intelligence

[Tone Space]

I am a firm believer that intelligence is not an absolute thing.there is no you are smart or you are not.I actually believe that there are various forms of intelligence.Book smarts may be the most common and widely accepted form.along with memory retention.but there are others.you have common sense.you have people that are experts on others emotions, and the manipulation/perception of them.take a pimp for example.an ugly pimp that manipulates fine ass women.he might be a d student with a two digit I.Q., but he's still "intelligent" in terms of emotional manipulation.some people are also good speakers, and perhaps can't remember shit, or know little.but when they talk they give off the impression of the smartest person in the world.I actually think that person "is" very smart in a particular form.I know a dude who just knows how to get money.You talk to him and he sounds like Grimlock, and more then likely has a limited education.But he can have no money and attain a good amount quickly, and consistently.
so what do you all think you are intelligent in? What do you think your not intelligent in?
I'l breakdown some of my highs and lows

emotional-drooling bafoon
speaking-very bright
book smarts-ok
philisophically-pretty good
memory-pretty good
adaptable(survive, make the best out of bad situations, ect)-pretty good
success (able to achieve, succeed, accomplish goals)-working on getting better.

[Miss psyclodia]

Academicaly im a total idiot but psycologicaly im more adavnced than half of the psychiatrists around here.

[Revenant]

Emotional-Similar to a chimpanzee
Speaking-So full of shit even I will believe my own lies
Book smarts-So so, but suplimented by my memory
Philisophically-Havent a clue
Memory-Outstanding. I might even be able to whip Catfish at Jeopardy
Adaptable(survive, make the best out of bad situations, ect)-Excelent. I'm a social chameleon.
Success (able to achieve, succeed, accomplish goals)-Poor. I've lived my life on doing just what it takes to get by. But for the past 6 years there has been much improvement.

[Horus]

im a badass, mentally and physically, end of study.

[G.M.Skel]

There's this survey my teachers at school sometimes pass out at the beginning of school.
It supposedly measures multiple intelligences.
Here's an online test:
http://www.ldrc.ca/projects/miinventory/miinventory.php
It's about 80 questions.
Here's what I got:
Linguistic 33, Mathematics 41, Visual/Spatial 39, Body/Kinesthetic 40, Naturalistic 36, Music 25, Interpersonal 27, Intrapersonal 34

Intelligences explained:
http://www.ldpride.net/learningstyles.MI.htm#Interpersonal%20Intelligence

[Dane]

Emotional-beyond anyone else on earth
Speaking-amazing
Book smarts-i can quote 5,000 different books
Philisophically-my theories are accepted world wide
Memory-I remember the first time I shat myself
Adaptable(survive, make the best out of bad situations, ect)-i can adapt to anything and anyone
Success (able to achieve, succeed, accomplish goals)-I've always accomplished every goal I set for myself wither it was becoming a wrestling or getting involved in porn to finishing highschool when I felt the time was right

[dj 2way]

Emotional-I fall victum to this shit alot. I for the most part understand it very well. But when it comes to overstandin it its not that easy. But I know in the long run I will conquere emotion.
Speaking-I find most of my wisdom is in not speaking at all. But on my A game I got rhetoric that can kill. It comes very natural to me when Im in that zone.
Book smarts-At my best I see through this shit so much that Its like its already mastered.
Philisophically-I find this one of my stronger areas. Its kinda the key to everything I enjoy about my brain.At a young age I also remember someone tellin me I should be a philosipher. Even before I knew what the word meant.
Memory-On point but I kinda drowned it with weed. Still I remember stuff at a very young age. I find myself very good at capturing moments in great detail.
Adaptable(survive, make the best out of bad situations, ect)-So much sometimes that I dont even know who I really am sometimes.
Success (able to achieve, succeed, accomplish goals)-Sometimes but I have been met with alot of ruts. Its my own damn fault though.

[Antwerp's Finest]

I always used to be more intelligent than my classmates when i was younger.

But after 6 years of smoking weed i feel like i smoked myself stupid. I'm not as sharp or eloquent as i used to be.

[Element 115]

Linguistic 29
Mathematics 39
Visual/Spatial 36
Body/Kinesthetic 40
Naturalistic 37
Music 49
Interpersonal 27
Intrapersonal 39

unless a bunch of other people post their results to compare, this means absolutely nothing to me

[Revenant]

Linguistichttp://www.ldrc.ca/images/bar.gif30Mathematicshttp://www.ldrc.ca/images/bar.gif42Visual/Spatialhttp://www.ldrc.ca/images/bar.gif45Body/Kinesthetichttp://www.ldrc.ca/images/bar.gif40Naturalistichttp://www.ldrc.ca/images/bar.gif33Musichttp://www.ldrc.ca/images/bar.gif33Interpersonalhttp://www.ldrc.ca/images/bar.gif35Intrapersonalhttp://www.ldrc.ca/images/bar.gif46


Okay, I took that test, but I have no idea what it means.

[Talleyrand]

There's this survey my teachers at school sometimes pass out at the beginning of school.
It supposedly measures multiple intelligences.
Here's an online test:
http://www.ldrc.ca/projects/miinventory/miinventory.php
It's about 80 questions.
Here's what I got:
Linguistic 33, Mathematics 41, Visual/Spatial 39, Body/Kinesthetic 40, Naturalistic 36, Music 25, Interpersonal 27, Intrapersonal 34

Intelligences explained:
http://www.ldpride.net/learningstyles.MI.htm#Interpersonal%20Intelligence

Yeah, I've seen that multiple intelligences test before.

I think that the concept of intelligence changes over time. The people that might be considered intelligent today would not be considered intelligent a hundred or a thousand years ago. Each historical epoch valued different attributes and measured those attributes differently. Intelligence is a virtue and, like all virtues, are malleable.

We like to think that we are smarter today than people in the past because we build upon the accomplishments of past generations. However, this type of thinking gives one a sense of undeserved accomplishment. Which brings me to the point. An intelligent person, I believe, is one who is always questioning their own knowledge and going back to the fundamentals of their knowledge to see if they stand the test of time. Some people just hold assumptions all of their lives without questioning them or even knowing that they hold them. An intelligent person won't have the answers, they will have more questions.

As far as intelligence tests and the like are concerned, each one of them tests very narrow interpretations of intelligence, even the so-called "multiple intellegences" exam. It is just a symptom of modern man's attempt to quantify and grade every neddlesome aspect of the human soul. Some things just can't be quantified, not the important things anyway. We like to think we're smarter, but all we are today are more narrowly trained and measured. The branches of knowledge are all separated and specialized today, unlike thousands of years ago. We usually know one thing well, but don't know/care about anything outside of that.

[Akridrot]

Yeah, I've seen that multiple intelligences test before.

I think that the concept of intelligence changes over time. The people that might be considered intelligent today would not be considered intelligent a hundred or a thousand years ago. Each historical epoch valued different attributes and measured those attributes differently. Intelligence is a virtue and, like all virtues, are malleable.

We like to think that we are smarter today than people in the past because we build upon the accomplishments of past generations. However, this type of thinking gives one a sense of undeserved accomplishment. Which brings me to the point. An intelligent person, I believe, is one who is always questioning their own knowledge and going back to the fundamentals of their knowledge to see if they stand the test of time. Some people just hold assumptions all of their lives without questioning them or even knowing that they hold them. An intelligent person won't have the answers, they will have more questions.

As far as intelligence tests and the like are concerned, each one of them tests very narrow interpretations of intelligence, even the so-called "multiple intellegences" exam. It is just a symptom of modern man's attempt to quantify and grade every neddlesome aspect of the human soul. Some things just can't be quantified, not the important things anyway. We like to think we're smarter, but all we are today are more narrowly trained and measured. The branches of knowledge are all separated and specialized today, unlike thousands of years ago. We usually know one thing well, but don't know/care about anything outside of that.

My math teacher related this to us once. We all perceive the great legends of long ago to be 'lesser than us,' when that plainly isn't the case. Yes we understand much more than they did years before we were born, but these men were literally drawing shapes and equations into the sand with sticks, while we don't understand the meaning behind the numbers. Pythagorean theorem might be elementary to you, but could you have come up with it on your own?

As for multiple types of intelligence, I always believed that this was true. I could son my friends in certain areas, but there are some things that they could embarrass me at. But I never believed that it meant people were highly intelligent in at least one area. I've met my fair share of completely stupid people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_multiple_intelligences http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_intelligence

[furst]

I remember reading The Theory of Learning (by BF Skinner.. I think) and somewhere in there it said that intelligence as a whole can really be measured by a person's ability to adapt to changing circumstances. In other words, if you read a whole lot of books and even understand all of them, but the knowledge you attain from your studies does nothing to change your behavior for the better, you really haven't learned anything. So called "latent knowledge" is really meaningless. With all this in mind, I think that your last two categories - adaptability and ability to succeed - really include all the others.

As for me, I'm pretty much an idiot. Sure, I know some shit, consider myself a fairly articulate person, and my memory is just fine.. but in this whole world order I'm pretty much dwelling at the bottom. Then again, I don't think that my ability to adapt to circumstances has been tested just yet. I live a life that most people would consider pretty meager, but oddly enough I am pretty content with it. It doesn't take much for me to survive right now, and while this is comfortable, I think it's probably smothering my potential a bit.

That's my take on things. You're either a moron or you're not.. it's hard to quantify. There are plenty people with esteemed degrees and understanding of certain things, but when you look at their actions they ain't shit. Hustlers like pimps who seem like idiots when you talk to them are probably not. If a person can hold it down and adapt even in the grimiest way, they are intelligent.



Anyways, even though I think these categories are somewhat irrelevant on their own, I'll do it for the fuck of it.

emotional-I couldn't care less about this shit. Emotions are a redundancy and I can't wait until they're replaced by computer chips.
speaking-I don't slur my words.
book smarts-Sometimes I get real caught up in literature.. sort of like I get caught up at this site. I did drop out of highschool though, it's probably evident after enough scrutiny.
philosophically-I'm no Talleyrand and have never formally studied the subject.
memory-What are we talking about again?
adaptable(survive, make the best out of bad situations, ect)-Who the fuck knows? I've found my way out of some nasty ruts before, but then again I've also found situations that near impossible to overcome.
success (able to achieve, succeed, accomplish goals)-I find success in nearly everything I do.. I just don't do a whole lot.

[Tone Space]

Furst you bring up an interesting point.you say your somewhat/or greatly content with what others may consider meager.now if you are or were to be content and even moreso very happy with however your life is, then wouldn't that make you a sucess?
or are we as a society caught in the contrast between eachother?when you dissasociate yourself from common standards and luxuries are you intelligent in knowledge of self?is the overman intelligent?

[M U G G S]

Linguistichttp://www.ldrc.ca/images/bar.gif29 Mathematicshttp://www.ldrc.ca/images/bar.gif45 Visual/Spatialhttp://www.ldrc.ca/images/bar.gif38 Body/Kinesthetichttp://www.ldrc.ca/images/bar.gif34 Naturalistichttp://www.ldrc.ca/images/bar.gif42 Musichttp://www.ldrc.ca/images/bar.gif46 Interpersonalhttp://www.ldrc.ca/images/bar.gif35 Intrapersonalhttp://www.ldrc.ca/images/bar.gif35

[sTePeAsY]

I always used to be more intelligent than my classmates when i was younger.

But after 6 years of smoking weed i feel like i smoked myself stupid. I'm not as sharp or eloquent as i used to be.
Same here.
Here's my scores :
Linguistic 42
Mathematics 37
Visual/Spatial 34
Body/Kinesthetic 31
Naturalistic 26
Music 37
Interpersonal 34
Intrapersonal 27

[RM_3000]

I divide intelligence into two basic categories. This is more that academic side of it; not necessarily emotional intelligence:

1. Mastering knowledge that has already been produced by other people.

2. Generating new knowledge that has not previously been known.

Most of the great scientific geniuses fall into category #2. Artists that don't copycat also fall into #2.

If you spend all your time reading books, then you're really intelligent by standard #1, but you've accomplished nothing by standard #2.
You might know a lot of stuff, but you've never contributed any new knowledge.

Now to be practical, you can only do #2 by very extreme specialization these days. You practically need a PhD in the sciences to be able to contribute new knowledge in most fields, although there are some exceptions.

-----------------------------------------------------------
I was always good at math as a kid. Never really knew why, just was. I was also terrible with classes like literature and history. I finally figured out that I got good at math by practicing it--doing those repetitive homework assignments every day. I literally built it up, like a skill or a craft. To this day, on the other hand, it is very difficult for me to simply read something and retain more than 10% of the details of what I read. I may get the big picture, but the details just aren't there. If you read a political text by Noam Chomsky, there simply isn't a set of excercises that I can do to reinforce the details, like there was when I was doing fractions, or whatever.

So, in some sense, I'm a smart motherfucker (I managed to get a phd in computer science), but I'm halfway retarded when it comes to reading books and really learning from them. Even for the critical papers that I read while getting my PhD, it really took 5-10 reads to truly get each one. And to this day, I can go virtually nowhere with Shakespeare or Chaucer.

So am I smart, or am I an incompetent idiot? The answer is that I'm knowledgeable in what I specialized in...

Then again, Andy just wants to see pictures of my cock, so perhaps I am truly brilliant for not posting them.

[Zener]

i cant really answer that. Sometimes i am good at one thing & then bad in other time, at the SAME thing. Smart or dumb, doesnt matter. Wise or not, is important. Wisdom is a strange thing it is beyond smart or dumb. It takes in both. Like Jesus was good at persuading but dumb at getting killed (no offence, i love this man beyond imagination), he is wise nonetheless.