• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

How do you define "Intelligence"?

Thump

Hating the environment since 1994
  • Was reading the thread about the Stupid Test and it got me thinking.

    What qualities do you use in classifying someone as intelligent?

    For me, it's someone who can carry on a conversation on a multitude of topics and not get lost in the conversation.

    I'd say I'd describe those people as more intelligent than someone who may have a PhD in a field but only know things in that field.

    Also, college degrees mean nothing to me in determining how "bright" someone is.

    Also, I value common sense intelligence much more than book intelligence.

    Example, I would value someone who knows how to hop in a skid loader and run it without instruction than someone who can recite Hamlet word for word.
     
    Just an off the cuff definition - intelligence to me is the ability to make connections. Whether street smarts or book smarts - one's ability to take input and make logical connections and implications from the data.

    Edit -

    Thump - similarly I would rank the skid loader more intelligent (based on only that) as well. He is making connections and conclusions about all of this new information being fed to him on how to operate it. The guy reciting Hamlet isnt making any connections at all - just spitting out something that has already been done from memory.
     
    Upvote 0
    NewYorkBuck;774090; said:
    Just an off the cuff definition - intelligence to me is the ability to make connections. Whether street smarts or book smarts - one's ability to take input and make logical connections and implications from the data.


    Sounds fair to me.

    Also, people who can state a point using minimal words instead of having to ramble on to make a point.
     
    Upvote 0
    Thump;774091; said:
    Sounds fair to me.

    Also, people who can state a point using minimal words instead of having to ramble on to make a point.

    Now, what exactly do you mean by such a statement? Why do you automatically subscribe the Occam-esq position that intellectual parsimony is necessarily senior to its complement? Further, I find the scholarly lattitude taken by your usage of "point" somewhat troubling as well. Is it, in fact, your claim that intellectual prowess cannot be successfully demonstrated when there is no clear goal or conclusion to ones reasoning? Surely you agree that the intellect can be applied when there is no true apex that it is working toward.

    :tongue2:
     
    Upvote 0
    NewYorkBuck;774106; said:
    Now, what exactly do you mean by such a statement? Why do you automatically subscribe the Occam-esq position that intellectual parsimony is necessarily senior to its complement? Further, I find the scholarly lattitude taken by your usage of "point" somewhat troubling as well. Is it, in fact, your claim that intellectual prowess cannot be successfully demonstrated when there is no clear goal or conclusion to ones reasoning? Surely you agree that the intellect can be applied when there is no true apex that it is working toward.

    :tongue2:

    Maybe that 3rd grade education works on your fashion boards but here at BP at least a semblance of educated syntax and diction is mandatory.

    Shape up or ship out.
     
    Upvote 0
    NewYorkBuck;774106; said:
    Now, what exactly do you mean by such a statement? Why do you automatically subscribe the Occam-esq position that intellectual parsimony is necessarily senior to its complement? Further, I find the scholarly lattitude taken by your usage of "point" somewhat troubling as well. Is it, in fact, your claim that intellectual prowess cannot be successfully demonstrated when there is no clear goal or conclusion to ones reasoning? Surely you agree that the intellect can be applied when there is no true apex that it is working toward.

    :tongue2:
    Excuse me, but I believe that should read "toward which it is working."

    Thank you.

    :p
     
    Upvote 0
    NewYorkBuck;774141; said:
    If its all the same to you, I like to keep my responses crisp and to the point, without adding needless words to satisfy others desire for perfect usage.

    :biggrin:

    "that it is working toward" = five words

    "toward which it is working" = five words

    In my world, five equals five. :biggrin:
     
    Upvote 0
    Back
    Top