According to wikipedia that figure for Feynman seems to be based on 1 IQ test he did in high school.
I'm assuming IQ testing practises have improved since then, it is also possible that his IQ raised significantly as he got older due to extensive study as it is also possible that his IQ test was simply poorly administered for whatever reason.
>>t is also possible that his IQ raised significantly as he got older due to extensive study as it is also possible that his IQ test was simply poorly administered for whatever reason.
Which is why an IQ is useless. If it can rise then it is not really measuring intelligence. Rather it is measuring what you know so far. Which explains why kids from better income families have better IQs.
And yet people treat IQ as a constant. Glad I decided never to let a single number define me. To all you that believe the IQ is important I say ...
I'm not an IQ expert by any stretch but I doubt that it fluctuates that much (in the population in general). Based on the limited reading I have done your IQ will tend to rise as you get older, however in general people will stay in roughly the same position relative to others.
Whilst you can probably influence your IQ by working your brain really hard every day or lower it by doing a lot of drugs I doubt it is really that meaningless as it does tend to correlate well with success.
However I'd be curious to know how it correlates with lifetime income once you control for family income. I assume this has been researched.
Since we are making anecdotal observations I'll posit that you could significantly increase your IQ if you focused on it. Just like if you wanted to play an instrument. You can increase your playing ability by focusing on it, or more specifically, by practicing. That is how I see IQ, as something that you can get better at by practicing, nothing more, nothing less.