![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Apophis
![]() Join Date: July 29, 2003
Location: The Underdark cavern of Zagreb
Age: 38
Posts: 4,679
|
Yes... something along these lines:
Liquid intelligence is a kind of intelligence that can actually develop with age, and grow with experience. Before the age of 16, our intelligence is approximately 20 % liquid. After that it rapidly degenerates, turning into crystalized intelligence. It is not knowledge. At 30 I think we only have about 1-3% liquid intelligence. It is also claimed to shape, and be shaped by, our tendency to a certain type of know-how(math, music etc). Crystalized is something that we can not change, our own starting intelligence. It changes a bit, but not much.
__________________
MAKE LOVE, NOT SPAM! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
40th Level Warrior
![]() Join Date: October 29, 2001
Location: Western Wilds of Michigan
Posts: 11,752
|
One thing I remember from some class or another... the definition of IQ, according to an IQ test, is "what this test measures" -- IOW, there's no good definition of it.
IQ officially is mental age / actual age. IOW, how much do you know, based on how old you actually are. As someone with a very high IQ, as measured by tests, I can tell you that from my perspective, it doesn't matter. What matters is the ability to "get it", whatever "it" is. To understand and grasp a situation and issue and be able to know what it is and how to handle it. I think that a number of insecure people use their IQ as a way to isolate themselves from others -- "we don't associate with people like that". I think they're afraid of being upstaged by someone who's "inferior" ![]() Me, I don't mind that at all. It happens all the time because, as Styx sang some years ago, "The more that I learn, well, the less that I know".
__________________
*B* Save Early, Save Often Save Before, Save After Two-Star General, Spelling Soldiers -+-+-+ Give 'em a hug one more time. It might be the last. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 | |
Lord Soth
![]() Join Date: July 25, 2002
Location: Melbourne FL
Age: 61
Posts: 1,971
|
Quote:
__________________
----- Help feed animals in shelters with just a mouse click at The Animal Rescue Site !! |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
Dracolich
![]() Join Date: January 24, 2004
Location: UK
Age: 42
Posts: 3,092
|
Hmm..would pressure count as an exterior force though?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 | |
Registered Member
Iron Throne Cult
![]() Join Date: August 27, 2004
Location: North Carolina
Age: 62
Posts: 4,888
|
Quote:
I have a perfect example of someone who is very smart and knows a trade most people have NO knowledge of, yet he never spent a day in college. Instead, he decided to be an apprentice to the local locksmith. He began working during his junior (or senior) year in high school and eventually bought the business from his mentor when the fellow retired. I have took a double-major in college and also got a two year degree from the local community college, but if I lock myself out of my house, I am S.O.L. until my buddy can show up and pick the lock for me. ![]() So, no, I don't believe IQ IS an accurate test of "intelligence" either. One other quick story I heard a few years ago comparing book knowledge to street smarts. The author of the article told how he took a cab in NY and struck up a conversation with the driver about the day's horse races. He started talking about one of the favorites for the last race that day, but the cabby told him the horse wouldn't even finish in the top 3. "Why not?" asked the author. "He has excellent breeding, great training and one of the best jockeys available". "Yeah," said the cabby "but he ain't got no heart. He don't have the strength to go the full distance. He'll fade out in the last turn". Sure enough, the cabby's "street smarts" proved correct, while the "expert knowledge" missed the mark.
__________________
Cerek the Calmth |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 | |
Bastet - Egyptian Cat Goddess
![]() Join Date: September 5, 2001
Location: Calgary, AB
Age: 50
Posts: 3,491
|
Quote:
I have a perfect example of someone who is very smart and knows a trade most people have NO knowledge of, yet he never spent a day in college. Instead, he decided to be an apprentice to the local locksmith. He began working during his junior (or senior) year in high school and eventually bought the business from his mentor when the fellow retired. I have took a double-major in college and also got a two year degree from the local community college, but if I lock myself out of my house, I am S.O.L. until my buddy can show up and pick the lock for me. ![]() So, no, I don't believe IQ IS an accurate test of "intelligence" either. One other quick story I heard a few years ago comparing book knowledge to street smarts. The author of the article told how he took a cab in NY and struck up a conversation with the driver about the day's horse races. He started talking about one of the favorites for the last race that day, but the cabby told him the horse wouldn't even finish in the top 3. "Why not?" asked the author. "He has excellent breeding, great training and one of the best jockeys available". "Yeah," said the cabby "but he ain't got no heart. He don't have the strength to go the full distance. He'll fade out in the last turn". Sure enough, the cabby's "street smarts" proved correct, while the "expert knowledge" missed the mark. [/QUOTE]The locksmith is not such a good example of common sense but intelligence. He has been trained even though he did not go to school and is no doubt an expert in the area of locks. Think of an apprentice as a different type of learning and was commonly used before trade schools, and higher learning. I am sure if I gave you the locksmiths tools you would figure out how to get in your house even if you were not very efficient due to know being familiar with the tools, and a severe lack of practice on locks, eventually. It might take you many hours compared to a few minutes or seconds but you could do it. Once I locked myself in a restaurant bathroom because the lock broke. I asked someone to get me a butter knife to slide under the door, by the time the locksmith arrived I had taken off the lock and was out. What I do wonder is how the locksmith would have gotten me out from his side if I was totally inept and could not get the lock off before he arrived. The screws were on my side and there were no holes in the knob on the other side. It was a nice solid steal door so kicking it down would not be an option. What tools would he have at is disposal. The locksmith is not going to be using a butter knife to get the door open but we sometimes have to make use of the tools we have available. A butter knife was the only thing I could think of that would slide under the door that I could work at the knob. While the locksmith did not have book smarts he does have applied knowledge and experience as an apprentice. So the question becomes how much wisdom does each locksmith have, take away his tools how well will he adapt to tackle a lock given a problem, the answer to that will vary from person to person, some locksmiths will just give up in that they don't have there tools, others will think of ways to use other items that will act as poor substitutes this involves common sense as it is not likely something you will learn as an apprentice or in text books, it requires wisdom, intelligence is what you have learned through practice or text books. I didn't say books because sometimes you might find an example in a good novel to use. The taxi cab however is a good example knowing the animals desire to win and is not an easy thing to grasp or learn, kind of reminds me of the trainer in the movie seabiscuit. I guess intelligence can be described as ability to learn, while wisdom is the ability to adapt to new situations and problems as they arise wether you have no previous knowledge or not. Those with knowledge and intelligence in a certain area definatly are capable or more prepared of adapting quicker that others with no previous knowledge in certain areas weather they do or not is another thing. [ 03-18-2005, 04:58 PM: Message edited by: pritchke ] |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 | |
40th Level Warrior
![]() Join Date: July 11, 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,916
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Quintesson
![]() Join Date: August 28, 2004
Location: the middle of Michigan
Age: 43
Posts: 1,011
|
Er, TL beat me to that one, and phrased it much more cleverly than I would have lol.
Other than that, a few thoughts here. This thread in January dealt with the worst of IQ tests, the online ones. Particularly, I argued that intelligence itself is arbitrarily defined by those making IQ tests, and that they inevitably fail across cultural lines (where that definition changes). http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/cg...=022090#000000 Are 'street smarts' and 'book smarts' mutually exclusive? Is the character of information different? Could instances of street smarts not be put into a book? Do people with lots of common sense just shy away from reading entirely? LoL I realize I'm being silly here, but I think this distinction is silly. We observe people with a wide variety of abilities and knowledge in different areas, and I think the social status gap in the college educated and the rest of the population manifests itself into the street smarts/book smarts dichotomy. [Quantitatively, by the way, the difference between those with college degrees and those with high school diplomas (in the US), is on average $1M over a lifetime.] Instead substitute two kinds of reasoning that I think warrant an actual distinction. Idiographic reasoning is a tendency to use your own observations about the world to make judgements about a broader reality. I think this is a fair replacement of so-called 'common sense'. We all do it, but we should acknowledge that it leads to bias and limits the scope of our analyses. Nomothetic reasoning is a conscious and willful effort to avoid idiographic reasoning. Anyone who has ever read or heard something that caused them to re-evaluate their previous personal assessment has engaged in nomothetic reasoning. Nomothetic reasoning will lead to more broadly informed and rationally tested foundation of ideas about a subject. I don't know about anyone else, but the more I learn the more I realize that my less informed observations don't count for crap lol. Everyone must engage in both of these to some degree, but all education presents opportunities for a nomothetic understanding of some subject (or requires it). College allows for even more, at a faster rate and 'higher' level, but it's not always applicable to the world outside of academia, which is on its surface a good reason to separate book smarts from everything else. However, the idea is that one learns how to learn more effectively, and applies that to his/her life from then on. In my opinion, the pursuit of aforementioned 'book smarts' actually improves the quality of your thinking, even if the actual knowledge is irrelevent (or forgotten). Note that higher education doesn't ensure this, nor does the lack of it prevent someone from developing a similar capacity. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
Apophis
![]() Join Date: July 29, 2003
Location: The Underdark cavern of Zagreb
Age: 38
Posts: 4,679
|
Cerek, you misunderstood me.
IQ is mostly intelligence, if you view intelligence as a starting point. Intelligence is not gathered knowledge, experience or skills learned. It is the ability to understand, learn and adapt. If you're a dummy and you read "Internet for Dummies", you don't stop being a dummy. And about that lock picking thing... I took a screw driver, a stapler and I unlocked my apartment doors in 15 minutes. 5 minutes the second time. 4-5 times later, I'm down to 1 minute. Not really hard. The horse racer shows experience, not intelligence. The Taxi driver had access to information unavailable to the passenger, me keeps track fo the track(no pun intended [img]tongue.gif[/img] ), and knows that the horse doesn't have spirit. IMHO an IQ test that uses external knowledge, verbal skills or attention exploits is not worth the paper it's written on. I feel I have to write something about my own views on inteligence, judging people and stuff... Why do I use IQ? Because people like it. Because having a high score gives you advantages. I don't do it because I feel superior to anyone else, or that I need to prove myself, or that I need confidence. As long as other people give me good paying jobs based on my IQ score(156), I am not gonna complain.
__________________
MAKE LOVE, NOT SPAM! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
Emerald Dragon
![]() Join Date: December 10, 2003
Location: UK
Age: 41
Posts: 961
|
So let me see if I understand what your saying..
If you've got a high, or above average IQ and get good grades you must therfor have poor social skills.. I find that offensive, the sort of trash that people spew after they've finished an IQ test and got less than the guy next door... There are far more examples of less than steller intelligences being rather rude and obnoxious.. I used to rate between 114-150 IQ points, dunno how I'd rate nowadays.. One of my mates IQ is around the 90 mark, and he's a rude thoughtless SOB.. You get nasty smart people, you get nasty dumb people, learn it, live with it.
__________________
-Jenn |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Smart Kid | Arvon | General Discussion | 4 | 10-31-2005 09:10 PM |
Smart Kid | Arvon | General Discussion | 6 | 04-23-2005 03:54 AM |
Are they really so smart? | Spelca | General Discussion | 13 | 03-09-2003 12:16 PM |
Eat Smart! | Sazerac | General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) | 20 | 02-08-2003 11:42 PM |
Smart | Arvon | General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) | 2 | 01-16-2003 01:49 PM |