IQ is defined with a standard deviation of either 15 or 16 depending on the test. IQ 1000 is 60σ, or z>1.238e-784. As this is significantly less likely than randomly guessing the correct {plank volume, plank time} pair out of the visible universe from Big Bang to now, much more, I’d agree the such responses didn’t understand the statistics.
I don't think they're misunderstanding, though they may be ignorant of the stats, what they're saying is they want to be unimaginably intelligent. Perhaps assuming that special powers will go with that, like precognition.
It’s surprising how little extra skill in some area is required to seem like a wizard to outsiders. For example, I’m still amazing people by demonstrating Google Translate’s AR mode, and I remember when the tech was first demoed as WordLens 7.5 years ago.
But that is assuming that intelligence is a normal distribution, i.e. arises from a contributions of many independent random variables. Which is a decent approximation for underlying natural processes (human genetic pool and environmental contributions).
But it is just an approximation. For starters, there is a lower bound to intelligence (inert matter) so we're not really dealing with a normal dist, the truth would be closer to a skewed, semi-bounded distribution, we just don't see that because we're just measuring humans instead of also including animals on the left and hypothetical superintelligences on the right.
Secondly, modelling it as random independent variables breaks down if you start to deliberately engineer all those contributing factors. Natural processes are exceedingly unlikely to hatch ants from fly eggs due to random genetic mutation. But a process like evolution or engineering can bring such things into existence.
So asking for an IQ of 1000 is simply saying that you want to be more intelligent than random, natural reproductive processes could give you anytime soon.
> But that is assuming that intelligence is a normal distribution,
No, not intelligence, just IQ. They are not synonymous.
Modifying your example, if there is more than one braindead person on life support at any given moment, the minimum IQ for humans is greater than zero.
IIRC, the concept of IQ originated as the ratio between the individual's intelligence, evaluated through some way such as standardized test scores, and the average test score for individuals within a statistically representative group that reflects the individual's profile (for example, people of a certain age). The mere fact that the IQ is calculated as the ratio of two meaningless values used to reflect an intangible and subjective concept is enough to cast serious doubts about the accuracy of this particular test.
