Re: a test -- Freak Kingdom

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 22:44:52 11/27/02 Wed
Author: UHTMilk
Subject: Re: a test
In reply to: Jorgie 's message, "Re: a test" on 12:36:50 11/27/02 Wed

When I first read the message and saw that Jorg had replied to it I was sure straight away that he would probably have the most interesting one, although maybe not the most fun for all besides myself, and maybe the most generally accepted or defined with scientific fields.

I can only really agree with Jorg on this one. Intelligence is generally seen in scientific fields as the amount of cognitive power you have available to process the knowledge you posses. This, in general acceptance, is about where it divides. As Jorg says most people will see somebody as intelligent if they possess certain socially desirable abilities or knowledge. I.E. Somebody who has memorised the capitals and leaders of all the countries is seen to be intelligent, although this is just acquired knowledge, whereas somebody with low levels of knowledge but has abilities to process abstract thoughts etc. is seen as less intelligent. This is the ironic part as certain psychometric tests, to determine IQ for example, which claim to measure intelligence generally pose questions to asses the amount of knowledge we posses and not the application of said knowledge. Indeed it�s hard to glean empirical data on the application of knowledge from current psychometric tests.

With developmental psychology intelligence is measured in animals by different criteria. It�s seen as an �underlying ability, which enables an individual to adapt to and function effectively within a given environment�. Thus the most intelligent are the one who succeed and survive. With sociology the term intelligence is again controversial. Hans Eyseneck (sp?) defined intelligence as abstract reasoning ability measurable through psychometric tests yet fails to establish a measurement for it.

Really it all boils down to the key elements of, is you can succeed at trivia or enjoy, for want of a more accurate description, highbrow entertainment you�re probably a knowledgeable person. However if you can see patterns in what appears to others as chaos, albeit long-divisions, quantum theoretic's, or probably even music, or more critically possess what is often termed as common-sense than you�re probably an intelligent person. Common sense is an often-used term but is not often possessed in everyday situations by most people who often seem to possess the most knowledge.

But enough of this idle chitchat. The question you posed was about how do I ascertain the difference. I guess the only reason I put it forward is that it is close to how I discern the difference between knowledge and intellect. Most intelligent people seem to have a good knowledge base yet often knowledgeable people are not always, in my definition at least, intelligent..

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]