(Untitled)

[justinkick]

intelligence can be measured as someones profeciency at a certain skill or set of skills relative to their exposure to these skills. for example, someone who is a grand master mason after one years is naturally smarter than someone who is a grand master mason after three years, all things being equal.

discuss.

Comments

[thehopelesscaus]

you're not including several factors, though.
for example, was the person who became a grand master mason raised in a family of masons, or with a strong tradition of masonry?
was the person who became a grand master mason not raised the same? or did he have the same upbringing?
if these people have known masonry their whole lives, it would be expected of them to excel at it, regardless of intelligence.

[justinkick]

taking this out of the metaphor and back into the question, would you imply that intelligence is something that is taught? does an intelligent set of parents increase the chances of an intelligent child.

and i had a disclaimer "all things being equal"

[thehopelesscaus]

environment does have a big effect on a lot of things.
if you're lumping skills and intelligence into the same category, then, yes, intelligence can be affected by your surroundings.

and i have to bring in another factor: the idiot savante.
are these people intelligent because of their proficiency in one area?

[justinkick]

not necessarily skills themselves, but the ability to gain proficiency quickly in a varying set of skills. this also answers the question of the idiot savant; due to their inability to master different sets of skills, can they truly be called intelligence.

a set of skills can be hammered into the subconscious; it can become a set of reactions based on stimuli. but when a set of skills are quickly assimilated into a person's exsisting skill set, doesnt that person have a natural advantage - intelligence - over somebody else?

[abnormalfreak]

wow, i see how far astray our discussions go without my not-so-gentle condescension

[justinkick]

good to hear from your ultra-high pedestol your eminence. and yes your right, we must make a bell run. i agree with the main thrust of your argument, as it was mine but restated in most places. however, can it not be said that i.q. tests are inherently flawed, and inherently geared towards the more easily testable areas of intelligence (math skills, spatial reasoning, and the others you mentioned). they fail to take into account skills that are demonstrated when someone learns something quicker than someone else. doesnt that ability make someone smarter than someone else? ive always been under the impression that i.q. tests were aptitude tests; they measure how much you are able to learn. hence higher iq, higher intelligence.

o and you spelt savant wrong. you spelt it 'sevant.' its savant, with two 'a's.

[flameofthewest1]

when someone learns something quicker than someone else. doesnt that ability make someone smarter than someone else?

I think it would have to depend on your definition of the word smart, or intelligent, which is basically what we're arguing over here. How exactly does one define intelligence?

As Justin and I studied in Psychology, this particular question has been argued over for years, and if scholars and professors at some of the top Universities in the world haven't figured it out yet, I highly doubt we will. For example, Howard Gardner (someone we studied), a professor at Harvard's Graduate School of Education, said that intelligence comes in seven forms (his Theory of Multiple Intelligences).

According to Gardner (1999a), intelligence is much more than IQ because a high IQ in the absence of productivity does not equate to intelligence. In his definition, "Intelligence is a biopsychological potential to process information that can be activated in a cultural setting to solve problems or create products that are of value in

[thehopelesscaus]

and so, i must present the final, absolute, unquestionable, true answer...

none of this is real, so fuck it.

[justinkick]

do you know how much fucking space you just took up in the universe of my live journal?

like all the fuckin dark matter ever.

[thehopelesscaus]

too bad all that space DOESN'T EXIST!

that's a philosphical burn, motherfucker.

[justinkick]

zing. . .
SHUT up Elias!!