3 of 4
3
Intelligence, Knowledge, and Wisdom (oh my!)
Posted: 02 November 2014 06:35 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 31 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5257
Joined  2011-11-04

IQ tests do, if constructed and administered appropriately, validly and reliably measure the specific (rather constricted) defined kind of intelligence for which they are designed (within a certain +/- standard error).  Each well constructed IQ test tends to have defined categories which they are testing. One IQ test may focus on crystalized IQ (knowledge that one has learned from experience) IQ and fluid IQ (facility with new problem solving).  Another IQ test might focus on Verbal IQ, Mechanical IQ, etc.  There are non-verbal IQ tests that can be used to estimate an IQ for persons who would be unable to effectively communicate with the examiner.  But it is not necessarily accurate to generalize beyond what the IQ actually measures to say that a particular IQ means that one person is generally more intelligent than another.  Intelligence (as we tend to think of it) has various and sundry dimensions.  No single IQ test (AFAIK) is designed to measure all of the possible dimensions. Then there is the problem of deciding what “intelligence” really consists of, in order to decide what all of the dimensions are, and what weight to give each.  IOW, what are all of the dimensions of “intelligence” and what part does each play. 

So again, IQ tests can validly and reliably measure what they are designed to measure, but ONLY the particular defined components of “intelligence” for which they are designed. 

To answer one of the questions at the beginning of this thread, there are many people with high measured IQ’s who are also theists.

I would be curious as to whether there is difference in the number of theists vs. non theists among persons who score high quotients across the board in, for example, all of the 14 types of “intelligence” as suggested by Furnam.  Or at least to see persons who test with high quotients in the most accepted standardized tests for “intelligence” plus high quotients in “emotional intelligence” plus high quotients in “interpersonal intelligence” plus high quotients in “creative intelligence”, and then determine if there is a significant difference among the number of theists vs. non theists.

My guess is that the percentage of non-theists/theists would be way higher than the percentage of non-theists/theists in the general population.

(My personal pet idea, is that theism is largely a developmental issue. i.e., if anyone could live long enough, and continue learning and developing, and overcome blockages to development, they would eventually become non-theists.)

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 November 2014 07:16 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 32 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4314
Joined  2014-06-20
Handydan - 08 July 2014 05:06 PM

Perhaps there are different kinds of intelligence, different kinds of knowledge, different kinds of wisdom? No one has all of all of them. We’re actually all a mixed bag of all kinds of different things. How does Mensa define intelligence?

They define it with an itelligence test that tests for several intellectual abilities.  But all IQ tests are flawed or inadequate in some way. They can’t test for everything. A person with low intelligence will not pass the test, but even those who do pass have their intellectual deficits. And then there are differences in understanding and personality. People who test high on IQ tests are as different from each other as people in a mixed population. You’d be better off finding a group with similar interests than depending on IQ scores alone. And people who score high on IQ tests and who think that is a particular advantage socially are not necessarily interesting people. They can certainly be supercilious snobs.

Lois

 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 November 2014 08:57 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 33 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  483
Joined  2014-03-12

So true, Lois.

 Signature 

“expectation is the mother of disappointment”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 November 2014 09:43 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 34 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5257
Joined  2011-11-04

Some persons with a diagnoses of Asperger’s have high IQs while also having profound challenges in interpreting and responding effectively, or even appropriately, in social interactions.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 November 2014 02:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 35 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7818
Joined  2009-02-26
TimB - 03 November 2014 09:43 AM

Some persons with a diagnoses of Asperger’s have high IQs while also having profound challenges in interpreting and responding effectively, or even appropriately, in social interactions.

Comes to mind the story of an autistic girl who spent many years in an institution for the severely handicapped, until someone gave her a computer.
She now travels on lecture tours, where she communicates through her computer. Turns out she has a very high IQ and great wisdom, but just could not express her thoughts verbally. I can only imagine the sheer hell this girl lived in for many years.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 November 2014 12:56 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 36 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4314
Joined  2014-06-20
Occam. - 09 July 2014 10:05 AM

I don’t recall the specifics, but a while ago a psychologist at USC did a statistical analysis (I’m not sure of what) and found there were fourteen distinctly different types of intelligence. 

Many years ago some members of the local Unitarian church asked me to apply to join Mensa.  From what I saw of their behavior and thinking, I decided that Mensa must define ego as intelligence.  These people weren’t very clear thinking but since they had passed some test that Mensa gives they were sure they were brilliant. 

Occam

Yes. That’s the problem.

Lois

 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 December 2014 10:57 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 37 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  201
Joined  2014-03-18

Don’t know if anyone’s mentioned this yet, but I’ve always found it fascinating that Richard Feynman, who had an IQ of “only” 115, somehow managed to win the Nobel Prize in physics.  Simply put, the guy was a genius by any reasonable standard—except IQ.  I think that says something about IQ.

(By the way, I was measured as being in the 98th percentile of IQ in elementary school, put in the TAG (Talented And Gifted) program, Olympics of the Mind, represented my middle school in the Oregon Writing Festival, etc.—and yet, as an adult, I’m a complete failure in virtually every aspect of life.  I just like to mention that whenever I can…you know, the high IQ part.)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 December 2014 12:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 38 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4314
Joined  2014-06-20
Handydan - 08 July 2014 05:06 PM

Perhaps there are different kinds of intelligence, different kinds of knowledge, different kinds of wisdom? No one has all of all of them. We’re actually all a mixed bag of all kinds of different things. How does Mensa define intelligence?

The ability to pass IQ tests that support their preconceived ideas about intelligence.

Lois

[ Edited: 07 December 2014 12:11 PM by LoisL ]
 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 December 2014 03:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 39 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5257
Joined  2011-11-04
BugRib - 07 December 2014 10:57 AM

Don’t know if anyone’s mentioned this yet, but I’ve always found it fascinating that Richard Feynman, who had an IQ of “only” 115, somehow managed to win the Nobel Prize in physics.  Simply put, the guy was a genius by any reasonable standard—except IQ.  I think that says something about IQ.

(By the way, I was measured as being in the 98th percentile of IQ in elementary school, put in the TAG (Talented And Gifted) program, Olympics of the Mind, represented my middle school in the Oregon Writing Festival, etc.—and yet, as an adult, I’m a complete failure in virtually every aspect of life.  I just like to mention that whenever I can…you know, the high IQ part.)

There are plenty of high IQ folks who suck at critical thinking.  It seems to me that there are plenty more who are seriously deficient in intellectual integrity.  You, however, seem to do well with both. 

As far as being a failure in life, that’s a value judgment.  Ultimately, we all die, so in that respect, we all pretty much tie, in the end, with regards to failing.

“All men are created equal.” is a nice ideal.  But, “All men die.” is an absolute fact.  Enjoy the meantime.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 December 2014 09:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 40 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  201
Joined  2014-03-18
LoisL - 02 November 2014 07:16 PM

They define it with an itelligence test that tests for several intellectual abilities.  But all IQ tests are flawed or inadequate in some way. They can’t test for everything. A person with low intelligence will not pass the test, but even those who do pass have their intellectual deficits. And then there are differences in understanding and personality. People who test high on IQ tests are as different from each other as people in a mixed population. You’d be better off finding a group with similar interests than depending on IQ scores alone. And people who score high on IQ tests and who think that is a particular advantage socially are not necessarily interesting people. They can certainly be supercilious snobs.

Lois

I’m pleasantly surprised to find that there aren’t too many of those snobs around here.  The level of discourse here is so much more civil and reasonable than my previous forum hangout over at http://forums.about.com/discussions/AgnosticismAtheism/ab-atheism?lgnF=y&nav=messages&redirCnt=1 , which used to be a wonderful place for intelligent debate but has lately devolved into a place where four or five bullies (who seemed, nonetheless, to be quite intelligent) have driven out most of the frequent contributors.  The place is a bit of a graveyard now.

Anyone else here who used to hang out over there?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 December 2014 04:06 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 41 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7818
Joined  2009-02-26
BugRib - 07 December 2014 09:03 PM
LoisL - 02 November 2014 07:16 PM

They define it with an itelligence test that tests for several intellectual abilities.  But all IQ tests are flawed or inadequate in some way. They can’t test for everything. A person with low intelligence will not pass the test, but even those who do pass have their intellectual deficits. And then there are differences in understanding and personality. People who test high on IQ tests are as different from each other as people in a mixed population. You’d be better off finding a group with similar interests than depending on IQ scores alone. And people who score high on IQ tests and who think that is a particular advantage socially are not necessarily interesting people. They can certainly be supercilious snobs.

Lois

I’m pleasantly surprised to find that there aren’t too many of those snobs around here.  The level of discourse here is so much more civil and reasonable than my previous forum hangout over at http://forums.about.com/discussions/AgnosticismAtheism/ab-atheism?lgnF=y&nav=messages&redirCnt=1 , which used to be a wonderful place for intelligent debate but has lately devolved into a place where four or five bullies (who seemed, nonetheless, to be quite intelligent) have driven out most of the frequent contributors.  The place is a bit of a graveyard now.

Anyone else here who used to hang out over there?

As an atheist myself I do not frequent any websites with a stated limiting agenda, including atheism or agnosticism.

I prefer fora such as CFI because it’s agenda is “humanism” which is all inclusive and allows for free discussion on a variety of subjects.

As to the term intelligence, IMO, intelligence is the ability to find the fundamental premise of a question. One can put forth a brilliant logical argument, but if it is founded on a false premise it is of no real value and may even lead to a misleading conclusion.

I believe that, in any discussion, it might be helpful to first state the fundamental principle on which the argument is based.

I recently saw a movie named “frequencies” which touched on this in a profound way. It proposes that all things in the universe respond to wave forms and frequencies of those wave forms and pure logical intelligence is not necessarily connected to “being in harmony” with one’s environment.
To anyone who has access to this movie, I can recommend watching it.

An example (in that movie) was that during a heated argument the father of one of the brilliant students suddenly began to play Chopin on his piano. The argument stopped immediately and all who were present stopped arguing and started listening and became absorbed in the melody and chord progressions.
When someone asked the pianist why he was playing music, his response was that the genius of Chopin forced the listeners toward the same frequencies and the previous discord (disagreement) dissolved instantly, because everyone was “tuned in” to the same frequency levels. He further went on to say that if you “recognize” a musical composition which you had never heard before, it was because it resonated at a fundamental level in the listener. This simple statement resonated in me and answered several questions about our relationship to the wholeness of the universe.

Coming from Holland, the first time I heard the term Universe, I intuitively interpreted the word as Uni-Verse, or “single song”. This is not the official definition of the word Universe, but IMO, speaks to to the fundamental inherent potential of the universe.

I believe, David Bohm identified this fundamental universal connectedness as the universal “insight intelligence”. I am sure he did not imply an intelligent, motivated god, but a universal resonance to which all things repond at a fundamental level.

Charles Ives understood this and wrote “The Unanswered Question” which demonstrates the implaccable nature of universal harmony and the discord that ensues when trying to explain this phenomenon in bits and pieces. As an eminent physicist dealing with bits and pieces, Bohm saw a deeper, more fundamental state which is responsible for the evolutionary process, not only of the universe, but of everything contained therein.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbArUJBRRJ0
and for a Leonard Bernstein lecture on the connectedness of language to music,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_fxB6yrDVo

What is intelligence?  Man has a large brain capable of imagination (arguably our greatest intellectual asset), but there are many animals who are able to use intellectual abilities far beyond the abilities of humans.
A bat uses high frequency sonar, a whale uses low frequency sonar. Birds use the earth’s magnetic fields as maps. When it is time to swarm, bees “discuss” the best possible new site from information passed on by “site scouts”.  The cuttlefish is a true shape shifter with the ability to imitate and completely blend into its environment. The “slime mold” has no brain at all, but can navigate a maze to find the shortest route to food.

Man is only able to copy these abilities into machines. But is our ability to learn any different from the ability to learn in other organisms? Perhaps we tend to give ourselves too much credit for our ability to use gadgets, while ignoring the natural harmonic excellence residing in other living organisms.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 December 2014 06:41 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 42 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5257
Joined  2011-11-04

Your thoughts reminded me of a scientist, (can’t think of his name) who was working on the idea of “morphic resonation” among organisms.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 December 2014 03:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 43 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4314
Joined  2014-06-20
BugRib - 07 December 2014 09:03 PM
LoisL - 02 November 2014 07:16 PM

They define it with an itelligence test that tests for several intellectual abilities.  But all IQ tests are flawed or inadequate in some way. They can’t test for everything. A person with low intelligence will not pass the test, but even those who do pass have their intellectual deficits. And then there are differences in understanding and personality. People who test high on IQ tests are as different from each other as people in a mixed population. You’d be better off finding a group with similar interests than depending on IQ scores alone. And people who score high on IQ tests and who think that is a particular advantage socially are not necessarily interesting people. They can certainly be supercilious snobs.

Lois

I’m pleasantly surprised to find that there aren’t too many of those snobs around here.  The level of discourse here is so much more civil and reasonable than my previous forum hangout over at http://forums.about.com/discussions/AgnosticismAtheism/ab-atheism?lgnF=y&nav=messages&redirCnt=1 , which used to be a wonderful place for intelligent debate but has lately devolved into a place where four or five bullies (who seemed, nonetheless, to be quite intelligent) have driven out most of the frequent contributors.  The place is a bit of a graveyard now.

Anyone else here who used to hang out over there?

Never been there, but you might try .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address). They have their share of crazies but there are enough rational members to cancel them out. Some of the exchanges are priceless.

Lois

 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 December 2014 03:24 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 44 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7818
Joined  2009-02-26
TimB - 08 December 2014 06:41 AM

Your thoughts reminded me of a scientist, (can’t think of his name) who was working on the idea of “morphic resonation” among organisms.

An experiment was conducted whereby a still beating adult heart was placed in a petri dish and the still beating heart of a newborn was placed 12” away and without connection of any kind.
It was observed that after a few seconds the fast beating infant’s heart slowed down and became synchronized with the slower, but stronger, beating heart of the adult.
This was a serious and controlled scientific experiment.  “synchronicity”?

In physics we speak of “fields”, such as electro-magenetic fields which radiate at certain wave-lengths and frequencies, which influence the objects within those fields. What is rthe mechanism that allows bodies to “feel” and “respond” to those fields. At the atomic scale all things respond to those fields.  “resonance”?

Bohm speaks of the “holomovement” of the universe and likens it to a grand river flowing, but displaying eddies, rapids, and wave interferences, which are causal to the movements of objects within that larger stream. Intuitively I see an elegant and profound concept in his hypotheses.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 December 2014 03:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 45 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5257
Joined  2011-11-04

Of course, I am skeptical, but it seems no less believable than the idea of “dark energy”.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
   
3 of 4
3