Your argument does not have merit it has personal narrative just all perceptions do. In order for an argument to be valid it must be deductively valid meaning true premises and true conclusions. In order to test for validity you can test the hypothesis /STUTTERINGHOLDSMEBACK/ but their are countless people who have overcome their stuttering. The fact that people have overcome it destroys all of your premises. The life experiences of one man is not testable statistical fact. Prem 1) Stuttering holds me back. Conclusion/ Stuttering is the reason for my woes in life Valid Y/N : INVALID Also dude using reasoning( left brain) to interpret emotion(right brain) often always leads to invalid perceptions like this. Learn to be more emotional because EQ is a bigger determinant of life success than IQ. The most influential people to have lived had both high IQ and EQ. High IQ people are grunt engineers while people with both include people use their expansive knowledge of IQ related tasks and EQ related tasks to change the world around them. For example Steve Wozniak was high IQ while Steve jobs was high EQ. Without each other apple computers would have been some shit Wozniak thought of in his wet dreams it was Steve Job's people skills that put it into consumers hands.