Notices
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Intelligience

  1. #1 Intelligience 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    53
    What are the things or thing that defines a person's Level of Intelligience (LOI)

    - Is it, as it is popularly inferred, his ability to intently decipher, for the most complex of problems, solid solutions that stands stands the test of time.
    - Does it lie in his level of Self Organisation SelfO
    - Is it his ability to draw from within the deepest part of the Mind (from the Delta Brainwaves) through deep meditation, the most complex and deepest of thoughts which is further transmutated with the most appropriate words that convey its meaning or expressed through any Creative Method appopriate.
    - Is it his ability to accurately, in the everyday Social Affairs Of Life, Co-ordinate with Explicit Reason, the effort of others into Organised Planning.
    - Is it his ability to command attention of other with proper expression, irrespective of what they are-his Ideas.
    -- Is it his IQ (genetically).


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  

    Related Discussions:

     

  3. #2  
    Veracity Vigilante inow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    Intelligence is very difficult to define. What type of intelligence do you mean? Someone can be a brilliant piano player and suck at math. Someone can be brilliant in physics, but suck in social settings. Someone can be amazing with animals, but not know how to tie their shoes.

    http://psychology.about.com/od/cogni...telligence.htm
    http://otec.uoregon.edu/intelligence.htm


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3 Re: Intelligience 
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by didact

    - Is it, as it is popularly inferred, his ability to intently decipher, for the most complex of problems, solid solutions that stands stands the test of time.
    - Does it lie in his level of Self Organisation SelfO
    - Is it his ability to draw from within the deepest part of the Mind (from the Delta Brainwaves) through deep meditation, the most complex and deepest of thoughts which is further transmutated with the most appropriate words that convey its meaning or expressed through any Creative Method appopriate.
    - Is it his ability to accurately, in the everyday Social Affairs Of Life, Co-ordinate with Explicit Reason, the effort of others into Organised Planning.
    - Is it his ability to command attention of other with proper expression, irrespective of what they are-his Ideas.
    -- Is it his IQ (genetically).
    Yes.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    53
    Quote Originally Posted by inow
    Intelligence is very difficult to define. What type of intelligence do you mean? Someone can be a brilliant piano player and suck at math. Someone can be brilliant in physics, but suck in social settings. Someone can be amazing with animals, but not know how to tie their shoes.

    http://psychology.about.com/od/cogni...telligence.htm
    http://otec.uoregon.edu/intelligence.htm
    Surely Inow, finding, a particular definition of What Intelligience is, is of many difficult devouts, a complex task owing to the different definition forwarded with experimental determination and logical explanation. Ranging from that of Terman's Kids to single testimomies of individuals like Chris Langan and even the ones that you reffered to by the above links (which i have come to terms with), You will agree with me that all of those definition Converge to one thing: Intelligience in itself is not confirmed or constraint to no any single thing (Wether in the form of Science or Art). Hence the Intelligience I infer here is the Type Such that when it is applied to any field with little training blossoms with little time. I believe my question is not clear so rephrasing it: At what point(what i meant by level) is a person perceived or seen to be Intelligient. Judging from his works and behaviour all.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Veracity Vigilante inow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    Quote Originally Posted by didact
    I believe my question is not clear so rephrasing it: At what point(what i meant by level) is a person perceived or seen to be Intelligient. Judging from his works and behaviour all.
    Isn't this entirely dependent upon the specific observer, the information available, and the context in which it's presented?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    53
    Quote Originally Posted by inow
    Quote Originally Posted by didact
    I believe my question is not clear so rephrasing it: At what point(what i meant by level) is a person perceived or seen to be Intelligient. Judging from his works and behaviour all.
    Isn't this entirely dependent upon the specific observer, the information available, and the context in which it's presented?
    Exactly the point, thats an answer, this means you understood my question on the Surface. Lets get deeper for I need anwers . Now suppose someone who sees me to be Intelligient prevent to you a data of my works my behaviour, Asuming the data is the points I had earlier mention on top of the thread. What inferential opinion (opion base on the inference you drew from the data) would you hold from it.
    For I imagined if this same data is present to Lengendary Philosophers like Napoleon Hill His own Inference might have been: He has mastered the Ability to master to commute with his Sixth Sense through which Infinite Intelligience (the highest kind of Intelligience in my Opinion) voluntarily communicate without any effort from him.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Veracity Vigilante inow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    But, that's why context matters, as well as the perspective of the perceiver. We could take a person from present day whom we collectively agree is a buffoon, but to a person several hundred years ago they may appear to be a genius... simply due to their exposure to our current technology and information. I'm still not really following your point.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    53
    Quote Originally Posted by inow
    But, that's why context matters, as well as the perspective of the perceiver. We could take a person from present day whom we collectively agree is a buffoon, but to a person several hundred years ago they may appear to be a genius... simply due to their exposure to our current technology and information. I'm still not really following your point.
    Yes the context matters as well as the perspective of the perceiver. Now my point is more plainly: Suppose you are the perceiver presented with a data of, say, the inventions an Intelligient person of Our modern age with the exposure of modern developments and technologies. And from all Conclusions (i.e from the context of the data now) this person has applied his genius in inventing things that have not come across the mind of Any Human (not even the most Intellgient of Humans). What will be your conclusion of his Source Of Intellience .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Veracity Vigilante inow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    Quote Originally Posted by didact
    What will be your conclusion of his Source Of Intellience .
    A unique combination of nature and nurture, genetics and experience.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    53
    Quote Originally Posted by inow
    Quote Originally Posted by didact
    What will be your conclusion of his Source Of Intellience .
    A unique combination of nature and nurture, genetics and experience.
    Thanks for the answer inow, an application of Cognitive Science from observation. I think I will come to terms with this soon enough.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Given that the human brain has been desrcibed as the most complex thing in the universe and that intelligence is one of its predominant features, then it is not surprising that the origin and character of intelligence would itself be complex.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Time Lord zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    5,722
    Isn't it a little ironic that the thread title is spelled wrong?

    Was it deliberate? Science of Intelligence, perhaps?
    All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Teb
    Teb is offline
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    50
    Isn't it a little ironic that the thread title is spelled wrong?

    Was it deliberate? Science of Intelligence, perhaps?
    Or the topic starter is like me, a non native english speaker.

    On topic:

    isn't it that there is at least a level at which we would consider someone intelligent ?
    for instance how many people would argue that Stephan Hawking is not intelligent.

    I agree that the subject of intelligence is not simple, yet we should also keep in mind that it does have a meaning to the larger whole of our society and that this meaning in itself gives these definitions merit.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Veracity Vigilante inow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    Quote Originally Posted by Teb
    I agree that the subject of intelligence is not simple, yet we should also keep in mind that it does have a meaning to the larger whole of our society and that this meaning in itself gives these definitions merit.
    Yes, but that meaning to "the larger whole of our society" is generally little more than, "not so dumb that the person cannot function." Intelligence is often implicitly defined by the absence of it's opposite, and that's not entirely helpful.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    53
    Quote Originally Posted by Teb
    Isn't it a little ironic that the thread title is spelled wrong?

    Was it deliberate? Science of Intelligence, perhaps?
    Or the topic starter is like me, a non native english speaker.

    On topic:

    isn't it that there is at least a level at which we would consider someone intelligent ?
    for instance how many people would argue that Stephan Hawking is not intelligent.

    I agree that the subject of intelligence is not simple, yet we should also keep in mind that it does have a meaning to the larger whole of our society and that this meaning in itself gives these definitions merit.
    I get your point Teb, but the question at the beginning tends to appeal to the "larger whole of our society" as you observed, because when this phrase is absent then the topic Intelligience becomes abstract, that was why i arbitrarily named the thread Intelligience knowing well the its broad complexity. Besides i've got a lot of questions to ask on it, but decided to do my homework first.
    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
  •