How do I write like him?
>>8051257
Be an ivy-league educated genius. Smoke dank and watch cartoons.
>>8051259
>Ivy-league educated
>Cornell
Ebin meme dude
S H I T P O S T
H
I
T
P
O
S
T
>>8051310
You're mediocre
>>8051317
Actually I'm a highly cited mathematician with a 157 IQ. What are you?
>>8051344
Feminine man who takes female hormones, uni student, Mensa member.
>>8051357
I see you were too scared to tell me your IQ.
>>8051344
gay porn credits dont count as citations
>>8051357
>Feminine man who takes female hormones
>Mensa member
mensa members are known degenerates
>>8051364
>being this jealous
Is this what you wasted 4-7 years of your life doing?
>>8051257
What's with all the IQ memers recently? you faggots should go back to /sci/ and continue to jerk yourself over a number that you may or may not even have gotten to make up for your lack of accomplishments and talents
>>8051380
Actually I have a PhD and have a tenure-track position doing something I love. I also happen to have a 157 IQ and enough intelligence to recognize the utility of psychometrics. Evidently you do not.
>>8051368
Degenerates come in many different forms, anon.
>>8051380
Brainlet detected
>>8051380
We're all pseuds here anyway.
>>8051385
>I also happen to have a 157 IQ
certainly not 156 or 158
>>8051385
>bragging on the internet period
:') your self esteem is so low (and you won't admit this to yourself) that you have to validate yourself online on a chinese cartoon forum. did you not get laid in high school? did your fat girlfriend Ursula cheat on you? either way, I wish you well in the future
>>8051368
>mensa members are known degenerates
so was pinecone tho
>>8051368
>muh degeneracy
People with higher IQs are more likely to experiment sexually and with substances than brainlets.
>>8051431
Explain why those teenage boys who smoke weed and play COD all day exist.
>muh intellect drug meme
>>8051482
Having a high IQ doesn't mean you make good decisions all the time as a juvenile and won't fall for an addictive activity.
>>8051486
I have an IQ of about 115. How fucked am I?
>>8051493
You're sitting on the borderline for having the capacity to succeed in law or medicine so get your ass to work.
>>8051497
I graduated from high school at 16 and majored in Computer Science. Now I shit post on 4chan. Still good?
>>8051502
>Now I shit post on 4chan
no
>>8051497
How do you know what occupations go with selected ranges? Got a chart or something?
>>8051521
For law, they've found that LSAT scores track well with IQ, and the score that serves as essentially the cut off for whether you have acceptable odds of passing the bar later or not tracks to an IQ or just a little over 115.
I don't remember what it's called, but there's a good bit of evidence that something in the 115-120 range is where diminishing returns come in for success in intellectually demanding professions. People with lower than that get in, but they're not getting into Harvard Law or Medical. However, plenty of people at Harvard Law and medical are going to be right around 120.
>>8051361
Too scared to tell us your Myers-Briggs? Your income bracket? Length, girth, diameter?
>>8051594
ESTJ
$300k
8x6 calculate diameter yourself
>>8051493
I tested at 129 on the adult scale when I was in 4th grade and I'm fucking retarded.
>Everyone talking about IQ
Could you repeat the question
>>8051599
You're a fraudulent little bitch but it's more fun to play along, so I will. Why do you post here?
>>8051612
What? Obviously I'm joking.
I post here because I'm addicted to this timesink hellhole.
If it makes any of you feel better I have an IQ of 160+ and I really detest Pynchon's writing. I feel his ramblings are far more at home in a scientific journal than in literature - that is to say that they're detailed and specific to the extent that they detract from any literary clout that his novels might have held.
I have no idea what my IQ is because I am afraid I won't make it past 100 of I take the test.
I don't feel retarded enough to be hopeless but I definitely feel outclassed compared to a lot of people when it comes to recognizing patterns and discerning advanced logic.
>>8051651
Yeah well I'm Thomas Pynchon and have an IQ of 190 so you can suck my wrinkly old schlong.
>>8051660
I fucking hate your books pal
>>8051651
Also, obligatory Myers-Briggs, income, and length/girth/diameter:
INTP/ENTP/ENTJ (depends on my mood honestly; I've been clinically depressed for years and also enjoy a bit of substance use)
~$1500
7x6
That being said, I've come to realize the value of hard work and knowledge over natural intelligence.
>>8051660
I'm sure you'd do it yourself if you didn't have those fucking rat teeth, Pinecone.
>op asks about writing
>retards start crying about MUH IQ MUH 180 IQ !
Jesus fuck, IQ tards are the new fedora. Oh wait fedoras actually talk about IQ a lot. So you are just basic fedoras, not neo-ones
>>8051658
Honestly, it's not really worth it to - I wouldn't do it for any reason other than if necessary. I got an IQ test when I was younger along with a group of other psychological exams in tests for OCD tendencies and Aspergers.
>>8051694
Except Pynchon's IQ is one of the more specific pieces of personal information we have on him. Do you think you're being gang-stalked by men in fedoras?
>>8051701
Yeah I'd say it's definitely a crucial part of the way he writes and how his writing is meant to be analyzed/interpreted. It's also a big distinction because, if I remember right, successful authors oftentimes don't have exceptionally high IQ's.
>>8051701
Source on his IQ ? Pretty about him is made up with the exception of like 3 interviews
>iq thread
>everyone is significantly above genius level
>people posting "i tested 160 and im really dumb!" as a subtle way of lie-bragging
>self-estimated iqs of above 140
>"iq doesnt mean anything" people who dont understand some proven correlations
Ok its done, no more, weve already had this thread
>>8051717
It's from an old girlfriend of his. From his writing though - I would definitely say it's up there.
I was really interested in OP's question. Better luck next time, I guess.
>>8051742
>Ok its done, no more, weve already had this thread
We have it three times a day.
>>8051742
>brainlets really believe this
It's like your IQ is too low to understand that IQ does not define people beyond their logical reasoning and processing skills. Also, you should do some research in the statistical significance of IQ results.
>>8051750
The answer is: you need to be so smart that your ability to convey information overshadows the way your information is expressed. I'm the one who described his writing as unnecessarily analytical, and it turns out he wrote copy for Boeing for years before becoming an actual author.
>>8051742
>that one guy who doesn't understand what correlation is
>that one guy who doesn't understand sample sizes
>that one guy who is 'done' with the thread but is still monitoring constantly
4chan pretty muchs disproves any IQ study, we have a lot of people with 140+ IQ who are either NEET or not successful at all in any field. At the most we have some STEM students but that's pretty much it.
>>8051779
>that fallacy
>tfw too buzy
>>8051779
continue discussing your iqs then, im just pointing out that we have these threads like 9 times a day and its never not cringeworthy
>>8051790
>spits out the fallacy fallacy as he posts examples of people who are not in this thread saying dumb things
>>8051809
>implying it wasn't you who made that post
>>8051257
My cult leader had an iq of 175 and he was an asshole. Correlation does not imply causation but I think he led that get to his head.
>>8051809
>spits the fallacy fallacy fallacy
>is still in the thread shitposting
>>8051814
>I think he led that get to his head.
>my cult leader
kek it sounds like he rused you.
>>8051814
>My cult leader had an iq of 175
pro tip
every time someone claims to have an IQ higher than say 140 they're probably lying or mistaken unless you have some evidence of the fact
175 in particular is such an absurd number that it puts him in top 100 in America and is almost certainly BS unless you have very good reason to think otherwise
write obscure references into your book
watch losers and academia eat it up like gold shit
>>8051825
I might have gotten it wrong but it was pretty high. Unless he was lying. I found that factoid in his publications so theres that
>>8051672
>obligatory Myers-Briggs, income, and length/girth/diameter
As the poster who initially asked for those, die faster.
I mean there is really no way to satisfy you all, but I'll try to answer a few of the things that keep popping up:
>Why does everyone on /lit/ have a 140+ IQ?
Realistically, individuals with higher IQ's will be the ones dedicated to discussion or research in academic fields at a serious level. I understand 4chan is far from a fully-academic board for discussion, but the reasoning that pages like "I Fucking Love Science" are only tangentially related to the field of science are because only a surface level discussion will hold people who are generally disinterested in anything intellectually stimulating.
>What does IQ have to do with this?
Pynchon's writing is definitely related to his intelligence - without a doubt. You don't want to write like Pynchon because his writing isn't really that good, and even when it is good, it is far too analytical to be stimulating beyond the stimulation reading a medical journal might give you.
Anything else?
>>8051805
Golf doesn't even exist.
>>8051805
>he thinks golf exists
Brainlets must lead such strange lives.
>>8051766
Just curious - what works of Pinecone's have you read? Personally I wouldn't consider any of his works outside of maybe his first three to be particularly analytical.
>>8051851
I don't really get why anyone posing as an intellectual would say that. At that point, you can just say nothing really exists, and we are only a product of our gestures and actions which ultimately have no meaning, but even then that's a pretty flimsy concept unless you go full Stirner.
>>8051864
I've read Lot 49 (favorite), GR, V, and Inherent Vice. Never read Mason & Dixon.
>>8051842
What about actually responding to OP?
>>8051842
>Realistically, individuals with higher IQ's will be the ones dedicated to discussion or research in academic fields at a serious level.
the average IQ on /lit/ is definitely above 100 don't get me wrong but it's nowhere near the levels you'd expect if you took these threads at face value
realistically it's probably somewhere closer to 110 or 115
and 115 is not a bad score, it puts you in the top 15% of people which while nothing spectacular is nothing to scoff at either
140 puts you in the top 0.4% of people, one in 250, higher than (or by the absolute most generous estimates equal to) the average Harvard graduate and it's plainly absurd to think any popular website or forum has a median IQ of anything near that
>>8051385
What you don't understand is what IQ measures and how it's meant to be used, the fact that intelligence is relative (we determine if a person is 'smart' by a monolithic 'a little' or 'yes' or 'no' answer since we utilize executive functioning to sort through an individual's idiosyncratic compilation of traits), and the fact that IQ measures academic functioning and learning conditions that interfere with functionality more than anything else. This is actually the only need for a clinical definition of intelligence, for statistical purposes to help clients function better in life. Retake your psych 101 class instead of spouting memes.
>>8051876
I did in discussing how IQ was related to Pynchon's writing. Step one, be smart, step two, write in an unnecessarily detailed way that only a genius would be able to write in.
>>8051878
>the average IQ on /lit/ is definitely above 100 don't get me wrong but it's nowhere near the levels you'd expect
this. consensus here keeps saying it's 140. I'd say it's more like 135.
t. 145 IQ guy
Any educated person knows that psychology as a whole is a joke. I'm not sure why you people are discussing IQ, might as well be discussin the horoscope or what twilight character you resemble the most.
>>8051344
>>8051376
>trying to brag about shit on fucking 4chan
>>8051928
>ny educated person knows that psychology as a whole is a joke
What's up with this meme?
>>8051257
Which one of you faggots paid tribute...
>>8051931
4chan hasn't been exclusively basement dwellers since like 2008.
>>8051257
He's not that good. I like him, but he's not worth emulating.
Listen to Lotion, especially the album Nobody's Cool.
>>8051298
Back to Europe.
I have an IQ of 121. What can I achieve with this IQ?
>>8052042
a graduate degree. but not postgrad.
>>8052041
how did you get from someone jokingly suggesting cornell isnt good enough to be ivy to saying "back to europe"?
whats it like being handicapped?
>>8052051
rip
>>8051390
Brainlet lmao
>>8051875
If you like him enough to read multiple works by him but still find him overly analytical, I'd recommend M&D. It's mostly focused on prose and building characters, and while it has his usual "voice", it's far more lyrical and less analytical than, say, GR.
>ITT people lie about their IQs without understanding the concept of standard deviation and the statistical improbability of their claims
>>8052131
Why would I lie about my 121, lmao.
>>8052131
Are you telling me every time you see an outlier you clap your hands to your ears and shout no no no?
>>8052131
4chan is full of autists. There's a correlation with autism and high IQs.
>>8052207
kek
>>8052207
Rather, when you see a large amount of outliers grouped as such it points to a problem with the data gathered.
>>8052221
Experimental design with biases built in doesn't mean the subjects are deceiving you.
>>8051257
bernie sanders?
>>8051766
>>8051842
>>8051864
>>8052125
Why do you guys say Pynchon's style is "analytical?" I'd say it's definitely detail orientated, but "analytical?" can you give some examples? I don't think adding in science references means that his writing is analytical. I'm not even sure what you mean by that, anyways. In my opinion, it's more rambling and excessive.
I wish Pynchon would come back and post here again like he did back in 2010.
That was the best of /lit/ times.
>>8052391
bullshit
>>8052391
how do u know i'm not posting here right now?
>>8052242
pinecone
>>8052391
Do you have pastas of his post anon?
>>8052397
Why do you doubt he was, friend?
>>8052402
Hello, Tommy, my good friend.
>>8052391
Never mind, I found one
Shakespeare criticism is by and large an index of things not worth saying about Shakespeare.
He has a massive vocabulary, a command of differing high and low styles, and most importantly there's no biography we have that could "explain" his work away. In other words, he's still a mystery in a way that Dante (who did meet Beatrice and wrote from that inspiration) or Joyce (who did meet Nora and immortalized the day she first gave him a handjob) are not. Because we figure, oh Dante or Joyce did it for a girl they loved and lost or didn't lose, or whatever.
Hence, the authorship debate. Freud thought the plays were written by the Earl of Oxford. Walt Whitman and Mark Twain believed the Bacon theory. HELEN FUCKING KELLER believed the plays were written by Francis Bacon. (See the new book by Shapiro, "Contested Will", if you doubt me.)
You want to know my theory?
One English writer gets to be the most famous writer of all time. His name? Shakespeare (or so they say).
Meanwhile, 400+ years earlier, the only Englishman ever to be elected Pope gets elected as Pope. He promptly uses his powers to give Ireland to the King of England, which says a lot about the Papacy and about Irish Catholics. What was his name?
Well, Pope Adrian IV. The only English Pope. Look it up. His real name was Breakspeare.
Obviously Shakespeare was some kind of pen name. Obviously there is a conspiracy. I just find it hilarious that it's only within the past 10 years or so that people have started to suggest (based on the "Shake-shafte" found in a Catholic recusant household during Shakespeare's lost years) that Shakespeare might have been Catholic. DUH. Joyce noticed this, Antony Burgess noticed this, they both knew about Shakespeare / Breakspeare. They just had better things to write than more fapping over the supposedly greatest writer of all time.
Pic related: It's Hamlet's Uncle, the Roman who conquered Britannia and was deified there.
>>8052436
say morepls
>>8052445
But did you ever think maybe Joyce realized that people were so obsessed with Shakespeare that they were not prepared to acknowledge another great writer, and so to make them pay attention, he just gave his book the title of the character who has the longest, most boring single speech in Shakespeare's work: Ulysses?
Ulysses, whose father, incidentally, had the same name as Ophelia's brother. Laertes. Nobody mentions this in the National Library chapter of Joyce's novel. It's probably irrelevant. But what if it isn't?
>>8052445
>>If indeed they were all by one writer, then it is entirely fair to say that man is the greatest writer in the history of the English language. Some might contest Milton,
True. But what if they were written by more than one writer? What would that do to our heroic ideas of authorship and lone genius?
Or put it this way: Sir William Empson, who was a very well-read and intelligent man, and a good poet, so I won't knock him for being a critic, at the end of his life declared that he had read Marvell's satirical poems "Advice to a Painter" and decided that it was clearly the work of 6 different people. Most professional Marvell scholars thought Empson was just off his trolley (as they say in the UK), and he probably was.
But seriously....what if? We act like geniuses act in isolation, that they owe nothing to other people.....and then suddenly somebody discovers that John Milton plagiarized one of the best phrases in Lycidas from a lousy poem called "Sir John Van Olden Barnavelt"
The phrase, incidentally, describes a writer's desire for fame..."that last infirmity of noble minds".
>>8051298
It's the best of the ivy leagues for engineering, which is what he majored in.
>>8052463
the problem with this theory is the same problem with any conspiracy
keeping tongues from wagging is near impossible
how difficult do you suppose it would be to coordinate six people to write all these works and then to never breathe a word of their work for all their lives?
extremely, I imagine.
>>8052436
>>8052457
>>8052463
Yeah, I remember that guy. He wasn't Pynchon.
Plus, I prefer to think Pynchon is smart enough to not say some of the retarded shit that guy said. There was one guy in the thread saying, "holy cow, you're so smart" and shit blew up for no reason. Then the guy didn't deny he wasn't Pynchon in the thread so everyone ran with it and got carried away.
Dude's a lunatic with some of his /lit/ theories.
>>8052505
If it were then Tommy really has smoked himself fucking retarded because all of this dude's theories were fucking retarded.
>>8052501
Someone said he posted on lit and tv about making a manuscript about a Japanese insurance salesman who has a fetish for the Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory scene where the girl turns into a blueberry, so when he hears that Tim Burton is making a remake of the movie he goes on the internet to protest.
>>8052523
>Someone said
Welp, there ya go.
>>8052523
This is so funny I wish it was real.
>>8052579
not OP, All I've found is here
http://4chandata.org/lit/Ok-so-seriouslyWas-that-really-Thomas-Pynchon-posting-those-crazy-TCoL49-explanations-and-Shakespeare-conspiracy-theories-and-Will-a673537
>>8052579
No. Just start going through here:
https://warosu.org/lit/thread/S3039755
No matter who it was, Martin Eve, Max Brooks, Harold Bloom, or Pynchon himself, the stuff he was actually saying, while obscure, was retarded.
>>8052436
This doesn't read like Pynchon at all.
>>8052579
you can also read here
https://warosu.org/lit/thread/S3039755
>>8052634
You really think, if it were him, that he'd shitpost exactly the same as he would write a novel?
>>8052634
It clearly isn't. /lit/ has a love affair with the idea (emphasis on it being just an idea) that a good writer actually comes here for two very pitiful reasons. First, they want to pretend they're in good company and not talking to a bunch of jobless losers who have /b/ open in another tab. Second, they want to believe that the content of this board is so intriguing as to capture the interest of a successful, intelligent person like Pynchon.
The best this place will ever get is Tao Lin—quite rightly.
>>8052663
I wish you'd stop hating yourself so much, anon. It's hurting you and the people who care about you.
>>8051777
>NEET
Doesn't really disprove anything though. What it does prove is that you need to be an average IQ jarhead that can regurgitate information in order to be successful.
>>8051904
But most geni do waste their genius. There is a point where a high IQ can be detrimental, especially when we live in a society where original thought and ideas often leads to being told you're crazy or a dreamer.
>>8051344
Also, I'm a really smart math guy like other smart guys think I'm smart. Also I rapped on a track with the Geto Boys, all the rap guys want my verses. And and, own an island. F-four, in fact.
>>8052750
high iq and original thought and ideas are two very different things
iq test basically measures how well you can solve riddles... if your iq is high you can solve them well, but how is it related to thinking originally?
>>8051742
Do you know what I see in this thread?
Do you really want to know? You might not like the answer, but you're all smart people and can probably get by intuition that what I am saying here does in fact add up correctly.
I see a whole lot of assumptions in this thread.
I don't see a lot of arguments in this thread.
>>8053499
this whole thread is an argument you fucking ponce
i'm arguing with you right now but you're probably 2 fokkn dense to know it aye cmon now son
crabby bunch here.
>>8053514
Oh, people are arguing, but are there any valid arguments in this thread? No. And yet I do see a lot of assumptions, this is a big thread and I wouldn't be able to count them all. Can any arguments which use assumptions be valid? No.
