IQ is good as an indicator, not a predictor. You can make assumptions that will likely be true on the basis of IQ, but there's very little that you can say for an absolute fact on that basis.

I think we're saying the same thing here. I'd argue IQ is correlated with the some outcome, but that it causal of few or none. Is that roughly what you're getting at too?

When IQ is indicative but not predictive, I just don't see much use there. If I can't predict future behavior, success, or some other metric then I'm not sure why I'd zero in in IQ specifically. I have also found past experience to be indicitive but not predictive, and I don't need to trust a standardized testing method to review experience.

I will agree based on anecdata alone. I have a high IQ, but have achieved much less than you might predict based on that IQ alone--primarily out of lack of desire.

Even though on paper I may be high-potential, in real life I'd prefer to be normal, and for every one of me that exists, there's a 100 IQ person who has the drive and willpower to achieve things that would be considered atypical. Both of us are exceptions, but we both still exist.

You're clearly not that high IQ because you're not able to make the leap into understanding that your own personal experiences don't matter on a societal level, everything is averaged out. A society that is on average low IQ will on average be a low achieving shithole, and vice versa. (Barring say discovering a bunch of oil under your barren sand dunes)

Mate, you should try going out and talking to real people instead of a computer screen and see how they react.

Mate, you should try going out and talking to real people instead of a computer screen and see how they react to you saying such things.

Facts > feelings