What is intelligence?

[sssssssssss]

a bunch of biased decisions youve made relative to your experiences

 

[ebola?]

Due to interest on the part of a friend, I'm bumping this. I'm of two minds on intelligence:

1. It is largely mythical. Rather, people have varied talents largely specific to assorted domains, develop these talents into skills, and then engage in (social) practices on the bases of these skills. Some such social performances are valued selectively by dominant social institutions, and prevailing cultural content accords individuals certain shared meanings and inclinations to evaluate these performances; culture shapes our very individual, personal experience of 'intelligence'. For example, insofar as someone navigates language games with deft acuity, particularly insofar as they draw on highly specialized terminology strung together convolutedly, they tend to appear more intelligent. Are they? Also quite commonly, people tend to say things like, "He's so smart. . .like an encyclopedia!" But does this reliably indicate intelligence (particularly in an age where everyone has near instant access to encyclopedic knowledge)?

2. But what if we have to concede that there's some factor which confers "intelligence", influencing a variety of talents? If pressed, I would have to define intelligence as the ability to manipulate abstract concepts in such a way as to deftly infer conceptual patterns and then deploy such inference creatively (be this creativity directed toward rendering practical action more effective, illuminating mechanisms underlying observations, or expanding the scope of sum human conceptual material), navigating such with maximal complexity and nuance.

For now, I'm a bit more inclined to take on view 1, as talent in abstract domains actually appears to be another kind of specific talent. Eg, even those with formal instruction in statistics and logic tend to succumb to the same fallacious heuristics most of us use routinely.

ebola

 

[Maya]

^ great explanation as always Ebola?

I have always viewed intelligence as the ability of a human being to make less mistakes and for this reason, I have always admired the artificial intelligence of machines. But your post has a better meaning to what intelligence is and I definitely agree with individuals have varied talents so everyone possesses some kind of intelligence in a specific field.

 

[rickolasnice]

Intelligence is a whole bunch of things.. Off the top of my head would be: (These are all (mostly) human intelligences, obviously)

Logical Intelligence - Pretty much a decent IQ test
Body intelligence (spatial awareness, etc) - How aware you are of your surroundings, people with intelligence high in this area will rarely trip, drop things, knock things, etc
Emotional intelligence by which I mean how varied and deep your emotions are .. Can't be measured in humans really, but we are a lot higher on the scale than snakes.
Social intelligence A -which i would suspect psychopaths and sociopaths reign king
Social intelligence B - High rankers would be good at working in groups, social events, have empathy
Social intelligence C - High rankers would be good at working out groups, know people and their true morals / agenda, their sincerity, etc. They see between the lines.. whether or not they "fit" into the social construct.
Creative intelligence - as in, starting from one point how many paths of thought they can take (I saw one experiment where is asked a group of participants to think of as many uses for a pair of socks as they could.. i think that would fall into this category)
Already known intelligence and ability to retain information - Usual jazz: Who was king / queen and when. What is the capital of bluelight. What does E=MC2 actually mean. and so on..
Intrapersonal Intelligence- Being in control of your emotions, understanding them for what they are but more importantly what they should be. (This one maybe bullshit)
Rhythm (or music) intelligence) - Being able to dance in rhythm, tap in rhythm and eventually be able to write a piece of music.. Music is separate from the arts in which i think there is a rule as to what it can be to work.. I don't consider artistic skills to be a form of intelligence as I am a strong believer that art is so subjective it can not be scored, by anyone. This of course doesn't apply to sculptures, painting or drawing who's aim is to look like the real thing as best as possible
Being in control; Intelligence - Basically having the ability to overpower your emotional reaction and desire for a more logical approach.. By this I don't mean think like Spok I mean have the ability to assess the situation, how it makes you feel and what the best outcome would be. Ie; Don't react on impulse. (Although being a believer in determinism, this intelligence doesn't exist - just thought I'd throw it out their for the free-willers

It'd be interesting to be able to conduct a test of bluelighters, covering different areas of intelligence, as intelligence is now widely accepted to not just be a single thing.

Anyone up for doing an online IQ test and posting the results?

I know online tests are generally shit and hold no bearing over the true intelligence of a person but just thought it'd be a laugh?

 

[Maya]

Oi don't deny it you've taken it before too right? Lol Yes IQ online tests are absurd unless you just want to make yourself feel better.

 

[ebola?]

Logical Intelligence - Pretty much a decent IQ test

I think that these lack ability for measuring general logical acuity. Rather, they tend to test abilities somewhat specific to the test, particularly experience in timed testing domains.

Yes IQ online tests are absurd unless you just want to make yourself feel better.

Precisely...inflated, meaningless scores.
...
But how meaningful is IQ? It is moderately predictive of later scholastic performance. Statistically, that's what grounds it. The test was originally developed (I forget if this is Watson, Stanford, or Binet) to detect retardation. An odd basis for testing intelligence in a wide sense. Also, these tests tend to lose reliability for scores over 140...so if someone says they score something ridiculous, like 160+, they actually mean "140 or over".
...
But I'll bite: my IQ is 92.

ebola

 

[ebola?]

Already known intelligence and ability to retain information - Usual jazz: Who was king / queen and when. What is the capital of bluelight. What does E=MC2 actually mean. and so on..

See, I would argue that this is not an aspect of intelligence; rather, it provides people with raw material to do intelligent things with (or not).

Being in control; Intelligence - Basically having the ability to overpower your emotional reaction and desire for a more logical approach..

This seems more like a value judgment rather than a criterion for intelligence, essentially just positing as given that one mode of cognition is superior to another.

ebola

 

[GodandLove]

Intelligence is a subjective system of measurement. Measurement for what? Levels of consciousness.

Intelligence is/works much like ingredients... All sorts of fun combinations.

 

[sekio]

Intelligence is the ability to choose and manage goals (recognizing problems), and the mental skills needed to develop and execute plans to achieve some goal (solving problems), as well as analyzing their outcome and adapting accordingly (learning).

I have always viewed intelligence as the ability of a human being to make less mistakes

More aptly, the ability to learn from mistakes.

 

[MyDoorsAreOpen]

I think that these lack ability for measuring general logical acuity. Rather, they tend to test abilities somewhat specific to the test, particularly experience in timed testing domains.



Precisely...inflated, meaningless scores.
...
But how meaningful is IQ? It is moderately predictive of later scholastic performance. Statistically, that's what grounds it. The test was originally developed (I forget if this is Watson, Stanford, or Binet) to detect retardation. An odd basis for testing intelligence in a wide sense. Also, these tests tend to lose reliability for scores over 140...so if someone says they score something ridiculous, like 160+, they actually mean "140 or over".
...
But I'll bite: my IQ is 92.

ebola

On that note, my SAT score (on the old scoring system -- I took it in 1996) was 1290. My verbal score was in the upper 700s -- nearly perfect. My quantitative score was... well... you do the math

I largely agree with you, ebola. I don't think a clear line can be drawn between talent and intelligence, other than a cultural one. A person dubbed "intelligent" by his social milieu, is, no more no less, a person whose talents happen to be highly valued by that social milieu for their present or historical usefulness in solving problems particularly germane to that group of people. Find me a group of intergenerationally itinerant circus folk and ask them to introduce me to the most intelligent person among them, and I'll probably find myself talking to someone who figures out very quickly how to talk in a way that holds my attention, can improvise an ending to a show that's suffered a major setback at a moment's notice, and probably makes noticeable mistakes in his act a whole lot less than most of his fellow carnies. Transplant this same fellow to an economic think tank that serves the government, or a subsistence farming community in a harsh environment, and I think the chance he'll be seen as intelligent is no higher than someone randomly selected off the street.

I've long said that I'm not really all that smart, I just give that impression because I'm very good with words. Put me in a situation where verbal sophistry is not seen as helpful or respected, and I don't stand out at all. Tests since age 6 have actually shown me to be slightly lower than average when it comes to pure quantitative / logical reasoning. I'm criminally slow at picking up on people's unstated agendas when they talk to me -- I'm sure that if forced to be a businessman or politician, I'd be seen as quite dumb. Thus, I don't completely brush it off when someone insists I'm smart, but I do take it for what it is -- a roundabout way of saying "I appreciate people with talents like yours", or more simply, "I like you."

Are there talents that are universally useful and prized? No, but I think there are a handful of raw talents that have ended up being unusually useful to an unusually wide range of people and human problems in today's world. Verbal communication, predicting what isn't known from what is (logical reasoning), and reading people's motives and intentions are the big three that come to mind -- there might be one or two more that belong in this class. People with the incredible fortune to be talented in one or more of these areas will be called "smart" by many people, and be given privileges in society not given to everyone. But I think very few people are truly talentless, and most people have at least one potential social setting where their particular talent set would earn them enduring respect, and it's just a matter of finding it.

I'll second the parsimonious assessment that IQ tests test one's ability to take a certain kind of test. If you live in a world where passing similar tests solves a lot of highly pressing problems, then it's a true measure of "intelligence" in a relative sense. If you don't, then it isn't.

 

[Mysterie]

intelligence is when you have the confidence to put good ideas into a practical and productive real life setting

its hard to describe it in so few words

 

[rickolasnice]

OK..

Everything that can consciously or subconsciously be done, either better or for worse, by someone or something else, can be seen as a form of intelligence.

I also think it is closely related and part of awareness and consciousness.

 

[Mysterie]

OK..

I also think it is closely related and part of awareness and consciousness.

i agree with this alot, im afraid mainstream society would say that you have taken too much acid or fried your brain with weed tho

 

[rickolasnice]

Nah I reckon mainstream society is right up there with us..

You only have to look at animals to see it. How conscious, aware and intelligent is a fish? What about a rat? A dog? A gorilla? You? .. Each time consciousness, awareness and intelligence grows at roughly the same rate (My opinion, but aside from consciousness, depending on what you believe, this is testable)

 

[Mysterie]

i see what your getting at, but consciousness and awareness in animals is probably reasonably constant (im not a biologist so i cant testify to that hypothesis), whilst human consciousness appears to me to tend to fluctuate in waves, and i feel we are in a dip and not a peak right now, possibly mostly due to the age of technology we live in

today i cooked 3 pieces of bacon, 2 for me, 1 for my dog, and i forgot to give her, her piece after it was cooked, about 20 minutes later i remembered (usually i remember after its cooked), and she took the bacon where i couldnt see her, and ate it.

she had so many complex thoughts, that she recognised that i hadnt forgot about her, and it wasnt that i dont love her, but i simply forgot, and was always going to give her the bacon, so she was ashamed to eat it in front of me as she always does

of course i patted her when she came back to get the grease on the floor, she is much smarter than i first realised

 

[rickolasnice]

You seen this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KSryJXDpZo

I believe that consciousness is nothing more than a construct of the physical brain, so no comment on the current dip. But why do you think we are so different to animals?

 

[Mysterie]

mostly due to the fact society is focusing much deeper on their external world than they do their internal

the age of technology has had a significant role in this shift of focus of consciousness (ease of distraction, instant gratification) e.g. 15 seconds is now a long period of time, i would hazard a guess that was not the case 300 years ago...

apparently the existentialist ideas of the 20s were spurred by the idea that technology was becoming so prominent, that humans were starting to think of themselves as robots, hence thinkers and artists, having some pretty depressing thoughts, or killing themselves i guess

ill watch the video tmrw it looks interesting, its nap time now and this comp funnily enough doesnt have an updated version of flash on it yet, thx for sharing this is an interesting topic

 

[rickolasnice]

Hey! Not only am i nothing more than a biological robot.. I have no free will Doesn't depress me..

I wouldn't blame technology.. I'd blame knowledge (science).. but yeah ok maybe technology too, in the form of distractions.. Where's all the technology helping you guys out? You got binaural beats, flashing goggles and deprivation tanks (would love to try that) but i'd expect a lot more.. No doubt with controlled electromagnetic pulses into specific parts of the brain could bring on a whole bunch of different affect (would love to try that too).. And oh yeah! LSD But I do understand what you're saying.

NSFW:

Sorry if this post came across as condescending in any way I really didn't mean it to

 

[Mysterie]

your post made me smile, definitely no misunderstandings, i have a small gift of perception which im trying to look after now ive realised it

deprivation tanks are my jam, its expensive but trust me its worth the money and time x10

 

[ebola?]

Intelligence is the ability to choose and manage goals (recognizing problems), and the mental skills needed to develop and execute plans to achieve some goal (solving problems), as well as analyzing their outcome and adapting accordingly (learning).

I find this definition intriguing, but to make sure I'm understanding you correctly, can these goals and plans unfold purely conceptually, or does the use of intelligence require action that actually shapes the empirical world before us?

I've long said that I'm not really all that smart, I just give that impression because I'm very good with words.

No, I'm pretty sure that you're quite smart.

Thus, I don't completely brush it off when someone insists I'm smart, but I do take it for what it is -- a roundabout way of saying "I appreciate people with talents like yours", or more simply, "I like you."

Accordingly, I often confuse liking someone with thinking they're smart (but not in your case! ), but I'm really bad at reading people socially anyway.

i see what your getting at, but consciousness and awareness in animals is probably reasonably constant (im not a biologist so i cant testify to that hypothesis)

mmmm....biology can't even refute the solipsistic thesis though. . .

ebola