Intelligence

tomar

Ad Honoris
Jan 2011
14,030
Most people have a "linear" understanding of intelligence.... i.e that humans can be classified according to a scale going from less intelligent (or stupid) to very intelligent (or genius)... The approach to measure IQ is exactly that, as it assigns an "intelligence" score to each person and then some will have a higher score than others....

My observation is different... Most individuals I know have different intelligence levels for different types of activities... Someone could be very good at chess, but very poor in social interaction for example (or vice versa)..... Average IQ is considered to be around 100, so speaking in IQ terms, this person could have 150 for chess but 50 for social interaction.... There is no sense in "averaging out" these 2 skills (or most others)....




 
Nov 2016
1,262
Germany
Intelligence tests are total nonsense. The numbers are bullshit.

It is said that actor James Woods has a much higher IQ than Einstein and Hawking (both 160), namely 180, which would make him the most intelligent man in Hollywood and the tenth smartest man in the world. Compared to Woods, Sylvester Stallone is a dummy (160), but just as smart as Einstein and Hawking. Even Matt Damon is at a modest 160. Sharon Stone should be ashamed - she only has 154.

This is Terence Tao, allegedly No. 1 in the world at present (IQ 230):

1573912655462.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tulius and specul8

MG1962a

Ad Honorem
Mar 2019
2,161
Kansas
My observation is different... Most individuals I know have different intelligence levels for different types of activities... Someone could be very good at chess, but very poor in social interaction for example (or vice versa)..... Average IQ is considered to be around 100, so speaking in IQ terms, this person could have 150 for chess but 50 for social interaction.... There is no sense in "averaging out" these 2 skills (or most others)....
Completely agree. I knew a guy who was illiterate, and came across as pretty stupid build a car from the ground up simply by eye. All the frame and body work was fabricated by eye. Most astonishing thing I have ever seen!!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: specul8

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
27,360
Italy, Lago Maggiore
The most used IQ tests are culturally polluted [by the Anglo-Saxon approach to knowledge]. There is a curious persuasion that knowledge and memory are in some way connected with intelligence. Personally when I was studying mind philosophy I noted that attention seems to be the engine of intelligence: more attention capability = more intelligence. That is to say that perception and awareness [the columns of attention] generate intelligence.

Intelligence is the computational capability of a brain, but it's connected, directly, with the quality of the information and this depends on how the brain acquires that information [so perception and awareness].

Anyway, obviously enough, IQ tests are scientifically valid [once we understand their cultural orientation] and they give an indication about the capabilities of the brain of an individual [from the perspective of the Anglo-Saxon culture].
 

specul8

Ad Honorem
Oct 2016
3,445
Australia
The second basic law of human stupidity ;

The probability that a certain person be stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person.



" The evidence that education has nothing to do with the probability was provided by experiments carried on in a large number of universities all over the world. One may distinguish the composite population which constitutes a university in five major groups, namely the blue-collar workers, the white-collar employees, the students, the administrators and the professors.


Whenever I analyzed the blue-collar workers I found that the fraction σ of them were stupid. As σ's value was higher than I expected (First Law), paying my tribute to fashion I thought at first that segregation, poverty, lack of education were to be blamed. But moving up the social ladder I found that the same ratio was prevalent among the white-collar employees and among the students. More impressive still were the results among the professors. Whether I considered a large university or a small college, a famous institution or an obscure one, I found that the same fraction σ of the professors are stupid. So bewildered was I by the results, that I made a special point to extend my research to a specially selected group, to a real elite, the Nobel laureates. The result confirmed Nature's supreme powers: σ fraction of the Nobel laureates are stupid."


I find Ciipolla's definition of intelligence ^ very relevant . An intelligent person is one that finds solutions that benefit BOTH themselves at others at the same time .
 
Jul 2019
168
Ghana
My observation is different... Most individuals I know have different intelligence levels for different types of activities... Someone could be very good at chess, but very poor in social interaction for example (or vice versa)..... Average IQ is considered to be around 100, so speaking in IQ terms, this person could have 150 for chess but 50 for social interaction.... There is no sense in "averaging out" these 2 skills (or most others)...
This is worth checking out:
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
22,722
SoCal
In theory, one can certainly exhibit different talents for different things. For instance, I'm very good at history but certainly can't be this good at complex math or complex science. Whether this is due to my short attention span or due to something else, well, I don't know.
 

VHS

Ad Honorem
Dec 2015
4,733
Florania
Intelligence tests are total nonsense. The numbers are bullshit.

It is said that actor James Woods has a much higher IQ than Einstein and Hawking (both 160), namely 180, which would make him the most intelligent man in Hollywood and the tenth smartest man in the world. Compared to Woods, Sylvester Stallone is a dummy (160), but just as smart as Einstein and Hawking. Even Matt Damon is at a modest 160. Sharon Stone should be ashamed - she only has 154.

This is Terence Tao, allegedly No. 1 in the world at present (IQ 230):

View attachment 24706
It doesn't mean he can be brilliant in all areas; for example, is he a brilliant Chinese medicine practitioner?
 
May 2017
222
Monterrey
I have never met anyone who would be considerably smarter than me. However, I consider myself only slightly above average (and at times, and with certain things, slightly below average), and truth be told I haven't really met anyone who would be considerably dumber than me either (unless they are mentally disabled). I'm good at troubleshooting (finding solutions to problems) and pattern recognition, but do those really measure any kind of intelligence? There are certainly "stuff" that you can be good at, but I don't see how it relates to general intelligence. In fact, no such thing as general intelligence seems to even exist.

What I mean is that intelligence is often treated like some sort of video game attribute: you have ten points of intelligence so you are good at this, this and this. But there seems to be no such connection. This is why you can also have people who are for example extremely good at pattern recognition but suck at drawing conclusions from those patterns. Such as people who believe in the crazies conspiracies because "the patterns" are clear and make sense.

I can go to the gym and find out that someone can bench lift twice as much as I can. But can you meet a person and say that they are twice as smart as you are? Of course, there is the pitfall that maybe I just can't recognize it. I can only understand things to my own level of intelligence, and anything beyond that is beyond my grasp; I don't even understand that it is beyond my grasp.

Everything you're good at seems to come at a drawback. I can think and figure things out fast, but this also means that when I arrive at a wrong conclusion I am light years past it before I realise my mistake. This is very frustrating when I have an argument with my wife, and just proves that I am an idiot because now I can't back out, and for some curious reason at these times my intelligence tells me to double down instead of backing up. Judging by what we know of the world's geniuses (and again, I've never met one) it seems that no amount of intelligence allows one to escape the flaws of being a human. SO can one really be intelligent at all?