|
|
|
|
#1
10-07-2010
|
||||
|
||||
What is it to have intelligence?
Ok, so maybe this is stupid question with an easy answer to some, but to me, always been a deep and misunderstood question, I mean there are many answers out their, but none quite seem to fit:-
=The ability to have sentient (or self awareness) was first port of call, however just because something is self aware doesn't mean it understands what it is, just realises it there, and also many sentient being can be seen to lack wisdom, now techically wisdom is different to intelligence, but the lack of 1 surely must lessen the other. -In short, being self aware doesn't mean smart, so this can only be starting point at best =The ability to speak was the first major sign of intelligence in the eyes of the scientists defining it during the enlightenment period. However this has two problems:- 1=Many unsentient animals can speak, (all be it in more limited capacity than man) thus conflicting with our basis of sentient thought view 2=The ability to speak is only small part of language/communication and though it is logical to see it as sign of higher thought, it is unlogical to see it as the defining point, because like the above, it simply doesn't fit to say 1 equakes to the other, as proven by problem point 1 -So again this seems to be more of side sign than the answer we are looking for =Next, there is the argument that wisdom is true intelligence, and while this is an appealing answer, it cannot be right 1, because as many scientists over the years have shown us, the idealogy of intelligence doesn't always co-exist with wisdom -Also, then must ask what wisdom is and though Zhu Tao's anecdote "If I say I am wise, I am clearly not, but if I say I am not wise, I am clearly lier" is amusing, doesn't really answer question there, but that is different matter altogether (PS shortened quote is shortened) =So next, the idea that knowing lots of facts is intelligence, this is in my opinion, completely wrong, because knowing lots of facts is memory game at best and though having good memory is good thing, doesn't mean understand what memorizing -There is a man who can say what the weather was on any day of record history in his life-time, now this is amazing, but doesn't mean he is smart =And in here lies our true question and its possible answer, intelligence in my all be it limited opinion, is the ability of understanding something, not just knowing it is there, but knowing what it being there means and how it effects the world around it by being there. -However even this has limitations because this very obervsation based intelligence, what about the ability to create???? That too must be included in our scope =And this leads onto a new question, does the ability to have a skill others do not possess create intelligence, David Beckman is considered a slow man, but his ability at football is form of genius in my limited opinion =All this in conclusion seems to give us small sight of what intelligence is, but doesn't answer it in way which is satisfactory, so can one of you people, who are smarter than me, give me a more conversed answer? 
|
|
#4
10-07-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
comparisons. we are only intelligent when compared to something else, or stupid when compared to something else. which is why i get annoyed when people say people are stupid. point to something smarter. they may do stupid things but the fact you recognize them means you have the intelligence to perceive those mistakes even if they do not. you may be "smarter" than some people, (and by smarter i mean anything from a mind that grasps concepts quickly, to a mind that is quick with memorization, to a mind that can perseve and think up new ideas, to a mind that can take the building blocks it is given and create something unique and brilliant) but you will be "dumber" than others.
[ the end. ] [ I already told you it was the end. ] [ Seriously, stop reading these, it is over. ]
|
|
#5
10-08-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
First of all I think that there are varying levels of intelligence. It is not a thing of whether a species has it or not but simply the level that the individual.
Second I think that intelligence is a combined factor of many different aspects including but not limited to the following: 1. Ability to learn - this is, at its core the most basic measure of intelligence of a species, and has become a critical defining point scientifically in classifying the relative intelligence of creatures. Note that this doesn't necessarily pertain to how much one knows, as that is strictly "knowledge," a category unto itself. It simply entails the ability. Such an ability has been proven to exist in such lowly creatures as cockroaches and grasshoppers (using Pavlov's famous dog experiment as a basis). 2. Non-abstract application - Building upon the previous point, this has to do with taking information learned and manipulating one's environment to bring about positive results or avoid negative results as a direct extension of that learned ability. Mice, dogs, birds, dolphins and more have been shown to have this ability. 3a. Purely abstract application - This category is huge and could probably be broken down further, but I won't go into it terribly long. This kind of application grows over the course of the human life and a good deal of it is specific to humans alone. A good example of some of the characteristics of abstract applications can be found by searching for Piaget's stages of cognitive development. Higher orders of this can translate to derivation of theoretical concepts and mental skills in technical areas. 3b. Practical application - This is a bit of an aside but lies a stage above direct application in that a person without advanced abstract skills can still theorize higher levels of cause and effect. This comes into play for decision-making and tactician abilities, such as Fared's example of David Beckman who has low "intelligence" but highly developed mental ability as to his game. 3c. Creativity - This is similar to abstract thought but may be considered a slightly lower process. It is the ability to utilize an object to perform a different task than it naturally serves (i.e. tools) or to create new devices and concepts to fulfill specific tasks. Like I said, there are varying levels of this so-called "intelligence" and the various aspects I have posted are by no means all-encompassing. It's just further discussion some of the measures used.
|
|
#7
10-08-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
I agree with caps, intelligence depends on comparison, as does a large amount of things.
I think intelligence is made up of several things: -Our ability to understand different things -Our ability to learn different things -Our memory. Don't get me wrong, I agree with the idea that we shouldn't measure intelligence with our memory, but it's a good way to measure whether a person has learnt anything as well as their capacity for learning -Our ability to make connections between aspects of life. It's called active thinking to read, say The Lion The Witch And The Wardrobe and make the intertextual link to the Bible while you're reading it. -Rational thinking. I'm not talking about religion or sprituality or whatever. But the ability to see through a façade and think clearly to the best of our ability. -Linked with active and rational thinking is consideration. To consider how things affect other people and the ability to understand emotions -Brain power. How fast a person can think and how much they can process is a traditional way of measuring one's intellect and I see no reason to refute it as an aspect of intelligence. -As DA said, creativity. Now, I believe anyone can be creative. But the intelligence is the ability to understand how you're being creative and why. Furthermore, for the more intelligent, perhaps, the ability to reform our definitions of what is and isn't creative. No doubt there are more contributing factors to what makes a person "intelligent". But with so many aspects, everyone is going to be intelligent in their own way. Some people are more emotionally intelligent than others while others are faster thinkers. Certainly, different forms of intelligence are valued above others, specifically in academia. But to call someone unintelligent or stupid is, ironically, stupid itself. Nobody's unintelligent, we're all just intelligent in different ways. It's how we use our intelligence that forces people to brand each other as "stupid". And, of course, how we use our intelligence is also a contributing factor. Whether our ability to speak and form sentences is intelligence, I'm not sure. Definitely, our self-awareness should be counted and our whole self-made society and questioning of things we've made. It's hard to tell.
|
|
#9
10-09-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
=How sad that Titans gibberish is currently most intellectual thing written here <_< >_>
Caps=I agree intelligence is in part relative, as is most things, but most objective testing is done by relative comparisons, but I think this is so, only if looking at it from negative standpoint, IE is something not intelligent, more than is someone intelligent, because I consider 99.9% of human's intelligent, not because smarter than other creatures, but because do things which could in some format observed under our limited explanations of intelligence -However this actually leads into why I asked this question, though I will go into more after Dark's comments Dark=That is wonderful and well structured answer that suspect 90% of scientists would give and I wouldn't disagree with it, but there are two major problems to it:- 1-The first problem with all this is that, Human's are 1's defining it and we consider ourselves intelligent being, so we best what is to be intelligent on ourselves, then apply that process to other humans or creatures and see what results we get, now I know this more like theoretical ideology at most rebellious and therefore pointless, as logically those answers will work, but it doesn't mean that wrong that we trying to define an objective thing on a subjective sense of self, thus making the results gray, what if they are things we missed by doing the basis off ourselves 2-This leads onto problem 2, those answers are not so much an answer to what intelligence is, but examples of where it can seen, and this because answering what intelligence is, is like explaining any word, the most difficult task possible, because without using examples, only have words to do it with. So though those answers do give very nice and in my opinion very logical variations on where intelligence can seen, it doesn't really answer in a conclusive and fundamental way, what intelligence actually is, because doesn't say what these things are co-basing off and that is where this question becomes very vage and difficult to answer =Nik you bring up several interesting points, which like dark I don't disagree with, but still think interesting to know the deeper laid problems of:- 1=Memory/contextual links-As you made good point for these, I won't disagree on their inclusion and will do them together. The fact memory is nothing more than an organic version of data processing would attest to your view, but then with both memory and contextual links, we come into the muddy realm of subjective bais, now an example would be Avatar, Sally a relatively religious person watched that film and said thought lot of christian links to it, i watched it as very unreligious person and such no such links, -Now an objective person would say we should say cameron and see who is right, but i think both of us are right, in a less definite manor all be it. This is because our abilities to make arguments for our sides viewpoint, show that their is evident and clear structure and foundation to our views, therefore making them right from theoretical standpoint at least. -As I say, "The only argument which wrong in philosophical debate, is the augment never made." Now admittedly this is why i personally hate philosophical debate, it becomes so convoluted in its own profound sense of abstracted nature as to become as useless as Bentrium said it would be, but doesn't nesscarily mean it is wrong in the points it makes here, just annoying to me 2=This as so often is case, leads onto my second point, as I seem to have made an argument that the subjective ability to make an argument can be considered another form of intelligence (which to some existent it is) does that by default of my own definition intelligent.....possibly, but as most scientists and philosophers now agree, there needs to be basis and logic to an argument, thus throwing all I put into somewhat disrepute, however as we are still in realm of subjective view, may as well use it to its ultimate conclusion and ask...what is logic????? Rationality????? what is rational???? the logical and structured basis of an action, oh both explain the other, that useful <_< >_> -So we can see, as with darks explanations on intelligence, though can be useful and right, they are only as useful and right as we say they are because also defined logic in same way, thus meaning that logic has same unsound foundation behind it, and this throws all of the ideas on intelligence into disrepute, including the one I just used to come to use conclusion, making this conclusion by own logic void.....<erm> is it just me or did I prove all existence and intelligence is suffering from clinical retardation....jokes aside, does make everything unsound
|
|
#10
12-01-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
I'm not going to be able to post anything major, like the others on this thread as I'm no philosphy student and I've haven't actually thought about this topic too much, however, psychologists generally agree that there are nine different types of intelligence found in humans and animals alike, which helps to explain why we deem some animals to be more intelligent than others.
The following is copied from this website. http://skyview.vansd.org/lschmidt/Pr...telligence.htm The Nine Types of Intelligence By Howard Gardner 1. Naturalist Intelligence (“Nature Smart”) Designates the human ability to discriminate among living things (plants, animals) as well as sensitivity to other features of the natural world (clouds, rock configurations). This ability was clearly of value in our evolutionary past as hunters, gatherers, and farmers; it continues to be central in such roles as botanist or chef. It is also speculated that much of our consumer society exploits the naturalist intelligences, which can be mobilized in the discrimination among cars, sneakers, kinds of makeup, and the like. 2. Musical Intelligence (“Musical Smart”) Musical intelligence is the capacity to discern pitch, rhythm, timbre, and tone. This intelligence enables us to recognize, create, reproduce, and reflect on music, as demonstrated by composers, conductors, musicians, vocalist, and sensitive listeners. Interestingly, there is often an affective connection between music and the emotions; and mathematical and musical intelligences may share common thinking processes. Young adults with this kind of intelligence are usually singing or drumming to themselves. They are usually quite aware of sounds others may miss. 3. Logical-Mathematical Intelligence (Number/Reasoning Smart) Logical-mathematical intelligence is the ability to calculate, quantify, consider propositions and hypotheses, and carry out complete mathematical operations. It enables us to perceive relationships and connections and to use abstract, symbolic thought; sequential reasoning skills; and inductive and deductive thinking patterns. Logical intelligence is usually well developed in mathematicians, scientists, and detectives. Young adults with lots of logical intelligence are interested in patterns, categories, and relationships. They are drawn to arithmetic problems, strategy games and experiments. 4. Existential Intelligence Sensitivity and capacity to tackle deep questions about human existence, such as the meaning of life, why do we die, and how did we get here. 5. Interpersonal Intelligence (People Smart”) Interpersonal intelligence is the ability to understand and interact effectively with others. It involves effective verbal and nonverbal communication, the ability to note distinctions among others, sensitivity to the moods and temperaments of others, and the ability to entertain multiple perspectives. Teachers, social workers, actors, and politicians all exhibit interpersonal intelligence. Young adults with this kind of intelligence are leaders among their peers, are good at communicating, and seem to understand others’ feelings and motives. 6. Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence (“Body Smart”) Bodily kinesthetic intelligence is the capacity to manipulate objects and use a variety of physical skills. This intelligence also involves a sense of timing and the perfection of skills through mind–body union. Athletes, dancers, surgeons, and craftspeople exhibit well-developed bodily kinesthetic intelligence. 7. Linguistic Intelligence (Word Smart) Linguistic intelligence is the ability to think in words and to use language to express and appreciate complex meanings. Linguistic intelligence allows us to understand the order and meaning of words and to apply meta-linguistic skills to reflect on our use of language. Linguistic intelligence is the most widely shared human competence and is evident in poets, novelists, journalists, and effective public speakers. Young adults with this kind of intelligence enjoy writing, reading, telling stories or doing crossword puzzles. 8. Intra-personal Intelligence (Self Smart”) Intra-personal intelligence is the capacity to understand oneself and one’s thoughts and feelings, and to use such knowledge in planning and directioning one’s life. Intra-personal intelligence involves not only an appreciation of the self, but also of the human condition. It is evident in psychologist, spiritual leaders, and philosophers. These young adults may be shy. They are very aware of their own feelings and are self-motivated. 9. Spatial Intelligence (“Picture Smart”) Spatial intelligence is the ability to think in three dimensions. Core capacities include mental imagery, spatial reasoning, image manipulation, graphic and artistic skills, and an active imagination. Sailors, pilots, sculptors, painters, and architects all exhibit spatial intelligence. Young adults with this kind of intelligence may be fascinated with mazes or jigsaw puzzles, or spend free time drawing or daydreaming. Okay, that was a lot longer than I thought it would be. :P
|
|
#11
12-11-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
It means carrying a briefcase with important secrets.
lolomfg TF2 reference lolol >:(
|
 |
|
|
jk
