Intelligence round 1000

[Ms. Kensington]

What is your definition of intelligence?

Someone said I was an idiot because I didn't have focus or intent.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Rocky]

Intelligence = the capacity to reason.

I think that's too simple. I mean, wisdom or whatever you call it has to play a part in it somewhat.

Plus the "other" kinds of intelligences.

[Raver]

What is your definition of intelligence?

Someone said I was an idiot because I didn't have focus or intent.

Sounds to me like that individual was hitting your PoLR and that person must think that is intelligence because he or she values it. Anyways, intelligence is a highly arbitrary term that can be defined in multiple ways, but there are still some objective forms of it. In my opinion, Intelligence is being able to perceive the environment around you in different ways and analyzing it. Another way I view intelligence is being able to grasp anything faster and farther than the average person.

I think that's too simple. I mean, wisdom or whatever you call it has to play a part in it somewhat.

Plus the "other" kinds of intelligences.

Yes, another way I see an intelligent person is as the individual who is brilliant at almost any skill or at least a good portion of them. Do you agree?

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Ms. Kensington]

why do you say that was a polr hit, traveler? Anyhow, this person refused to argue with me about definitions of intelligence, so I don't know which he was using.

[aestrivex]

intelligence is a word with 12 letters. when the numerical values of these letters are considered (on the basis that a=1, b=2, etc.), the average of all the numbers is 115/12, while the standard deviation is approximately 4.98. beyond that, little can be said about this oft-confused concept.

[Raver]

why do you say that was a polr hit, traveler? Anyhow, this person refused to argue with me about definitions of intelligence, so I don't know which he was using.

It just looked to me that focus and intent were characteristics of and he saw those attributes as intelligence. Like if he meant intent as in being determined to do one thing and focus as being able to accomplish it. He could of intended those terms to be interpreted in a different format, so I could be wrong.

[ragnar]

What is your definition of intelligence?

The operative definition of intelligence:
"Anyone who I feel I know and who agrees with me or I otherwise find likable is intelligent".

Proof: On surveys, people consistently rate singers and movie stars higher than guys like Ed Witten, John Conway, Murray Gell-Mann and Richard Borcherds.

Q.E.D.

I know it when I see it, and know it when I don't.

A strange thing I have noticed: It seems a lot of Alpha SFs immediately devalue INTps on sight. John Conway, f.i., (who will probably be remembered for centuries for his intellectual accomplishments) would probably be dismissed as a nobody (or far worse) by most of them.

I have been a "victim" of this on numerous occasions, I've personally witnessed at least one other INTp experiencing this subtle discrimination as well.

He's a professional architect. University degree, highly paid job, well dressed, decent looks, nice family, nice car. We were hiking, and met an older ESFj/ISFp couple who instantly became sceptical when he told them he was an architect - he didn't "look like" one to them.

I have a feeling one has to "act" alpha-ish or at lest S to those people to come across as "competent" or "intelligent".


Greetings, ragnar.

[Phaedrus]

Any strict definition of the word "intelligence" is unnecessary and should be avoided since it only includes or excludes too much. Intelligence is an empirical phenomenon that can be studied. We can see it, and we can test it. We can determine who has more or less of it than others by observing and testing people. What we still don't know is the exact nature of the empirical phenomenon that intelligence is.

Some people use the word "intelligence" in other contexts as well, for example in the expression "emotional intelligence" (EQ). That is no problem if we keep in mind that it has nothing to do with the phenomenon we demarcate by IQ tests. (There seems to be at least a slightly negative correlation between IQ and EQ.)

What is a problem, though, is that people think that intelligence is something whose existence can be questioned, and that IQ tests are useless, or that they are unable to test "real intelligence" because they believe (falsely) that IQ tests are too culturally biased, or that we don't know what we are talking about. That's the problem with definitions. To be able to formulate a strict and correct definition of "intelligence" and other empirical phenomena we first have to know what their nature is. And we can only do that if we study them scientifically. Therefore the only really useful definition of "intelligence" is "the phenomenon we measure by using IQ tests" or something like that. If we want to explain what intelligence is in a less scientific way, we can say that it is the general capacity for abstract thinking and problem solving.

[Kristiina]

What is your definition of intelligence?

The operative definition of intelligence:
"Anyone who I feel I know and who agrees with me or I otherwise find likable is intelligent".

You might be onto something because seems I judge my friends to be pretty damn intelligent. On the other hand, I suspect I really have exceptionally intelligent friends.

"Anyone who I agree with and who seems to have more knowledge than me or more skill in using the knowledge they do have." Basically if the other person says something that I didn't know and I trust his judgement more than mine, then the other person is intelligent. It could be the Ti-dual-seeking, but when the other person is not intelligent (and I make this judgement very quickly), I keep the interactions short. Likability is only relevant in border cases, because I am more likely to trust the judgement of people that I like. There are people who are very intelligent, but who I don't like.

[XoX]

Any strict definition of the word "intelligence" is unnecessary and should be avoided since it only includes or excludes too much. Intelligence is an empirical phenomenon that can be studied. We can see it, and we can test it. We can determine who has more or less of it than others by observing and testing people. What we still don't know is the exact nature of the empirical phenomenon that intelligence is.

Some people use the word "intelligence" in other contexts as well, for example in the expression "emotional intelligence" (EQ). That is no problem if we keep in mind that it has nothing to do with the phenomenon we demarcate by IQ tests. (There seems to be at least a slightly negative correlation between IQ and EQ.)

What is a problem, though, is that people think that intelligence is something whose existence can be questioned, and that IQ tests are useless, or that they are unable to test "real intelligence" because they believe (falsely) that IQ tests are too culturally biased, or that we don't know what we are talking about. That's the problem with definitions. To be able to formulate a strict and correct definition of "intelligence" and other empirical phenomena we first have to know what their nature is. And we can only do that if we study them scientifically. Therefore the only really useful definition of "intelligence" is "the phenomenon we measure by using IQ tests" or something like that. If we want to explain what intelligence is in a less scientific way, we can say that it is the general capacity for abstract thinking and problem solving.

I think this is a rather good way of putting it. I don't disagree with anything in it. I might quote this if I end up in real life conversation about the subject

[Mea]

What is your definition of intelligence?

Someone said I was an idiot because I didn't have focus or intent.

That's rubbish. That person is an idiot.
You don't define intelligence that way. Even in an IQ test, there are many "types of intelligences".
People are just better at different things IMO.

Edit: O. And I agree with Phaedrus.

[FDG]

quickness in reasoning and appliying correct solutions in every situation (which, of course, comprises what is tested on IQ tests)

[Mea]

That makes me wonder what's the IQ of the people in this forum.

[science as magic]

quickness in reasoning and appliying correct solutions in every situation (which, of course, comprises what is tested on IQ tests)

:/

i wanted to respond to this thread but i couldn't. fdg please remember that somatic understanding of intelligence is vastly inferior to semantical understanding

[meatburger]

The thing about IQ tests is they are biased towards a certian number of functions. People who possess these dominant functions do the tests, obviously score highly then assume they are smarter than everyone else. In that area of problem solving they are indeed above the curb, however this is only part of the whole picture.

No suitable test exists for social intelligence, or other intelligences for this matter. I value social intelligence highly because i also feel strong in this area. Thats the beauty of Socionics, it teaches that every type has their niche. Just as you can have an incredible genius at solving mathematical equations, you can also have an incredible genuis who is leaps and bounds ahead when dealing with people.

[Exodus]

quickness in reasoning and appliying correct solutions in every situation (which, of course, comprises what is tested on IQ tests)

:/

i wanted to respond to this thread but i couldn't. fdg please remember that somatic understanding of intelligence is vastly inferior to semantical understanding

No. Intelligence is an empirical phenomenon.

(I think I understand what you're saying.)