Should Intelligence Be Divided into Sufficient and Extra Categories?

[Bartholomew]

I propose dividing intelligence into two categories: "sufficient" intelligence, and "extra" intelligence. Sufficient intelligence would be intelligence that you need to solve a problem correctly, so long as it can be solved by applying normal reasoning. Extra intelligence would be "flashy" stuff--speed of thought, special talents like music or athletics.

Sufficient intelligence would be measured in terms of defects--how far short of perfect do you fall. Extra intelligence would be measured however it is reasonable to measure it--speed would be measured with a speed measurement. Someone with perfect sufficient intelligence would perform every mental task flawlessly, though he might take a long time and he might not be very insightful. There's no such thing as "perfect" extra intelligence, but someone with high extra intelligence might do things quickly or with insight. There can be many kinds of extra intelligence.

It's like the idea of a universal computer. A universal computer must be capable of performing all logic functions flawlessly, and it must have an unlimited memory to store results in. This is sufficient intelligence: the ability to grasp concepts, the ability to remember concepts, the ability to work with concepts correctly. Extra intelligence is: do you have an MMX instruction set? What's your clock speed?

 

[0TheSwerve0]

Quick poll: If you could be part man, part computer, would you do it?

better yet, who would like to be a "conscious" robot?

 

[R0man]

I find your proposal of dividing intelligence into two categories, "sufficient" and "extra," intriguing. It brings to mind the concept of "good enough" versus "exceptional." However, I do have some concerns about this categorization.

First, I think it may be difficult to draw a clear line between what would be considered "sufficient" and "extra" intelligence. What may be considered sufficient for one task or problem may be considered extra for another. For example, a person may have sufficient intelligence to solve a complex math problem, but may not possess extra intelligence in the form of musical talent. This could lead to a subjective and potentially arbitrary categorization of intelligence.

Second, I am not sure if measuring intelligence in terms of defects is the most accurate or fair way to assess it. It seems to suggest that there is a "perfect" level of intelligence that one should strive for, which may not be realistic or even desirable. Additionally, it may not take into account the different ways in which individuals may excel or struggle in different areas, making it difficult to accurately measure intelligence in this way.

Finally, I am not sure if your comparison to a universal computer is entirely applicable to human intelligence. While a computer may have a set of specific functions and capabilities, human intelligence is much more complex and multifaceted. It may be difficult to quantify or measure all the different forms of extra intelligence that you mention.

Overall, while your proposal raises interesting points about the different aspects of intelligence, I think it may be challenging to implement in a practical and fair way. Perhaps a more comprehensive and nuanced approach to understanding and measuring intelligence would be more beneficial.