First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
What do you consider to be intelligence?
Posted 9/22/07

muzix wrote:


animecrazy86 wrote:

A lot of people consider grades to be the defining factor of intelligence, I think it shows your interest in your subject or your ability to focus.IMO, I think real intelligence lies in creativity and having the ability to solve problems.....
What do you think?Please discuss....


Amen to you brother. Its not about grades.


Although that is true...its also very unintelligent to allow yourself to obtain poor grades due to laziness

Trevor (OP)

Posted 9/22/07
Real intelligence comes at something that you are good to. Like me I'm good at compensating my opponents abilities and I'm also good at driving.
78167 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / Japan
Offline
Posted 9/22/07
@ mauz: Kant was quite the odd one when he introduced deontological philosophy.

But it's safe to say that it does not mean that no human being gains wisdom, but if you look at it from the difference of vicarious wisdom versus experienced wisdom, then there's a discrepancy in how the human being attains a level of wisdom ~ namely, through experience.

perhaps universal truth is the wrong term, but it's hard to find the right term for it.
46535 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 9/22/07
^ ahh Kant....love him and hate him ( his way of writing sucks) ><


muzix wrote:

Real intelligence comes at something that you are good to. Like me I'm good at compensating my opponents abilities and I'm also good at driving.


Let's not get into terms like 'real intelligence' It gets pretty biased if we go down that road.
77 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 9/22/07
When you're talking about Intelligence are you talking about it in an intuitive point of view or performance point of view.
Like a person that is talented that can learn at a fast rate or do fast calculations in their brains could be consider intelligence....versus like...for example, Albert Einstien which is talented too, but what seperated him was his intuition, how he percieved things to be different.....

Everyone has their own view on things and can call it wisdom, but you can't claim to be intelligence unless you can prove it to everyone in a scienticfic way, philosophy don't cut it these days....talking is not good enough.... you'll need to prove you idea to be called Genius...
13680 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Over there!!
Offline
Posted 9/23/07
mmmmm i would not no because im not smart
Posted 9/23/07

Ghost_22dare wrote:

mmmmm i would not no because im not smart


Hmmm...you know...somewhere in your post i do believe you proved your theory to be infallible.....perhaps it was when you spelled KNOW "no" ...major lulzage

Trevor (OP)

4557 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / F / Anime Dimension
Offline
Posted 9/23/07
a dog can be intelligent, i say how one views the world as....
78167 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / Japan
Offline
Posted 9/23/07

wilx927 wrote:

Everyone has their own view on things and can call it wisdom, but you can't claim to be intelligence unless you can prove it to everyone in a scienticfic way, philosophy don't cut it these days....talking is not good enough.... you'll need to prove you idea to be called Genius...


But the scientific method requires a quantification of information. Is intelligence truly quantifiable? What is the rubric for determining what is intelligent thought and what is not? If a baseline is established, what is the consequences of having such? Would that mean someone who is mentally retarded is far from being an intelligent being, and hence, can be considered less of a human?

Philosophy might not explain many things, but it can make you aware of many things that are not taken into account when you take a highly analytical path in trying to understand the nature of things. Intelligence is not simply a bunch of numbers that is quantifiable, or is something measurable.


@ muzix: I think the right term to use for your example of "good driving" is ability. Human intelligence grants us the capacity to drive, therefore turning it into an ability. How able that person is in driving is what you mean when you say you're "good at driving". Being a better driver than another person doesn't make you more "intelligent" than that person when it comes to driving ~ it simply makes you more talented or skilled.
77 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 9/23/07

edsamac wrote:

But the scientific method requires a quantification of information. Is intelligence truly quantifiable? What is the rubric for determining what is intelligent thought and what is not? If a baseline is established, what is the consequences of having such? Would that mean someone who is mentally retarded is far from being an intelligent being, and hence, can be considered less of a human?

Philosophy might not explain many things, but it can make you aware of many things that are not taken into account when you take a highly analytical path in trying to understand the nature of things. Intelligence is not simply a bunch of numbers that is quantifiable, or is something measurable.


Well i never said intelligence is measurable, but, it's pretty abstract just to be claiming wisdom is wisdom and inteligence is matter of morality and understanding of nature.

You could argue philosophy can make you aware of many things that are not taken into account when you take a highly analytical path in trying to understand the nature of things. Intelligence is not simply a bunch of numbers that is quantifiable, or is something measurable or whatever. a retard could be humane that has feelings.

But in the end, it's vague if it has no proof to it. Because anyone can feel anything, or claim to have a good understanding of nature, what is doing the right thing or what is doing the wrong thing.... that has changed constantly over centuries(look at the war with iraq, how controversal is that.?)
It is not very credible if it doesn't have evidence.....
192 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Canada
Offline
Posted 9/23/07
there are different kinds of intelligence in my opinion
78167 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / Japan
Offline
Posted 9/23/07
^ ^ You used the term Scientific ~ it follows that it requires quantifiable or measurable data to determine whether or not a given hypothesis is null or not. And quoting from you:


you can't claim to be intelligence unless you can prove it to everyone in a scienticfic way


Ergo, you have to quantify or make concrete proof of your intelligence, which is what you're saying.

And I didn't say "wisdom is wisdom" ~ I just pointed out a difference between intelligence and wisdom. You can be intelligent, but that doesn't necessarily make you wise: so much so that someone wise is not necessarily intelligent or intelligible in certain fields of expertise. To gain wisdom is to have reached that point where knowledge, theory, and praxis have been molded into one, and you see the "whole picture".

Classic example ~ you're a student and you study for grades, so much so that you're called "intelligent" because you get really high grades. Come the next year, someone asks you about that subject last year, and that student, apparently, forgot all about it.

Another student doesn't get stellar grades, but when asked about the said topic the following year, he is able to give a well stated report on the topic since he still remembers it.

And yet, we have another student. May or may not get stellar grades, but when asked about the topic the following year, he gives a someone strange answer that is usually not expected, and he relates many of the lessons to his personal experience since he saw connections.


I ask you, which of the three do you consider smart, intelligent, and wise? If you were to ask me, I'd say all of them were intelligent. The first was smart, the second was practical, and the third was wise.


Not all things in this world need solid proof for them to be proven. Many theories that we accept in modern science are the result of abstract ideas that are tested and tried again and again. The fact remains that everything we know is the result of an abstract concept. You can't deny the truth in philosophical tenants that try to explain the nature of the universe. As abstract as they may sound, they admit a certain level of truth or reason in them, because that is what they are ~ reason, based on logic and rationality ~ the same tenants of science.

To end my point, I think you need a good dose of both abstract and concrete if you want to discuss something as vague as intelligence more appropriately.



it's pretty abstract just to be claiming... intelligence is matter of morality and understanding of nature.


It's not abstract. You think when you have a moral dilemma... humans are moral beings because they can question their actions... do you see a dog thinking twice about sniffing another dog's vagina? Of course not... but humans don't do that because they have a conscience (super ego) that suppresses their instinct (id) from doing that because it's morally unacceptable. His intelligence permits him to question his actions and this further differentiates human intelligence from animal intelligence. This is far from abstract.

Understanding nature... of course you use your intelligence to understand nature. You don't use your intelligence to simply get grades or prove to people you're smart. You're free to do whatever you want with your intelligence, even if your insights in the world are incorrect or grossly misconstrued, you're still using your intelligence.

You're making it sound like that you have to be "right" all the time to prove that you're intelligent. And since you introduced the topic of ambiguity, how say can we show what is right or wrong? Man invents the atom bomb that kills lives... Intelligent, yes. Apply wisdom ~ morally acceptable? Of course not.

Intelligence is not a monolithic nature of man. It is intertwined and influenced and influences all of man's decisions. And if you think I'm making a mountain out of an anthill, then you're damn right, because people belittle the nature of intelligence to something as simple as grades... why else would you think I'd be ranting on a topic such as this.
378 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / 加拿大
Offline
Posted 9/23/07
Intelligence to me means the ability to adapt and succeed in all situations. If it's in school, an intelligent person would succeed in getting high marks as well as succeed in having great friends. At work, an intelligent person would know how to get the job done quick and well while having fun doing it.
78167 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / Japan
Offline
Posted 9/23/07
As if my rants were not enough...


wilx927 wrote:
you'll need to prove you idea to be called Genius...


Ever since when were Geniuses entered into the discussion? Are you saying that to be intelligent you have to prove yourself to be a genius first? So if I'm not a genius, I'm not intelligent?

You should be careful with the terms you pick.



And for my final rant:

The discussion is about intelligence, the noun. Not intelligent the adjective. Perhaps there are means to prove one's intelligence over another, but this does not deny a person of their intelligence. I was speaking from the point of view of what intelligence is ~ that it is an intrinsic value of the human nature and involves all of what we are and what we do, be it abstract (metaphysical) or concrete (physical), you cannot deny the human capacity to think and reason.

23685 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / F
Offline
Posted 9/23/07
My educated guess is that every single person who posts here thinks they are intellectually superior to the others who posted in the thread. This applies across board, mods, noobs, regular members, hypocrites, disgusting wannabes, and whatevers.

So not cool.

And I side with conflict theories on 'Intelligence'.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.