Well, spelling mistakes makes some look less intelligent.

But not on this forum, for reasons we all know. I forget what observation it was, as the thread is no longer there, but everyone hails from around the world and doesn't have English as a native language.

Sir S

Intelligence is relative in the way we think about it. However, in the way it's actually measured, there are universal standards. For example, here in the UK we have a TV show periodically called Test the Nation, and everyone can take part who watches it. Then, once you know your mark, you look it up in a table according to your age and gender to find your IQ. If we take 50/75 as a mark, and look it up, if you were, say, 10, this might give you a massive IQ, but if you're 40 it might only be average. But if you compared these two people who have the same mark, you'd be more likely to think that the 40 year old is more intelligent, simply because society expects us to grow more intelligent as we get older. 's just the way it is

i think that was Esq's discussion, the first topic he made.

I would define someone as intelligent, if they read, write, and can reason some what deductively, ie common sense, that they think about what they say and how they say it. And understand the basics of math science, history. A willingness to learn. Age is not a barrier. As some elderly folk, have little understanding of things around them, nor a desire to learn them. It should not be all based on knowledge, as this takes time to accumulate.

Well, I think intelligence is often confused with knowledge.
I've always deliberately mixed the two because imho the term "intelligence" simply refers to the processing speed of your brain, ie. your IQ, which I consider to utterly pointless, as this doesn't factor in their knowledge and attitudes and ways of learning, which is what I class as "intelligence".
I've never agreed that people's intelligence can be measured using a series of ludricrous tests. It's like trying to rate someone's soul by asking them what some squiggly lines on a page look like.

__ __
--
__
-------

You're never going to let me forget that, are you Sir Speckly? Also, what do you mean the topic ain't there? I never done deleted it!

"Intelligence" is just a word, and because the interpretation of words is intensely subjective (despite established definitions), can it really be defined? I think that it can to an extent, but not in any all-encompassing sense.

@Corsair, you can have a vast knowledge of things but that doesn't necessarily mean you are intelligent at all. Intelligence enables you to use that knowledge to work out further things for yourself.
It's like taking someone who has memorised thousands of mathematical problems and someone else who has taught himself how to complete mathematical equations. The former would not be able to work out a problem he had not memorised even though arguably he had the greater amount of knowledge, the latter, with intelligence, would be capable of figuring out the answer to almost any equation.

/what Rec said

..you shut your mouth, how can you say, I go about things the wrong way..

Well, in this crazy old world of ours, there are usually two kinds of people. The ones who are mentally adept and the ones who are physically adept. The lucky ones receive both. The doomed ones receive neither, and live lives of nothingness and hopelessness, never achieving anything.

Homer: All right, pal: where'd you get the sugar for that tea?

Thief: I nicked it when you let your guard down for that split second, and I'd do it again.

@Recusant- yeah, I also said that inteligence should factor in knowledge AND willingness to learn, ability to learn and styles of learning (yes, there ARE different ways to learn things )

EDIT- Oh yeah, and the guy who learns how to do equations still needs quite a bit of knowledge so he knows how to solve the equation- intelligence and knowledge draw heavily from each other, which is why I think of them as two sections of something greater, which is what I call "intelligence".
__ __
--
__
-------

Edited by - ~Corsair#01~ on 5/23/2004 5:00:01 AM

as some have said, knowlege and intelligence are two completely different things. some people have a lot of 'book smarts', but lack some common sense in real life... similar to nerds, who have very little people skills. (no offence to anyone on these forums). while on the other hand, there are people who would not know the difference between a ford and a holden, yet they have incredible people skills, and succeed in other fields.

then theres people like me who understand life, question it, and ***** about it.
the world calls me an artist.

Vi

Whether or not knowledge and intelligence are related, depends on your definition of intelligence.
If you define intelligence as a general understanding of the world around them, an urge to learn and an ability to solve problems as I do, rather than simply an IQ, then you must also factor in knowledge as well, as your ability to solve problems is very often based on your knowledge of past experiences, and knowledge and a thirst for knowledge is essential to understanding the world and how it works.
Anyways, people skills have almost nothing remotely to do with intelligence and more to do with upbringing, wealth, skill at sports and your general attitude and morals. Physical skills aren't even remotely related to intelligence (despite all that pathetic drivel that "when Beckham kicks a corner he's working out about 778474788 equations in his head", which doesn't count as intelligence, so much as reflexes.

EDIT- Oh yeah, here's my new sig. Cool ain't it? Well I like it... Just be glad it's not a series of _-_-- like my last one.


Confusing, but wise, words of the Corsair:
"If you give me £10, then you will have £10 less. Or do you?"

Edited by - ~Corsair#01~ on 5/23/2004 5:31:55 AM

Edited by - ~Corsair#01~ on 5/23/2004 5:33:35 AM

---

...your ability to solve problems is very often based on your knowledge of past experiences, and knowledge and a thirst for knowledge is essential to understanding the world and how it works.

---

While that may be true to an extent, in terms of raw statisitcal intelligience (ie. IQ), "knowledge" does not have as much to do with it, as a number of IQ tests are designed to avoid cultural and educational barriers and provide questions that are not based upon real world examples or knowledge thereof.

Yeesss, but what I meant was that as knowledge and "IQ" are both pretty pointless ideas, as knowledge has all to do with upbringing, and IQ is a subject of several utterly ridiculous tests that, yes, are made to avoid cultural differences, but really don't go deep enough for each person, and to figure someone's real IQ requires far more than a quick quiz.
So what I do, is combine the two factors into what I call intelligence, ie. I use the word "intelligence" as a combo of "knowledge" and "IQ" as opposed to the traditional defintion, which merely includes IQ.
I do this, because in real life, both factors mean very little if not combined.
As mentioned above, it's no use memorising the answer to every equation if you don't know how to solve an equation you haven't memorised, just as it's essential to have a knowledge of what the "rules" are for working out the answer, even if you have an IQ of 5645754.

So, in summary, I deliberately take "intelligence" as meaning something different than it actually does, because in the English language there is no word (that I know of, Esquilax probably does ) for both IQ and knowledge, so I combine the two in my defintion of "intelligence". When I talk to someone, instead of using the word intelligence in it's traditional defintion, I simply use "IQ".

And that, people is my post.


Confusing, but wise, words of the Corsair:
"If you give me £10, then you will have £10 less. Or do you?"