A very reliable source has now told me that Curtis Yarvin’s SAT score at age 13 was 1540, and that his cited 167 IQ was not on the SMPY entrance exam, but on a separate test he took.
Your analysis is flawed. You computed the likelihood, not the most probable value. Given your assumptions, the most probable value is 150 +/- 4.2.
Second, when you dismiss values we have no evidence of (a '169' IQ score -- I mean, 69? 13^2? It's a joke) and add in evidence we know with certainty, you get a very different result.
When you consider that the g loading of years worth of writing must be pretty high (it's like a 4 year long test), and the fact that his writing is, say, 1.87 SD intelligence (midwit-tier cleverness), you get a predicted IQ of 136 +/- 1.19. So his IQ is in between 132 and 139 with high certainty.
The average of the potential "Yarvins" is more informative than the most probable value. The mode is uninformative. An individual with a mode of potential IQ scores of 110 with all other scores above 120 should be assumed to be more intelligent than an individual with a mode of 111 and all other potential scores under 100.
I also misrecalled the score the source gave me. It wasn't 169 - it was 167. He did indeed score the same as Ted Kaczynski on the IQ test - for whatever reason I thought that was a score of 169 and not 167.
I do not think subjective judgements of an author's quality of writing are particularly correlated with intelligence, though this is a persistent disagreement that is not worth addressing anymore.
Your analysis is flawed. You computed the likelihood, not the most probable value. Given your assumptions, the most probable value is 150 +/- 4.2.
Second, when you dismiss values we have no evidence of (a '169' IQ score -- I mean, 69? 13^2? It's a joke) and add in evidence we know with certainty, you get a very different result.
When you consider that the g loading of years worth of writing must be pretty high (it's like a 4 year long test), and the fact that his writing is, say, 1.87 SD intelligence (midwit-tier cleverness), you get a predicted IQ of 136 +/- 1.19. So his IQ is in between 132 and 139 with high certainty.
The average of the potential "Yarvins" is more informative than the most probable value. The mode is uninformative. An individual with a mode of potential IQ scores of 110 with all other scores above 120 should be assumed to be more intelligent than an individual with a mode of 111 and all other potential scores under 100.
I also misrecalled the score the source gave me. It wasn't 169 - it was 167. He did indeed score the same as Ted Kaczynski on the IQ test - for whatever reason I thought that was a score of 169 and not 167.
I do not think subjective judgements of an author's quality of writing are particularly correlated with intelligence, though this is a persistent disagreement that is not worth addressing anymore.