What is intelligence and how do you measure it?

[surfsatwerk]

Intelligence is measured by a person's ability to know when to hold them, know when to fold them, know when to walk away, and to know when to run.

 

[Malak]

Professor Nyborg: "I'm not saying that believing in God makes you dumber. My hypothesis is that people with a low intelligence is more easily drawn towards religions, which give answers that are certain, while people with a high intelligence are more sceptical."

The test results as well as his comments are moot when you apply multiple intelligence theory. Also your IQ does not measure your rationality at all, so IQ cannot be directly compared to religious persuasion. We could do any number of similar comparisons and find that people who score higher on IQ tests like other things for no real rational reason.

If anything, the test actually only reveals that the higher scorers tend to be more skeptical and close-minded about anything spiritual, but not for any rational reason. Believing in God doesn't not in any way mean disbelieving in science, though quite often that is what atheists believe and preach.

 

[Cookie]

Believing in God doesn't not in any way mean disbelieving in science, though quite often that is what atheists believe and preach.

I find this interpretation amusing, since in my experience it is more often religious people who bring up the science vs god debate. I agree the two are not mutually exclusive. There are a lot of religious scientists and as far as I can tell science doesn't concern itself with god.

 

[yllus]

If anything, the test actually only reveals that the higher scorers tend to be more skeptical...

Skepticism is a neutral and useful state. If anything, I could see a link between skepticism and intelligence (more = better).

...and close-minded about anything spiritual,

Skepticism does not equal close-mindedness (not that you directly stated this).

...but not for any rational reason.

I would agree that athiests may not have a rational cause to disbelieve. Agnostics would seem to have the best of it.

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

The ones that don't explicitly present religion in the thread title are obvious bait threads. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM.

Can you show how anything I've posted in this thread has anything to do with relgion?

Otherwise, can you please stop trolling?

 

[Malak]

Skepticism is a neutral and useful state. If anything, I could see a link between skepticism and intelligence (more = better).

I'm not in any way saying skepticism is wrong, I agree.

Skepticism does not equal close-mindedness (not that you directly stated this).

Close-mindedness is the result of someone taking skepticism and declaring something absolutely true or not true simply because they are skeptical. That is where I see atheists.

I would agree that athiests may not have a rational cause to disbelieve. Agnostics would seem to have the best of it.

The agnostic has the benefit of being skeptical without without being close-minded, although some agnostics suffer something similar where they believe nothing can be known and therefore accept very little. I have a friend like that, philosophical engagements can spiral out of control sometimes because of that.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Measuring human intelligence seems pretty elusive to me.

Thoughts?

Whose intelligence are you trying to measure?

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

Whose intelligence are you trying to measure?

No one in particular, just a general question. Do you have any good candidates?

 

[Malak]

Whose intelligence are you trying to measure?

Anyone's. Many believe IQ tests are not sufficient and the definition of intelligence implies there is more to it than the tests actually test.

 

[edro]

IMO, it's mainly memory, recollection and troubleshooting.
Standardized tests are very good at measuring it.

The more difficult aspects to measure would be artistic aptitude.

 

[dank69]

IMO, it's mainly memory, recollection and troubleshooting.
Standardized tests are very good at measuring it.

The more difficult aspects to measure would be art.

I thought it was pattern recognition.

 

[DrPizza]

I'm also a fan of Gardner's multiple intelligences, although if I recall correctly, Gardner listed 7 or 8 intelligences. There was another cognitive theorist who believed in far more intelligences. That's the guy I most agree with. Pattern recognition, etc. - the things on "IQ tests" - I'm exceptionally good at.

Matching clothing when I get dressed in the morning? I'm functionally retarded in that task.

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

People always bring in that "there are multiple intelligence types so you cant judge blablabla" stuff, which WHILE TRUE, is not the point

Id say that there is definitely a "master" type of intelligence that governs all others (yeah, one intelligence to rule them all), and thats something you can see right away when you talk to someone or so

I mean, the general thinking ability you know? Logic would probably be the most accurate intelligence type, the way you relate thinks and you come to a conclusion and all that... It cant be something specific like maths or whatever, something that requires knowledge... Well, there is a reason nearly all questions asked in IQ tests are logic based

So, I am not one bit impressed if some dude can do an insane mathematical equation in his head, that tells me absolutely nothing about his intelligence, just that he has some "gift" (and is probably lacking somewhere else to compensate, thus retarded people are born)

Anyway, one thing Ive noticed is that sarcasm is a great intelligence-meter... Personally, I love it, and every smart person Ive met uses and abuses it as well (and so does this forum in general, which proves that the average IQ around here is pretty high, specially for internet standards)

If you try using sarcasm on "dumb" people, youll only be left with a facepalm after they take it literally

My 2 cents

 

[meltdown75]

it's measured by how much you kick ass at life.

also wwybywb

 

[Phoenix86]

it's measured by how much you kick ass at life.

also wwybywb

Excellent question...

 

[Malak]

People always bring in that "there are multiple intelligence types so you cant judge blablabla" stuff, which WHILE TRUE, is not the point

Id say that there is definitely a "master" type of intelligence that governs all others (yeah, one intelligence to rule them all), and thats something you can see right away when you talk to someone or so

I mean, the general thinking ability you know? Logic would probably be the most accurate intelligence type, the way you relate thinks and you come to a conclusion and all that...

There are a couple problems with this, although I believe I understand what you are getting at. First, there is no "master" intelligence, because that would imply that having a high master intelligence would mean being good equally at all other things, which is opposite to multiple intelligence theory. You would actually be going backwards with that idea.

The thing you observe when you speak with someone maybe isn't really defined yet. Intelligence, by definition, isn't that quality. Awareness might be better. Understanding that you don't understand something is a pretty good quality to have.

 

[edro]

Lemme ask you this, lemme ask you this!
Can you kick MY Ass?!