IQ & Intelligence

nosmo

Originally posted by Sangre
You have serious issues.

You're a serious troll

Sangre

I am?

lordsippa

Nah... Nosmo's just irritable because he didn't get his cup of funky-dunk for a quick dip of the lip. (obscure quoting! yay!)

Anyway... it ain't an issue of credit and respect etc. I will often respect someone who's incredibly talented at sports because, well I ain't (but no, this doesn't mean I actually really care about most sportspeople... ain't my scene). I will respect someone who can write the most amazing music, because I love music.

But I won't call them smart unless they prove they are. This is where my "issue" is. I hate people contorting the word so that everyone is nicely talented on an even scale. WTF? Some people are smart, others are thick. Sad fact - a LOT of sportspeople aren't that incredibly smart. Same with music. Same with a hell of a lot of people in various careers. So why must we Bullsh1t around the issue saying they have "physical intelligence"... it's called being "fit" and not in the sexy way... hell, should we be calling good looking people intelligent cause they're purdy?
</rant>

D-Generate

But there is a great amount of mental effort involved in sport. You try running up a rugby pitch and avoiding tackles comeing at you, adjusting your speed so that the pass either infront or behind you, analyseing the positions of your team-mates to the left and right of you, decideing to wait till the very last second before passing the ball. That is not easy to do and that's why not everyone is good at certain sports, they just simply cannot process that information quick enough. Another example of physical intelligence would be a snooker player judgeing the angle of a shot so that he bounces the ball off the cushion to hit another ball in. I am very good at maths, especially trigonometry but I am terrible at snooker/pool even when i try applying my mathematical skills to it.
There is also musical intelligence, some people can pick out individual notes from just hearing it and replay a song after just one listening, that is near impossible for most other people.

Then again there is allways the phrase "Intelligence is a myth, competence is real"

lordsippa

But... but... "i can throw a ball well - I have co-ordination. Watch me co-ordinate"... I don't consider co-ordination intelligence. I mean OH MY GOD! I CAN ACTUALLY MANOUEVER MY PEN TO A PAGE! LOOK AT HOW SMART I AM! FFS... that's what I'm pissed at. Dumbing down what intelligence is. I mean, why can't people just admit that sportspeople are TALENTED but NOT smart (well, based entirely on their sporting merits, not me slagging off individual sportspeople). Intelligence is a talent and a gift. It's something some people excel at, and others don't. It's just that people got so fecking offended because the smart people get their own back at the asses who lord it over them in almost every way by saying "well at least we're smarter than you". Well tought sh1t. Cause some people ARE smarter than others. And being good at sports, or music, or socialising doesn't mean you're smart. You can do smart things in them... like composing a really clever opera with twists and turns and moral values all stuck together etc.

I've kinda run out of steam cause I got distracted and left the puter for a minute, but I'm sure you see my point. Unless, that is, you're too stupid too. <ah good ol' basic psychology >

Sangre

We're not talking about being smart, but being intelligent, and Im pretty sure those 7 types of intelligence are widely accept. I have heard that list quite a few times before.
Ok, so would you say being linguistic is an intelligence?

Barry Aldwell

Originally posted by lordsippa
OH MY GOD! I CAN ACTUALLY MANOUEVER MY PEN TO A PAGE! LOOK AT HOW SMART I AM!

Isn't it maneuver?
Seriously, though, I agree with that (rather long winded) rant. A lot of people consider themselves amazingly smart, but are really about as intelligent as a brick. Similarly, a lot of extremely smart people have low self esteem and consider themselves to be stupid.

lordsippa

Yeah... I just think that that list is unfounded. It's his opinion, his own view on definition which has been accepted because it's so "nice".

Oh, I don't profess to being overly knowledgable on this subject, but I am quite opinionated when I feel like it. And, let's face it, that's what half of psychology is about (and this I say from experience).

SOL

So in conclusion we need some new words?

lordsippa

Or pistols at dawn.

purplepolkadot

oooooh, can one of the new words have 'lisa' or 'reilly' in it somewhere? one for people who have to suffer because of or come to the aid of dopey people.


and i so do not have issues sangre, and i agree with nosmo; you are a troll, one of those small horned ones (and not horned in the funny juvenile way). if you were constantly marauded by dopey people, you'd understand.

Sangre

Originally posted by purplepolkadot


and i so do not have issues sangre, and i agree with nosmo; you are a troll, one of those small horned ones (and not horned in the funny juvenile way). if you were constantly marauded by dopey people, you'd understand.

Puh-lease....they're spikes actually

Anyway this thread is going around in circles.
I dont care about stupid people, people with no cop on bug me though. Or if they could do something 10 minutes ago and now they can't.

PHB

I wasn't denying intelligence exists I was saying that its not as easily measured by using 70 short anwser questions.

A question for your sven
Do you agree that being good at maths and good at english are two types of intelligence?

Seaneh

Originally posted by lordsippa
But... but... "i can throw a ball well - I have co-ordination. Watch me co-ordinate"... I don't consider co-ordination intelligence. I mean OH MY GOD! I CAN ACTUALLY MANOUEVER MY PEN TO A PAGE! LOOK AT HOW SMART I AM! FFS... that's what I'm pissed at. Dumbing down what intelligence is. I mean, why can't people just admit that sportspeople are TALENTED but NOT smart (well, based entirely on their sporting merits, not me slagging off individual sportspeople). Intelligence is a talent and a gift. It's something some people excel at, and others don't. It's just that people got so fecking offended because the smart people get their own back at the asses who lord it over them in almost every way by saying "well at least we're smarter than you". Well tought sh1t. Cause some people ARE smarter than others. And being good at sports, or music, or socialising doesn't mean you're smart. You can do smart things in them... like composing a really clever opera with twists and turns and moral values all stuck together etc.

I've kinda run out of steam cause I got distracted and left the puter for a minute, but I'm sure you see my point. Unless, that is, you're too stupid too. <ah good ol' basic psychology >

I could almost guarentee that Clarence Seedorf and Reggie Miller have a higher IQ than you.

lordsippa

To a degree of course. Your ability to comprehend mathematics to a degree of mastery whereby you can manipulate it to a desired effect is definitely a form of intelligence, same with english, for example. As I've said, if you can do that with music, then yes you are smart, but using set patterns in music to form something that sounds pretty isn't being all too brilliant is it now?

As for sports, I understand the rules of the game, I know how to play, if I practiced I'd be good at it... and yes, I wouldn't be fantastic - because my body doesn't have the natural nervous system in place to allow the proper responses needed to succeed in that game. Where is the proof that I lack intelligence? Where is the proof that I need more than a basic intelligence to do well?

My view of intelligence is the ability to comprehend things and manipulate knowledge etc. I don't consider knowing things intelligence <although it can be a sign of it - though not always>, nor do people who merely use formulae to achieve their results impress me as intellectuals <although if they show some ingenuity in how they use them that would be a sign of intelligence>.

But then again, that's only my opinion. As valid as any other, but still only an opinion. Except it's a damn sight more rational than the "physical intelligence" one.

lordsippa

Oh and leave Sangre alone. He's just arguing a point for a larf, or so I figure.

[edit] In better mood now, but still Gandalf/Sean personal digs will earn you quiet mutterings behind your back from me. Probably nothing else but still... I can mutter quite sinisterly... while you sleep... Yeah... [/edit]

Seaneh

So what you are really saying is that academics are not a sure measure for intelligence?

In that case I would agree with you 100%.

(this was aimed at the post before your last one)



And I just want to say that I wasn't having a go at you, but what I said is true.

Sev

Well.. personally I hate English, that is the English leaving cert course anyway, and I cant stand poetry especially. And yes Gary, I find dancing equally stupid. It is as you have so neatly put before, poetry in motion.

But.. that doesnt mean that I lack the cognitive capacity to comprehend it, or that I have the intellectual superiority to transcend it. It just means that I dont like it. It's not my cup of tea. However I'm sure if I could suspend the inhibition or realisation to the fact that what I'm doing is so goddamn stupid, then with some practice, I could swiftly become quite the dancer. Likewise, if I actually had a passion for poetry, and had an active interest to persue it's study, I'm sure that I could become quite the poet.

Also.. after spending some time recently watching the crucible on the telly, I have to agree, snooker players seem quite the smartey men. As for golfers, the professionals do demonstrate a great deal of spacial and analytical ability to guage distances, judge the wind and read the lie of the land and the slopes of the greens.

But my question is... that regardless of your intelligence (provided it's within reason), is it possible to reach the level of these professional snooker players and golfers simply with lots and lots of sheer dedication and constant practice?

Sev

Also.. the ability for a golfer, to accurately judge the power needed to roll up to the lip and sink a 100 foot putt, and in turn the ability to apply this power through one's arms with such subtle and controlled motion. Surely this is governed in some way by intelligence?

PHB

Personally I'm a firm believer if you are above a base intelligence you can do anything you set your mind to.

But the whole point is this is that people are barely able to define intelligence, yet this IQ tests measure them in 70 short anwser questions

I agree with Sven to an extent, that intelligence if your ability to adapt to situations [over simplification i know] but I certainly don't think its a way of measurly it anyway accuratly.

And for yey who think that academic achievements dont nessacarily reflect intelligence perhaps your right.
But I think we can all agree anyone who gets 550+ have something going on for them?
Theres a limit to how much hard work can do.

In conclusion, I think IQ tests are stupid, partially because they are also a skill that can be picked up

lordsippa

On the point of golfing, surely they're merely talented at that. They're able to gauge distances. I don't consider it an astounding sign of intellect, but as I've said it's definitely a talent and one that I'd love to possess. Then again, I've never EVER seen or heard of anyone capable of that <beyond a fluke> without practicing A LOT. Proffessional golfers practice constantly. You don't go "well, I'm pretty damned good at golf.. guess I'll stop", it's like any talent, practice makes perfect. But there is a natural element to it. Their brains are wired that way.

My contention here, which is the only issue I'm arguing over, is that the term "intelligence" has been warped from what it traditionally meant to some indefinable philosophical issue simply because people are afraid of being labelled (and labelling others) stupid. It's being nice and politically correct, but I just find it rather ... well... silly. And that's my bone of contention. Not that these people aren't talented, but just that I don't feel these talents should be considered as intelligence.

Also, I've been continuously stating the fact that this whole issue is a matter of opinion and can't be resolved. Perhaps I should make it clear that I'm only arguing this because I find it amusing and I'm not actually taking this entirely seriously. Yes, I'm arguing what I feel are valid points, but I'm sticking stubbornly to my views mainly because it's an argument and that's what you do. And I apologise but I'm too lazy and tired to alter this paragraph and make it sound less patronising. It's not meant to be overly so, but alas! it is.

Sev

I always felt that the acid test for Intelligence is simply how long it takes for somebody to learn something.

Sev

Well essentially my question boils down to this, which I'm in no place to answer myself.. I can only have my opinion... but

Give two people, who have never seen a golf course before, a putter. Make one of somewhat below average intelligence, and the other of an intelligence equally above average. And ask them each to try sink a 100 footer putt. Would the smarter player get it closer?

Seaneh

Most likely, the odds are that he would understand that in order to get the shot near the hole he would have to use the slope of the green and and little hills inbetween to have a chance.

lordsippa

Depends... If you mean how long it takes them to comprehend something, then yes. If you mean how long it takes them to be good at something then... it really does depend. Take sports, that requires you tone your body into being able to do whatever is neccessitated <such as swing the club correctly, while holding it straight, while keeping shoulders in line, head down, etc>. I know what I'm meant to do in golf, I just slip up at golfbecause I'm not used to it and rarely play - hence don't just naturally assume correct stance etc. That and my aim sucks. Of course, being able to correctly gauge the distance to hit is quite astounding, but it's something you pick up with experience <as any golfer would tell you>. It's not intellect, but it's still damned impressive.

lordsippa

I'd guess that whichever one had the steadier hands and better aim would win. Doesn't take a genius to work out how to use a golf club.

But, again, this is just my view on this.

Sev

Right.. ok well, let's just say.. take the net average, of a person's instinctive ability to learn quickly and succeed at every possible discipline (provided its not hampered by a physical restriction). And that's my definition of intelligence. Feel free to disagree.

lordsippa

Ah, my definition is pretty much yours except I add that they can manipulate that knowledge. I just want to argue that certain things, like sports, rely more on honing your body (including reactions which aren't concious => cannot be used as a claim to intelligence) or other such non intellectually based factors. General learning etc is intellectual, although there is the factor of studying being a sign of concentration more than intelligence (which is proven by all those genius' with ADD).

p.pete

Originally posted by SOL
So in conclusion we need some new words?

Vitriolic, there's a good one. Quite apt as to how this thread is turning:cool:

I'll say it again, if ye bother to look up a definition of inteligence, it basically relates to quickness of understanding (I could give a slightly broader definition but that could upset some people).

Inteligence is something that I like to take an interest in and there is always going to be several schools of thought on something like this. Certainly I have come across the idea of 7 or so inteligences from more than one source.

Going back to inteligence being related to a quickness of understanding - I know I can figure out a math problem a lot quicker than a guitar chord. I can dodge a tackle better than I can rationalise an irregular verb and so on. A lot of it is probably down to enthusiasm - I don't much like verbs:D

strawberry

Originally posted by Sev
Well essentially my question boils down to this, which I'm in no place to answer myself.. I can only have my opinion... but

Give two people, who have never seen a golf course before, a putter. Make one of somewhat below average intelligence, and the other of an intelligence equally above average. And ask them each to try sink a 100 footer putt. Would the smarter player get it closer?

Interestingly enough, the better a golfer you are, the less brain activity is registered when you hit the ball. The trick is apparently to think about nothing.

Intelligence will always be viewed subjectively and measured objectively. This whole conversation seems like a game in which everyone tries to use as many big words as possible to define an indefineable concept. And then we point out people's typos and call them idiots-the murkier side of ctyi's 'multi-faceted' intelligence.