/lit/ - Literature

>>12233938
As long as you have verbal-linguistic intelligence, you can be an idiot in all other areas of intelligence

There is a quote by Beethoven where he basically says outside of music, everything he ever tried to do was terrible and shoddily done

>>12233964
Plausible, although people tend to underestimate the role of working memory in task-specific intelligence.

Beethoven was something else.

>>12233938
Salinger had a 104 in.

>>12233938

If you have the holy spirit guiding you, you can do much more than you realize. God bless.

>>12233938
Maybe not a great author but you can be a successful hack.

>>12233938
Verbal is the most g loaded category of cognitive performance and specifically vocabulary and concept matching/association. I would assume nearly all elite writers were very high iq but not nearly as high iq as genius mathematicians and physicists who also have very high verbal on average. There are outliers like for instance JD Salinger who was not a genius at all, had something like 105-110 iq and for physics people like Feynman who are only 120-125 which is below average for a physics PhD

Also, kind of funny that both men were Jewish and yet Jews are the highest iq ethnic group on Earth with the highest average incidence of genius and very weak spatial reasoning and artistic output proportionate to their overall intelligence and intellectual achievements. Proust strikes me as a genius, Kafka as an upper midwit ~130+

>>12234450
jews are based

>>12234450
If 100 is the average, I don't think you should say 130 is an midwit

>>12233938

>Can a sub 100 write a masterpiece?

As long as you write a novel that "captures the soul of the working class" or something like that. Don't try to write "Wittgenstein vs. Hegel" like DFW did in Broom of the System.

>>12234443
>low IQ retard
>makes shitty non-art