High IQ = form of neurodiversity?

Post Reply New Topic

I might say often your lack of pragmatism, has drawn me to read your threads many more than just once

elephant in room

Let's just admit everyone knows high IQ is perceived as "neurosuperiority"
Most high IQ folk don't identify as neurodivergent. But many like to show off how much smarter > average folk
every academic I know can't help themselves.

Nope.

They're not "neurosuperiority".
That's just a reflection of an individual's priority and upbringing related to having high IQ. Or a brand of superiority complex copium over whatever stupid game humans are playing.


You probably never met ex-gifted kids, PhD holders burnout in their 20s and underemployed, or underprivileged ones who never get to their potential.
Might as well never count anyone with twice exceptionality as someone with high IQ. And the not-success stories.


One can get snooty over one's own higher IQ all they want, they don't impress me.
Good analytical power can only be as good as what one can get their hands on with it.

While I don't mind them having their own fun with it, ego play is very trivial.
I don't see anything worth envying when it came to high IQ (the mind is as much as someone one had to regulate, no different than emotions and senses) and I'm not even one of those "better to have higher EQ than IQ" advocate.

So no -- regardless of how they call themselves, I will call them all neurodivergent for they are not a better versions of neurotypical, and for they do and did and will and are very much a divergence from typical.

Pretty impressive , This fellow Tao..extremely accomplished ..read his bio you provided .... impressive

Cognitively I'm not at all straightforward when it comes to ability, with variable performance on fluid IQ type tests. Weakness = things like mental rotation and visual puzzles, but pattern recognition is slightly below very superior level.

Processing speed is also not straightforward. I've not come across anyone else like this(Cognitive strengths and weaknesses were entered into Chatgpt.)

I'm uncertain whether high IQ can be regarded as a form of neurodiversity. What I do know is that I've been accepted more by people with high IQ and/or severe mental illness/autism than by the general population. In the near 5.5 years of being involved with FB's high IQ community my 'friends' have increased x 6.2. The vast majority of that increase being high IQ people wanting to be 'friends' with me.

we will have to agree to disagree then. Just because an individual can perform at a particular level when solving problems doesn't make them neurodivergent, but rather neuro-efficient.

Then you're one of those whose associations with neurodivergency itself is always a form of lack or deficiency from neurotypicality then?

Neuroefficient, neurosuperior -- because that's how one just perceive what "worthiness" is; a score on a paper and how useful they are because society hypes up their type of being -- they're very much likely not neurotypical.

intellectual giftedness in autistic children are 0.7% to 2%, compared with up to 1% in the general public. So it's only marginally higher in autism. My daughter is one of these gifted kids but it hardly matters because she faces significant challenges navigating a neurotypical world.

Might be worth having a working definition of neurodivergent - a person whose brain functions or develops differently from what is considered typical may have unique strengths, they often have specialized skills or different ways of processing information but face challenges in navigating a neurotypical world.

the underlined bit is the sticking point

So, the problem with your claim is that in reality most "high IQ" people have all their ducks in a row (in a manner of speaking) and navigate "satisfactorily" in a neurotypical world. You might say it's because they use their superior intelligence masking the unusual way their brain works. I could equally argue its because they are curious, focused and able to self regulate to stay on task. Perhaps there is some convergence? But my understanding of neurodivergence is it's the very unusual way our brain processes information that makes navigating a neurotypical world challenging and makes us visibly different in our behaviour.

Last edited by cyberdora on 05 Sep 2025, 7:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

When I was a kid adults often said I was smart and really talented. But I'm really not at all, I was only smart and talented for a young child, never an adult. I don't play chess and I hate putting together puzzles, I'm dumb at math, and I barely know how to do what most adults aren't even taught to do because you're supposed to "just know".

Either that, or they treat me like I really am a dumb kid who doesn't even know how to open a door with a key or use an ATM.

Before I was officially diagnosed with Asperger's, the psychiatrist believed at first I was mildly intellectually disabled. Apparently I'm smart for an 18 year old, and we all know how dumb they can be.

A lot of teenage oppositional behaviour is mistaken by professionals for "psychiatric" issues. A lot of parents are hoodwinked by professionals and teachers into thinking there is something wrong with their child.

So your definition of neurodivergence really is more to do with deficiencies and challenges than an actual divergence from the typical development and processes then?
Especially with using the stats that compares autistics with NTs.

Sorry, but I do not accept that.
While disabilities and disorders are the most visible forms of neurodivergencies, they're not the only forms of neurodivergencies.


Not all gifted individuals are "curious" and even with well regulated excitabilities, it doesn't necessarily apply across the board.

Most kids are curious.
A good portion of gifted kids peaked around middle school and high school. And if they did not, they will run into burnouts in early adulthood.

They're not developmentally lagged in any way relative to their age -- they're high IQ, and just as easily mistreated by themselves and the people around them.

Because they don't necessarily have a balanced developmental trajectory.
Kinda like a spiky profile, but in a more globally developmental sense than just the specifics around cognitive profiles alone.
They deal with something like Cartesian split (their minds are more mature than their bodies could handle).


Also for the definition of high IQ -- they don't necessarily meant multi-giftedness (high IQ with an at least equally high EQ, equally high SQ, equally high AQ, etc...)
What you're looking for is not high IQ -- what you're trying to define is a form of multi-giftedness, which is rarer than just high IQ.

Omnigiftedness is a rarest form of giftedness -- the closest you'll ever get to whatever you define as "neurosuperior".
They're not merely just "high IQ"; that's just one of their traits, may not even be their most developmentally advanced trait.

They are what you would described as someone who can navigate and adapt in every systems (and not just the ones made for neurotypicals in mind) seemlessly.

And they are even further away from the neurotypical norm.

^^^ Yeah I accept there is some convergence in brain processing and "giftedness". But I suspect nobody who has high IQ wants to identify as ND if they present as NT and identify as normal. High performance brain yes, divergent brain structure or function...probably not unless the label is packaged as neuro-superior or efficient.

They exist; high IQ identifying as ND.

Because they couldn't relate to NTs, and even thought their processes are "superior" they very much perceived it both a blessing and a curse.

They're not twice exceptional.
They need unlearning habits that helped them in early years but hold them back in later years, therapy from the pressures and expectations, all that academic validation and trauma...


They're not NTs who went through "Asian tiger parenting" either.

And no, not all high IQ types are all ego to call themselves superior.

The argument that they don't count as ND because they can navigate the NT world is almost as bad as saying Bi and Asexuals do not count as LGBT because they can pass for heterosexual and are "not as oppressed".

As a teenager I was a highly intelligent academic underachiever, but young for my age when it came to being self reliant. The sh*t hit the fan belt when trying to please my parents by getting to university, while being very aware I didn't have anywhere near the necessary independent living skills. The high anxiety and stress over that resulted in my becoming severely mentally ill. I think, correct me if I'm wrong, that it was a classic case of 'asynchronous development'. Back in the mid 1970s there was not the help and support for teenagers like me that there is now.

Ok I'm confused? are you saying all high IQ types are neurodivergent ? Sure some are (yes) but somehow I don't think the rest are all "Sheldon Coopers", more likely they are just normal presenting but very clever.

"Normal presenting" doesn't constitute as "neurotypical" either. That's a really shallow definition of what a neurotypical -- or what not a neurodivergent even is.


And no, they ain't "Sheldon Coopers" either. Or whatever the hell that was.
But if you mean by socially obnoxious high on ego types of high IQ individuals, then you're just stereotyping lol