical minded people don't have the two-way mind needed for sales and comedy. That is, they are either thinking or responding and aren't good at performing both tasks well simultaneously.

But at least your point about above average intelligence has been driven home. If I were looking to recruit a salesman or a comedian who had to make it, I would definitely prefer someone out of an intelligent group. If I had to financially back a random person to play poker, I would also want someone with above average intelligence. So while I realize there are exceptions (like slower running athletes), above average intelligence does increase the likelihood of success at almost any endeavor.

[andyfox]

I was wrong.

David has clearly thought more, and thought better, about the issue than I have. Plus I both misread and misunderstood his assertions. It makes sense that the more intelligent a person is the better chance he has to excel, in most fields, or to do better, than a less intelligent person. (A better example of that would be my arguments vs. David's arguments than the cited article; the Edinburgh Fringe is open to both amateurs and professionals and there's no evidence the named comedians are capable of coming up with "good jokes"; in fact, recent reviews of the comedy there often complain that the comedy is not as funny as it once was.)

A difference between math and comedy, however, is that there are no correct answers in comedy. David said, "If a martian is more likely to figure out how to stop hurricanes than you, he is more likely to be correct if he disagrees with you about any subject assuming you have spent the same time and effort investigating it. Religion baseball, tuning a piano, or even coming up with a good joke."

The problem I see is that there is no objective definition of a good joke. It seems to me that having a good sense of humor is more important for comedy than being intelligent. But again, given two people with equal senses of humor (if such a thing can be measured), and everything else being equal, one would think that the more intelligent person would be the more capable one.

In fact, if a major element of comedy is quirkiness, or a quirky way of viewing things, one would think more intelligent people would have an extra advantage, as they do in science. If we define quirkiness as an unusual way of viewing the world, this probably is more common in smarter people than in others. As David ponted out in another thread, scientists are used to, upon finding facts or conclusions that don't fit their axioms, changing their axioms to accommodate the facts or conclusions. Whereas Andy Fox types usually just have conclusions and axioms that don't match and fail to see, or worry about (or both) the discrepancies. Many of the discoveries of modern science, such as quantum mechanics, or curved space, or black holes, one would think, required that their discoverers adopt a new, "quirky" way of looking at things.

[David Sklansky]

Bravo

[mackthefork]

I think it is fairly accurate to say a more intelligent person has a 'better chance' of success in any field, however being smart definitely does not guarantee success, some 'intelligent' people are completely socially retarded and will be catastrophic failures at the simplest tasks. Smart people just do not like to accept this because it limits the importance of their particular skill.

Mack

David Sklansky, I hope that you now allow andyfox back on your list of people who you will debate with. A lot of us enjoy those debates.

Also, if anyone wants to read a long list of some reasons that came off the top of my head as to why intelligence was important to comedians, I posted one a couple days ago in the "Whats the Odds That The Man Who Stops Hurricanes" thread.

[Zeno]

[ QUOTE ]
I was wrong.



David has clearly thought more, and thought better, about the issue than I have. Plus I both misread and misunderstood his assertions. It makes sense that the more intelligent a person is the better chance he has to excel, in most fields, or to do better, than a less intelligent person. (A better example of that would be my arguments vs. David's arguments than the cited article; the Edinburgh Fringe is open to both amateurs and professionals and there's no evidence the named comedians are capable of coming up with "good jokes"; in fact, recent reviews of the comedy there often complain that the comedy is not as funny as it once was.)



A difference between math and comedy, however, is that there are no correct answers in comedy. David said, "If a martian is more likely to figure out how to stop hurricanes than you, he is more likely to be correct if he disagrees with you about any subject assuming you have spent the same time and effort investigating it. Religion baseball, tuning a piano, or even coming up with a good joke."



The problem I see is that there is no objective definition of a good joke. It seems to me that having a good sense of humor is more important for comedy than being intelligent. But again, given two people with equal senses of humor (if such a thing can be measured), and everything else being equal, one would think that the more intelligent person would be the more capable one.



In fact, if a major element of comedy is quirkiness, or a quirky way of viewing things, one would think more intelligent people would have an extra advantage, as they do in science. If we define quirkiness as an unusual way of viewing the world, this probably is more common in smarter people than in others. As David ponted out in another thread, scientists are used to, upon finding facts or conclusions that don't fit their axioms, changing their axioms to accommodate the facts or conclusions. Whereas Andy Fox types usually just have conclusions and axioms that don't match and fail to see, or worry about (or both) the discrepancies. Many of the discoveries of modern science, such as quantum mechanics, or curved space, or black holes, one would think, required that their discoverers adopt a new, "quirky" way of looking at things.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just noticed this. Excellent and classy post.

-Zeno

IQ does not = Intelligence
A quick wit does not = Intelligence

Intelligence includes many more things, and furthermore, there are many different types of intelligence.

[scalf]

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] try to keep up with robin williams..

lol

[img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

[Stuey]

Pick 4 random comedians and test their IQ.
Pick 4 very successful people in any line of work and test their IQ.

If people are in the top 3% in one category I would not be surprised to see them excel in several. I would think 3% of comedians have a high IQ as I don't find many of them funny. Maybe I just have a bad sense of humor or more likely I am just to dumb to get the jokes! [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]