Types of intelligence

estebancambias · 14-08-2007 1:24pm #1

This thread was stupid, however I do stand by the first paragraph.

genericgoon · 14-08-2007 1:29pm

I wouldnt say those who do Medicine are generally dumb but they mighnt have the general academic mindset one would expect for someone with such high points. They might of been spoonfed notes and learned how to beat the exam with no real interest in the subject. The LC for them is a means to an end.

On a different note did you see the Richard Dawkins programme on channel 4 yesterday. Very interesting stuff.

toastomatic · 14-08-2007 1:46pm

Yeah... I really agree with that. I think schools and "the system" is better for some types of people than others, and its not fair. Like me for example. (lol) Like all ive ever wanted to do since i could crawl was play music or paint. I'm not sporty, I can't sit down and learn for hours, I dont really understand detailed stuff much less hold them in my head and its just frustrating and upsetting to not do well despite effort. I get complimented a lot for my musical ability and I put a huge amount of effort into it but music is only one subject and if I had been born as a sciency person I could have had 5 or 6 subjects I would've done really well in, instead of 2.

I'm not the only one, you look at your class, the system only suits some of them....

Lucas10101 · 14-08-2007 1:58pm

LC is 85% Memory and 15% Understanding. Only 15% of the Population get above 500 points ( Or around it ). Thus those that do get above 500 aren't stupid, but have a good memory and a good understanding, so they're not stupid. But to say they're dumb is actually really Dumb.

So you think that reading about Evolution Vs God makes you more intelligent or smart. If you were as eager as you say to learn, then doing well in your LC wouldn't have been a problem and you wouldn't be fretting about getting Arts???

I have already read about the Evolution Vs God thing a thousand times, and I should get over 500 points tomorrow. So, to GENERALISE and CATEGORIZE Medical people or "Smart" people as Dumb, not willing to learn, and can't have understanding or will to learn trivial things is a really stupid thing to say. You cannot speak for thousands of people.

TheInvisibleFie · 14-08-2007 2:07pm

I thought this was about the seven types of intelligence. These are Linguistic; Logical-Mathmatical; Bodily-Kinesthetic; Spatial; Musical; Interpersonal; Intrapersonal. You say you have musical intelligence and even get commended on this but there is no reason to go belittling people in the other catagories. Everyone knows what type of exam the Leaving Cert is and what type of people it rewards. These are not just those who are "smart" but students who work hard. Unfortunately this doesn't include me but I at least have the decency to appreciate those people who worked hard over the last six years. You can learn off as many definitions in the sciences as you want but the top grades will go to those who actually take the time to understand the stuff. Unlike a lot of people I am not going to study Arts as a fall-back but because I really want to study History. There are plenty of middle of the road, dull Arts students who have no understanding about anything but are just doing the course because they want a degree and didn't get what they want.

Gone West · 14-08-2007 2:16pm

estebancambias wrote:

People who do medicine and subjects like that are generally dumb.

Thats cute that you think so.

Conor, Its quite natural to develop an inferiority complex, especially a day before the leaving cert results are due. Its understandable that not everyone has the same levels of the varying of different types of intelligence and motivation to study. As such its understandable that some of those who don't do really well feel the need to justify it in their minds with ridiculous statements in their minds.
Its only when they project those statements on other people, and state them as fact, that that person is in the wrong.

I didn't get great points in my LC, when I did it but thankfully I didn't feel the need at the time to blame the system or others in whole or part.

toastomatic · 14-08-2007 2:21pm

I belittled nobody. A large number of my friends are looking for very hard to achieve places tomorrow medicine etc I would never belittle somebody who could do this I wish I was like that too.
And no I'm not looking for arts-I think you mean the other person.
I just happen to be better at using my hands than memorising sylbuses. I didnt find the leaving as easy as a result as it is clearly a written exam based on 2 years worth of hard work. It didnt mean I didnt put in an effort, and it certainly doesnt mean I have anything against people who will get in the 500s. I have the greatest of respect and admiration for them, really..

Thomas_S_Hunterson · 14-08-2007 2:22pm

toastomatic wrote:

Yeah... I really agree with that. I think schools and "the system" is better for some types of people than others, and its not fair. Like me for example. (lol) Like all ive ever wanted to do since i could crawl was play music or paint. I'm not sporty, I can't sit down and learn for hours, I dont really understand detailed stuff much less hold them in my head and its just frustrating and upsetting to not do well despite effort. I get complimented a lot for my musical ability and I put a huge amount of effort into it but music is only one subject and if I had been born as a sciency person I could have had 5 or 6 subjects I would've done really well in, instead of 2.

At the end of the day, university is about acedemics. The leaving cert is about acedemics. It is about picking the best acedemic students and sending them to an acedemic course in university.

In ireland we have a bizarre system, where it is felt that one has to go to university. In most other countries, only the minority of students go to university.

If you're not acedemic, you shouldn't try and pursue an acedemic path in life

Thomas_S_Hunterson · 14-08-2007 2:22pm

toastomatic wrote:

Yeah... I really agree with that. I think schools and "the system" is better for some types of people than others, and its not fair. Like me for example. (lol) Like all ive ever wanted to do since i could crawl was play music or paint. I'm not sporty, I can't sit down and learn for hours, I dont really understand detailed stuff much less hold them in my head and its just frustrating and upsetting to not do well despite effort. I get complimented a lot for my musical ability and I put a huge amount of effort into it but music is only one subject and if I had been born as a sciency person I could have had 5 or 6 subjects I would've done really well in, instead of 2.

At the end of the day, university is about acedemics. The leaving cert is about acedemics. It is about picking the best acedemic students and sending them to an acedemic course in university.

In ireland we have a bizarre system, where it is felt that one has to go to university. In most other countries, only the minority of students go to university.

If you're not acedemic, you shouldn't try and pursue an acedemic path in life

genericgoon · 14-08-2007 2:32pm

Well a large proportion going to college is good and needed if Ireland is to become the ''knowledge economy'' it seeks to be. And ones financial situation dictates ones ability to go to college in many countries. We have it fairly good here.

toastomatic · 14-08-2007 3:27pm

Yes uni is academically based. Obviously. Thats the whole point of it.

But school (and to a slightly lesser extend ITs) are for everyone whose strengths are from any of those 7 types of intelligence.

So that's why its not fair that the leaving is only geared towards one or two of these strengths. Its an end of school examination, after all... yes its getting improved with more practical work etc. but its still very badly flawed and society really needs to change its attitudes on a fundamental level for any real change to take place.

8k2q1gfcz9s5d4 · 14-08-2007 4:01pm

estebancambias wrote:

People who do medicine and subjects like that are generally dumb. I bet anArts type of student has a better understanding and will to learn about interesting trivial things.

disagree alot with that point! so people dont learn alot of nteresting trivial things becoming a doctor?

i agree with the first half of what you are saying though.

spurious · 14-08-2007 4:12pm

'Intelligence' is about being able to use information and skills gathered along your way through life.

Knowledge learned off by rote or without any deeper understanding is quite difficult to adapt to a new situation and thus having lots of 'knowledge' has not necessarily any bearing on a person's ability to react to the demands of the world.

So, I suppose you could have someone who rote learned, crammed enough and chose an 'easy' combination of subjects to get high points, who might be a bit clueless in terms of dealing with the world, but I wouldn't call them dumb.

'Differently abled' maybe.:D

estebancambias · 14-08-2007 4:18pm

Wait, I'm sorry, some of my comments were stupid, and said hastly. It was heat of the moment stuff. Saying that people who get medicine are 'generally dumb' is plain moronic, what my original point was my 'smart' friends don't seem eager on learning stuff outside school.

Lucas10101 · 14-08-2007 4:24pm

estebancambias wrote:

Wait, I'm sorry, some of my comments were stupid, and said hastly. It was heat of the moment stuff. Saying that people who get medicine are 'generally dumb' is plain moronic, what my original point was my 'smart' friends don't seem eager on learning stuff outside school.

So as soon as you are proved wrong, you back and retreat...ha!?

But you are making another generalization. How can you claim that "smart" people aren't eager, how can you speak for the population that "smart" people are like this. You cannot.

Furthermore, what is a "Smart" person in your definition, it may not apply with others after all....??

IrishKnight · 14-08-2007 4:59pm

Lucas10101 wrote:

you are making another generalization. How can you claim that "smart" people aren't eager, how can you speak for the population that "smart" people are like this. You cannot.

I agree. I would consider myself smart, I have an IQ above average, and I love learning about almost anything. I love random facts like, did you know the earth has more than one moon. (QI is such a great show).

estebancambias, you say you are reading about Evolution vs God. Something, like yourself I find fascinating! ATM I'm doing a lot of research into religion...and a while ago I tried my hand at learning about String Theory.

Basical, yes you might get some "dumb smart people" but you'll also get some "smart dumb people"!

adam_ccfc · 14-08-2007 5:14pm

Just a point; there is no real "evolution vs god" debate, as it has been rather crudely phrased here. Evolution is as much a fact as that 'theory' which states that our plant orbits the sun.

Other than that, I have absolutely no interest in your thread, I'm afraid to say.

IrishKnight · 14-08-2007 5:21pm

adam_ccfc wrote:

Just a point; there is no real "evolution vs god" debate, as it has been rather crudely phrased here. Evolution is as much a fact as that 'theory' which states that our plant orbits the sun.

Agreed, I was just using his words or the sake of simplicity

Lucas10101 · 14-08-2007 6:17pm

Maybe it should be re-phrased as Theory of Evolution Vs. Word of God i.e Bible.

adam_ccfc · 14-08-2007 6:23pm

Lucas10101 wrote:

Maybe it should be re-phrased as Theory of Evolution Vs. Word of God i.e Bible.

I prefer "scientific theory", as the word 'theory' in its everyday usage can be misleading.

Lucas10101 · 14-08-2007 6:24pm

Nope Scientific Theory is the same as Theory.

How bout this::

Hypothesis of Evolution Vs. Bible.

adam_ccfc · 14-08-2007 6:31pm

Lucas10101 wrote:

Nope Scientific Theory is the same as Theory.

How bout this::

Hypothesis of Evolution Vs. Bible.

Er, I said I'd prefer to refer to it on here as a scientific theory, as most posters will not understand the enormous innate difference between a 'theory' as we use the term in everyday English and a scientific theory, which is one supported by a vast body of evidence and shown to be factual in a wide range of conditions.

And to call evolution a hypothesis is nothing short of a lie.

Lucas10101 · 14-08-2007 6:36pm

But to keep sides, it's only fair to Hypothesize on both as both disagree with each other i.e Hypothesis of Evolution is what the Bible people say, and Scientists say of the Bible that it's a Misunderstanding, so to keep between what THEY think, it should be:

Hypothesis of Evolution Vs. Hypothesis of the Bible.

NB: I know theres evidence and I support the Evolution theory.

IrishKnight · 14-08-2007 6:51pm

Er, off the point of the topic methinks, can we bring it back

estebancambias · 14-08-2007 7:13pm

Co-sign.

thefinalstage · 14-08-2007 7:58pm

People are very highly strung in this thread...
Why not let the OP rant and let off some steam? You don't have to read this thread and it makes him/her feel better.

I would reccommend changing the threads title though. I was hoping a for to learn more about those blasted intelligence tests that we all took in fifth year.

estebancambias · 14-08-2007 8:13pm

Now, that person is a true Irish citizen. I want to know why I wasted 3 years doing the Junior Cert.

EamonnKeane · 14-08-2007 8:14pm

As regards memory vs. intelligence, there is nothing to memorise for the French exam and subjects such as maths and physics require a very high level of understanding, you can't just remember the formulae and get an A1. But I accept that I did waste 2 years learning accountancy that not even accountants need to know.

adam_ccfc · 14-08-2007 8:37pm

Lucas10101 wrote:

But to keep sides, it's only fair to Hypothesize on both as both disagree with each other i.e Hypothesis of Evolution is what the Bible people say, and Scientists say of the Bible that it's a Misunderstanding, so to keep between what THEY think, it should be:

Hypothesis of Evolution Vs. Hypothesis of the Bible.

NB: I know theres evidence and I support the Evolution theory.

No, we can't. Evolution is a theory, a theory is different from a hypothesis.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

/end of debate

Oatesy · 14-08-2007 9:40pm

Erm 90% of maths is learning of theory's or formulas and repeating them with different numbers... 10% is left to understanding how the question is phrased

*Tripper* · 14-08-2007 9:58pm

I can only speak for myself here but this is the way I see it.

I could/can always do well in exams if i sit down and learn the stuff for awhile, thats not the problem. My problem is that alot of things that I had to learn for my leaving cert bored the utter ****e out of me.

I loved business, thats why I always did brilliantly in it. I hated physics, thats why when I didn't want to muster up the energy to study it I would do dreadful. but when I did study it i did brilliant.

Now with the prospect of college around the corner(again!), it makes me think that the leaving cert will hold no bearing on how well I will do in my course (commerce hopefully).

Finally, another example of the type of "intelligence",(I hate this phrase), I display is the job I currently have. It is meant to be just licking envelopes and such but I often end up doing other peoples work and getting paid an eighth of what they get paid. I sit at a desk, read through a report, bang out a few numbers on a calculator and hey presto! its done, to a perfect standard. I am so happy doing this and I really enjoy it but I imagine its many peoples idea of a perfect hell!

Well heres to he results tomorrow!

Good luck everyone, I imagine i'll be round here till the wee hours as i'm totally wired!

Types of intelligence

Comments