Notices
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Intelligence links?

  1. #1 Intelligence links? 
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    161
    Not sure where to post this
    Was discussing this at lunchtime with some mates.

    With intelligence do you think the amount of neurons in the brain effects your ability? Or do you think it could be conductivity between neurons?
    Or is it not linked to neurons at all.

    Quite hard to define intelligence but say performance in an IQ test or equivalent.
    Any comments welcome


    Liberty is the souls right to breathe
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2 Re: Intelligence links? 
    Forum Senior TvEye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    398
    "The quantity of neurons within the primary cortex of both cerebral hemispheres is enormous, and when they are properly used, there is no limit to a person's ability and consciousness. Intelligence, however, is not just a measure of the quantity of neurons within a person's brain. Intelligence is a measure of a person's ability to communicate with other intelligent beings and to correctly convert, codified, subsidiary cortex information into useful, constructive, conscious action."
    Source and further information:
    http://www.users.bigpond.com/VYSECO/5.html


    "The problem is (and I think Lahn would agree with this) he cannot link the "brain related genes" he postulates to any particular increase in intelligence or artistic capability. This is partly because neuroscientists can't identify any fundamental brain processes (such as the quality or quantity of neurons, or the ability to form synapses, or the speed of neuronal transmissions) that are responsible for increased intelligence. As we map the human genome we learn that no single gene (such as CHRM2 or CTSD) accounts for more than a tiny percentage of the difference in intelligence. If Lahn could prove his two genes turned the tide of humanity, it would be news indeed."
    Source and further information:
    http://illustrationart.blogspot.com/...echnology.html


    "new neurons can grow within the mature adult brain; this process is known as neurogenesis. Regardless of neuron growth or death, brain function and capabilities can be learned and developed throughout life."
    Source and further information:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_brain


    "First we build the tools, then they build us" - Marshall McLuhan.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard paralith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,190
    From what I understand, brain (and therefore neuron network) structure probably has a lot to do with determining intelligence - at least between species. Generally speaking, larger brains are more intelligent but size isn't the whole story. Again, this is for between species. I'm not sure how much these factors would account for variation between individual humans, as evidenced by the excellent references TvEye provided above.
    Man can will nothing unless he has first understood that he must count on no one but himself; that he is alone, abandoned on earth in the midst of his infinite responsibilities, without help, with no other aim than the one he sets himself, with no other destiny than the one he forges for himself on this earth.
    ~Jean-Paul Sartre
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    161
    I guess theres also the problem of what kind of intelligence people have.

    Obviously you get academic geniuses.

    But look at mozart. you can't deny he was a genius but i could probably beat him in a maths test.

    Or people can be emotionally intelligent and good at reading people.
    Liberty is the souls right to breathe
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard paralith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,190
    Quote Originally Posted by jacketate
    But look at mozart. you can't deny he was a genius but i could probably beat him in a maths test.
    Not necessarily. They say mathematics and music are highly compatible - a person good at one is often good at the other.

    But yes, the argument of how to exactly define intelligence and different kinds of intelligences is one that rages ever on. I suspect that answers will come as a clearer understanding of the brain develops. Which will probably take a while.
    Man can will nothing unless he has first understood that he must count on no one but himself; that he is alone, abandoned on earth in the midst of his infinite responsibilities, without help, with no other aim than the one he sets himself, with no other destiny than the one he forges for himself on this earth.
    ~Jean-Paul Sartre
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    161
    i guess you could look at which parts of the brain is linked to certain functions.
    You could map each section of the brain and look at various biological and chemical factors such as neurones and conductivity. and then do certain tests like math. See if there is a link. Could be an interesting experiment.
    Liberty is the souls right to breathe
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Sophomore blue_space87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    112
    The fundamentals from which one is considered intellectual can be quite controversial; it is easily debated. I personally, don't necessarily believe in the existence of "smart" or "dumb", as to me they're just mere characteristics and a way in which others will conform to their given label; if one is labeled "dumb", there's a proportionally higher change for them to develop into an individual that will avoid making "smart" decisions - as with the contrary applying to "smart" individuals. Ultimately however, we have to consider thought and not the individual; it's thoughts that communicate between ourselves, others and most significantly, the environment. Thought is ultimately a coincidence; it is the environment, and knowledge from within that impacts upon the individuals conscious decisions; if the individual is raised from within a negative environment, they're likely to commit to negative thoughts consequent to a severe negative impact upon their conscious mind, and thus, their thoughts and consciousness.

    Despite this, such characteristics can also have a drastic impact upon the individual regardless of location; personally, I speculate - and I'm unsure as to whether this is universally understood, but speculate that if intensive emotion is associated with a given desire, or negative input from the environment (I.e. Someone calling someone "dumb" or... "You're always going to be dumb; you're the worst of all humanity"), the chances are much more likely for the individual to compel to that of what had been spoken to them. Contrary to negative emotion, optimism can mitigate upon negative believe upon an individuals sense of themselves. Aside from a single peer responding negatively and being consequent to the individuals highly intensified emotional response (Negative; sadness, anger or anything as such), a group of peers or a school can also integrate this effect upon an individual.

    However, despite this, both primary and fundamental characteristics can also be negative, regardless of which being assigned to the individual; if an individual is viewed as "smart" and knows he/she is "smart", does this suggest that the individual is compelled towards a set path? Most importantly, we need to question as to what defines an individual as "intellectual"; is it high IQ scores? Integrity in other socially considered aspects? Or the individuals ability to develop innovative, efficient and sophisticated ideas upon reality?

    Personally, I see the assignment of such characteristics upon someone as linear; regardless as to whether one has achieved high scores throughout an IQ test, this cannot define their intelligence - it can only define their intelligence from within that aspect of cognitive ability.

    To clarify, take a look at Kim Peek; his abilities are unique and much more sophisticated to many throughout the world, but contrary to his ability and individualism, he's unable to accomplish the definition upon himself as "intellectual" as a result of having low IQ scores.

    However, in addition to this, in order to achieve the label as "intellectual", an individual is required to follow the linear path of others; in order to achieve high scores upon an IQ test, one is required to adapt to a new thought process as opposed to being consisted within their own. Considering this can introduce many negatives contrary to what IQ tests are supposed to introduce.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •