How Smart Are You?

Probably not as smart as you think? - Understanding IQ and the Illusion of Intelligence Among the Less Intelligent

By Tim McGuinness, Ph.D., DFin, MCPO, MAnth , Emeritus Council

What IQ Measures and What It Does Not

IQ, or intelligence quotient, is a standardized measurement designed to assess cognitive abilities such as problem-solving, reasoning, and abstract thinking. While IQ tests are not perfect indicators of intelligence, they remain one of the most widely used methods for measuring cognitive capability. The average IQ score in the United States hovers around 98, placing most Americans within the "normal" intelligence range of 85 to 115. However, the distribution of intelligence is not uniform, and significant disparities exist between individuals at the higher and lower ends of the spectrum.

IQ is not a measure of knowledge, wisdom, or creativity. It does not capture emotional intelligence, social intelligence, or practical skills. However, it does correlate with academic success, career achievement, and the ability to navigate complex information. Higher IQ individuals often excel in fields requiring deep analysis, strategic thinking, and adaptability, while lower IQ individuals may struggle with tasks that require abstract reasoning and long-term planning.

The Dunning-Kruger Effect: Why Less Intelligent People Overestimate Their Intelligence

One of the most well-documented cognitive biases that plays a role in how people perceive their intelligence is the Dunning-Kruger effect. This phenomenon describes how individuals with lower cognitive ability tend to overestimate their competence because they lack the necessary skills to recognize their own shortcomings. This effect is particularly visible in discussions about intelligence, where those with below-average IQs frequently believe they are more knowledgeable than those who are demonstrably more intelligent.

People with lower IQs often rely on simple heuristics—mental shortcuts—that make them feel confident in their beliefs, even when those beliefs are demonstrably incorrect. Instead of questioning their own limitations, they assume that those who disagree with them are misinformed or less capable. This is why you often see individuals who struggle with logical reasoning dismissing experts, rejecting complex explanations in favor of oversimplified narratives, and believing that their personal opinions carry the same weight as well-researched conclusions.

Higher IQ individuals, by contrast, tend to be more aware of what they do not know. They recognize the complexity of issues, acknowledge the limits of their knowledge, and remain open to refining their perspectives based on new evidence. Paradoxically, this self-awareness can sometimes make highly intelligent people appear less confident than those who lack the cognitive ability to recognize their own errors.

Intelligence Distribution: A Wide Divide

IQ follows a normal distribution, meaning that most people cluster around the average, with fewer individuals appearing at either extreme. The standard deviation of IQ scores is 15 points, meaning that about 68 percent of people score between 85 and 115. However, as you move further from the mean, the number of people in those categories decreases sharply.

• Below 85 (Low IQ) – This group struggles with complex reasoning, abstract thought, and long-term planning. Many within this range have difficulty managing financial decisions, understanding nuanced arguments, or solving unfamiliar problems.
• 85–115 (Average IQ) – Most people fall into this category. They can handle routine cognitive tasks, participate in everyday problem-solving, and function independently in society.
• 115–130 (Above Average IQ) – Individuals in this range tend to excel academically and professionally. They process information quickly, grasp abstract concepts, and demonstrate strong reasoning abilities.
• 130+ (High IQ) – This group includes individuals who thrive in intellectually demanding fields, such as scientific research, engineering, and philosophy. They are capable of abstract thinking at a level that is difficult for lower IQ individuals to grasp.

Example of Smart People

Historical Figures

• Leonardo da Vinci (1452–1519) - The ultimate Renaissance man: artist, inventor, scientist. He designed flying machines, dissected bodies for anatomy, and painted the Mona Lisa. Experts like Jonathan Wai, in a 2012 Psychology Today piece, estimate his IQ at 180–200 based on his polymathic output, easily clearing 140.
• Isaac Newton (1643–1727) - Revolutionized physics with gravity and calculus. His Principia Mathematica is a brain-bender even today. Estimated IQs range from 170–193, per historical analyses like those from Libb Thims, who ranked geniuses by intellectual impact—well above 140.
• Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749–1832) - German poet, playwright, and scientist who shaped literature and color theory. Thims pegged his IQ at 210–225 using a productivity-based method, though that’s debated; 140+ is a safe bet for his versatility.
• Albert Einstein (1879–1955) - Relativity, E=mc2, Nobel Prize. No recorded test, but estimates hover around 160–190, based on his groundbreaking physics and problem-solving, per sources like Reader’s Digest (2024). Definitely over 140.
• Nikola Tesla (1856–1943) - Inventor of AC electricity and visionary thinker. His patents and futuristic ideas suggest an IQ of 160–200, as speculated by historians like Bernard Carlson in his 2013 biography—above 1401749–1832) - German poet, playwright, and scientist who shaped literature and color theory. Thims pegged his IQ at 210–225 using a productivity-based method, though that’s debated; 140+ is a safe bet for his versatility.

Living Figures

• Stephen Hawking (1942–2018) - Okay, he’s not living now, but he was until recently, so I’ll slot him here. Cosmologist who explained black holes to the masses. Estimated IQ of 160, per Healthline (2020), based on his theoretical brilliance—well past 140.
• Marilyn vos Savant (born 1946) - Holds the Guinness record for highest tested IQ at 228, though that’s from a controversial high-range test in the 1980s. Her Stanford-Binet score was 167+, per her own columns in Parade. Either way, she’s over 140.
• Natalie Portman (born 1981) - Actress with a Harvard psychology degree, fluent in multiple languages. Estimated at 140 by Sociosite (undated), based on her academic and creative success—right on the line, but plausible.
• Terence Tao (born 1975) - Mathematician with a Fields Medal, started college at 9. Estimated IQ of 220–230, per Healthline (2020), though likely closer to 170–180 on standard tests. Far exceeds 140.
• Jordan B. Peterson - He’s probably 135–145—smart enough to wrestle with the downsides he warns about, but not so stratospheric that he’s unreachable. His real gift isn’t just raw IQ; it’s how he uses it to connect, even if imperfectly, across that intellectual divide.
• Donald Trump & Elon Musk - For Donald Trump, no hard number exists. He’s never released an IQ score, though he’s often boasted about his intelligence, famously calling himself a “very stable genius” back in 2018. Some researchers and psychologists have tried to peg him with an estimate anyway. A 2006 study from the University of California, Davis, ranked U.S. presidents by estimated IQ based on their education, writings, and leadership—John Quincy Adams topped the list, but Trump wasn’t included since it predates his presidency. Still, people have guessed. Based on his Wharton School degree from the University of Pennsylvania and his real estate success, some suggest he’s in the 120–130 range—above average (100) but not genius-level (140+). Posts on X throw out wilder numbers, from 70 to 170, but those are just opinions with no backing. Without a test, it’s all educated guesswork—probably north of 100, maybe not much more. Elon Musk’s case is similar: no official score, lots of chatter. He’s got a physics degree from Penn and nearly started a PhD at Stanford, plus a track record of building companies like Tesla and SpaceX. Walter Isaacson’s 2023 biography says Musk scored 1400 on his SATs in the late ’80s, which correlates to an IQ in the mid-130s—smart, but not the 155 or 165 some fans claim. A biographer, Seth Abramson, argued in 2025 on X that Musk’s IQ is more like 100–110, saying there’s “zero evidence” of higher intellectual feats tied directly to him. Others, like economic blogger Noah Smith, defend Musk’s brilliance, pointing to his organizational genius over raw test smarts. X posts ping-pong between 90 and 190, but the SAT-based 130s estimate feels most grounded. Still, it’s not a confirmed number—just a solid hint. IQ itself is a narrow measure—logic, patterns, problem-solving—but it skips creativity, emotional depth, or practical know-how, which both these guys lean on heavily. Trump’s a communicator and dealmaker; Musk’s a visionary and risk-taker. Their “intelligence” shows up in results, not just a score. The average American IQ is 98, per studies like the 2019 The Intelligence of Nations, so both are likely well above that. How far? Trump maybe above 130, Musk maybe above 140 or even 150.

The Social Consequences of IQ Differences

IQ differences create natural divisions in society, not just in terms of academic and career success, but also in how individuals perceive reality and interact with others. The inability of lower IQ individuals to recognize their own limitations often leads to overconfidence in their opinions, making them more susceptible to misinformation, conspiracy theories, and simplistic explanations for complex issues.

Meanwhile, individuals with higher IQs frequently find themselves misunderstood or dismissed, particularly when trying to explain intricate concepts to those who lack the cognitive framework to process them. This leads to frustration on both sides—those with lower intelligence feel patronized, while those with higher intelligence feel unheard or dismissed.

This dynamic is visible in political discourse, social debates, and even personal relationships. Highly intelligent individuals may struggle to find common ground with those who lack the ability to engage in nuanced discussions, leading to communication breakdowns and social alienation.

Why Intelligence Is Not Universally Valued

Despite the clear advantages of intelligence in problem-solving and decision-making, society does not always value high IQ individuals. In many cases, intelligence is met with skepticism or even hostility. People with lower IQs often perceive highly intelligent individuals as arrogant or out of touch, particularly when their ideas challenge deeply held beliefs.

This is especially evident in discussions about science, technology, and policy. Experts in fields such as climate science, economics, and epidemiology frequently encounter resistance from those who lack the cognitive ability to understand the data and methodologies underlying expert conclusions. Rather than admitting they do not understand, many individuals prefer to reject expert opinions outright, accusing scientists and intellectuals of being biased, elitist, or manipulative.

How Intelligence Affects Perceived Reality

IQ influences not only how individuals process information but also how they perceive reality itself. Those with lower cognitive ability tend to see the world in more black-and-white terms, relying on oversimplifications to make sense of complex issues. This is why populist rhetoric, conspiracy theories, and emotional appeals are more effective among those with lower intelligence—they cater to a need for certainty and simplicity.

In contrast, higher IQ individuals tend to embrace complexity, recognizing that most issues involve multiple variables and trade-offs. This ability to think in shades of gray rather than absolutes allows them to navigate uncertainty more effectively, but it also makes their perspectives harder to communicate to those who prefer simple, emotionally satisfying answers.

The Role of Education and Critical Thinking

While IQ is largely hereditary, education and exposure to critical thinking skills can help mitigate some of the cognitive gaps between individuals. Teaching logical reasoning, skepticism, and intellectual humility can help those with lower cognitive ability recognize their limitations and become more receptive to expert knowledge. However, this requires a cultural shift toward valuing intellectual honesty over certainty.

Many high-functioning societies prioritize education and critical thinking as a way to bridge the gap between intelligence levels. Countries with strong educational systems, such as Finland and Japan, tend to have populations that are more scientifically literate and less susceptible to misinformation. This suggests that while innate intelligence varies, the ability to reason critically can be nurtured through education and societal values.

Why This Matters in the Real World: Politics, Business, and Decision-Making

IQ disparities are not just an academic topic; they have real-world consequences that affect politics, business, and societal decision-making. The way intelligence is distributed across a population influences how policies are formed, how businesses operate, and how societies handle complex challenges. When individuals with lower cognitive ability overestimate their intelligence while dismissing those with higher intelligence, it can lead to poor decision-making on a large scale.

The Impact of IQ in Politics

In democratic systems, where public opinion drives elections and policy decisions, the intelligence gap plays a significant role. Politicians and political strategists understand that appealing to emotion is far more effective than relying on facts, data, or logic. Since a large portion of the population operates with limited cognitive ability, political campaigns are often designed to cater to simple narratives rather than complex, evidence-based discussions.

Highly intelligent individuals are often frustrated by the state of political discourse because they see how easily misinformation spreads and how little critical thinking is applied to policy debates. Meanwhile, those with lower IQs may believe they fully understand political issues despite lacking the depth of knowledge required to grasp them. This leads to the rejection of expert opinions, the rise of populist movements that thrive on oversimplifications, and policies that prioritize short-term emotional satisfaction over long-term viability.

One of the clearest examples of this dynamic is how scientific and economic policies are handled. When experts warn about issues such as climate change, financial instability, or public health risks, their nuanced arguments are often met with skepticism or outright hostility from those who lack the ability to fully understand the data. Instead of engaging with the complexities of these topics, many voters prefer simple explanations, conspiracy theories, or outright denial of inconvenient truths. This leads to policies that are driven by emotion rather than rational analysis, often resulting in long-term consequences that could have been avoided with more informed decision-making.

IQ in the U.S. Congress

The 119th Congress, sworn in January 2025, spans a range of ages, likely from the mid-20s (new young members like Maxwell Frost, now 28) to the upper 80s or low 90s (veterans like Chuck Grassley, now 91), based on trends from FiscalNote’s 2023 report on the prior Congress. The average age is probably still around 58 in the House and 64 in the Senate, though exact figures depend on the 2024 election turnover. IQ tends to stabilize in adulthood, but fluid intelligence—like quick problem-solving—dips slightly with age, while crystallized intelligence (knowledge) holds steady. Most members are seasoned, with careers in law, business, or public office before Congress, suggesting a baseline of at least 110–115 to thrive in those fields.

This May Surprise You

the top 10 smartest people in the U.S. Congress as of March 7, 2025—specifically the 119th Congress, sworn in January 2025. Since there’s no public IQ test data for these folks, I’ll base this on indirect markers: education, professional achievements, legislative impact, and how they’re perceived in terms of intellectual heft. I’ll focus on cognitive ability—reasoning, problem-solving, verbal skills—over political savvy or ideology. This is subjective, but I’ll ground it in what’s known about their backgrounds and contributions. Here’s my take.

1. Bill Foster (D-IL, House) - He’s got a PhD in physics from Harvard and worked as a particle physicist at Fermilab, co-inventing tech for accelerators. A 2023 Wall Street Oasis thread called him a standout for his raw brainpower among the “poli-sci majors and dumbass lawyers.” His legislative work on science policy shows he can wrestle with complex ideas. Likely IQ: 140+.
2. Jerry Nadler (D-NY, House) - Columbia Law grad, decades in Congress, and chair of the Judiciary Committee during Trump’s first impeachment. A 2021 Leadership Connect study named him among the most effective House Democrats for getting bills passed. His debates reveal sharp legal reasoning and memory. Probably 130–140.
3. Mitt Romney (R-UT, Senate) - Harvard Law and MBA, valedictorian at BYU, turned around the 2002 Olympics, and ran Bain Capital. His 2012 campaign showed analytical depth, even if polarizing. Posts on X often peg him as a “smart conservative,” and his Senate speeches blend data and principle. Around 130–135.
4. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN, Senate) - Yale undergrad, University of Chicago Law, and a former prosecutor. Leadership Connect (2021) ranked her among the most active senators, with bills becoming law. Her 2020 presidential run highlighted her knack for detailed policy arguments. Likely 130–140.
5. Elise Stefanik (R-NY, House) - Harvard grad, youngest woman elected to Congress in 2014, now U.S. Ambassador to the UN as of 2025 (resigned her seat). Her rapid rise and incisive questioning—like in the 2023 university president hearings—suggest high verbal IQ. Probably 130–135.
6. Marco Rubio (R-FL, Senate) - University of Miami Law, fluent in Spanish, and a key foreign policy voice. Leadership Connect (2021) called him the most active senator by bill sponsorship. His books and speeches show strategic thinking, even if his style is more rhetorical than technical. Around 125–135.
7. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY, House) - NYU Law, House Minority Leader since 2023, and a master communicator. His 2025 speakership challenge to Mike Johnson (lost 215–218) showed tactical smarts. USA Today (2023) noted his “centrist, low-key” approach, masking a sharp mind. Likely 130–135.
8. Ted Cruz (R-TX, Senate) - Princeton undergrad, Harvard Law, clerked for Chief Justice Rehnquist and won big Supreme Court cases as Texas Solicitor General. His beard might get more press, but his debate chops—like grilling tech CEOs in 2024—scream high IQ. Probably 135–145.
9. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA, Senate) - Harvard Law professor, created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and wrote influential books on economics. Her 2020 campaign was policy-heavy, and her Senate questioning is meticulous. Estimated at 130–140 by peers on X.
10. Josh Hawley (R-MO, Senate) - Yale Law, clerked for Chief Justice Roberts, and Missouri Attorney General by 36. His 2024 Senate reelection leaned on constitutional arguments, and his book The Tyranny of Big Tech shows depth. Likely 130–135.

Why these ten? Education’s a big clue—Harvard, Yale, and PhDs signal top-tier ability (top 1% is ~135 IQ). Pre-Congress careers like law, physics, or business leadership demand reasoning skills above the average congressional baseline of 115 I estimated earlier. Legislative effectiveness—per studies like Leadership Connect—and public debates hint at who can think on their feet. I left out some names like Nancy Pelosi (retired 2025) or Rand Paul (smart but less data-driven) to focus on current standouts.

How IQ Affects Business and Leadership

In the business world, intelligence plays a crucial role in innovation, strategy, and problem-solving. High-IQ individuals are more likely to create new technologies, develop efficient systems, and adapt to changing market conditions. However, just as in politics, intelligence gaps can lead to conflicts in decision-making.

Successful businesses rely on leaders who can think critically, anticipate future challenges, and make strategic decisions based on data and analysis. However, many companies are influenced by employees, stakeholders, or customers who do not have the cognitive ability to understand the complexities of a given industry. This can result in poor corporate decision-making, where short-term gains are prioritized over long-term stability.

One major challenge in business is the inability of lower-IQ individuals to recognize when they are out of their depth. This can manifest in:

• Overconfidence in decision-making – Employees or managers who lack the ability to analyze complex data may still believe they are making informed choices, leading to strategic mistakes.
• Resistance to innovation – Businesses that rely on outdated models often struggle to adapt because decision-makers do not fully grasp the benefits of technological advancements.
• Inability to assess risk – Individuals with lower cognitive ability may not recognize financial, operational, or reputational risks until it is too late.

In contrast, businesses led by high-IQ individuals often have an advantage in strategic planning, crisis management, and long-term growth. However, these individuals frequently struggle with communication, as they must simplify their ideas for broader audiences who may not grasp complex concepts.

The Disconnect Between Intelligence and Influence

One of the biggest challenges in both politics and business is that intelligence does not always correlate with influence. Many highly intelligent individuals lack the social skills, charisma, or populist appeal needed to sway large groups of people. Meanwhile, individuals with lower intelligence, but high confidence and strong emotional appeal, often rise to leadership positions despite lacking the cognitive ability to make sound decisions.

This disconnect explains why many businesses and governments make choices that seem irrational to those who prioritize data and logic. Public perception, emotional appeal, and simple messaging often win over complex reasoning and evidence-based strategies. As a result, societies and organizations frequently make suboptimal choices that could have been avoided with a more rational, intelligence-driven approach.

Why Recognizing Intelligence Disparities Matters

Understanding the role of intelligence in real-world decision-making is essential for improving the way societies function. Recognizing that many people overestimate their own intelligence while rejecting the expertise of those who are more capable allows us to address problems more effectively. In politics, this means creating policies that prioritize education and critical thinking skills to improve public understanding. In business, it means ensuring that decision-makers have the analytical ability to make informed choices.

The consequences of ignoring intelligence disparities are clear—misinformation spreads unchecked, poor decisions are made at every level of society, and emotional narratives overpower rational thought. Addressing these issues requires an honest conversation about the role of intelligence in shaping our world and the importance of relying on expertise rather than overconfidence.

My Final Thought

The differences in IQ across individuals create a wide divide in how people interpret the world, assess information, and engage in decision-making. Those with lower IQs often overestimate their intelligence due to cognitive biases like the Dunning-Kruger effect, leading them to dismiss expert knowledge and rely on simplistic explanations. Meanwhile, higher IQ individuals, though more capable of nuanced thinking, often struggle to communicate their ideas effectively to those who lack the cognitive framework to process them.

This disconnect has significant implications for education, public policy, and social cohesion. While intelligence differences are a reality, fostering critical thinking and intellectual humility can help bridge the gap, allowing for more constructive dialogue and informed decision-making. Recognizing that intelligence is not evenly distributed and that cognitive biases affect how people perceive themselves and others is crucial for understanding the social dynamics that shape our world.