Do you think there is an intrinsic merit to intelligence?

[WhoWee]

How do we identify that a person lacks intelligence?

 

[Prairie]

How do we identify that a person lacks intelligence?

lol.. why do you want to? Or... what is it exactly are you wanting to measure?

 

[russ_watters]

To demonstrate through analogy, in mathematics there are very well defined, concise methods of determining quantities...

There is no absolute, impartial method of evaluating the quality of art, because beauty is in the eye of the beholder. What one considers a masterpiece another may consider to be utterly worthless. Who is right? Neither one of them truly is, it is purely a matter of opinion.

There is an enormous difference between 'difficult to quantify/define' and 'does not exist'. A piece of art has a value that is determined by the people who bought/sold it. Just because it is subjective doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Clearly, intelligence has value, as you seem to somewhat acknowledge:

I would think it's obvious that a high intellect has many "valuable" applications.

While at the same time, you say:

But what one considers "valuable" is entirely subjective to me, and in that sense I can't see any true justification for the thought that intelligence is inherently a more meritorious quality than any other.

Well 'more valuable' is certainly subjective, but in your OP you didn't say "more" or "less" valuable, you said no value:

I've been wrestling with this idea that, beyond the context of today's society, knowledge, intelligence, wisdom,...etc are essentially worthless and just as mundane and trivial as say... hair color.

That's just nonsense (and illegal in some contexts!) and frankly, this whole thread just sounds to me like an unfocused/rambling whine.

 

[unchained1978]

There is an enormous difference between 'difficult to quantify/define' and 'does not exist'. A piece of art has a value that is determined by the people who bought/sold it. Just because it is subjective doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Clearly, intelligence has value, as you seem to somewhat acknowledge: While at the same time, you say: Well 'more valuable' is certainly subjective, but in your OP you didn't say "more" or "less" valuable, you said no value: That's just nonsense (and illegal in some contexts!) and frankly, this whole thread just sounds to me like an unfocused/rambling whine.

People seem to be over thinking this one entirely too much, and inferring that I'm saying that intellect has no value whatsoever in the world. The argument isn't that intelligence is worthless in society, it's that there is no intrinsic value of intelligence, just as there is no intrinsic value to currency. It's just paper. So as you quoted me in saying, "*beyond the context of society*" it only has value on a individual basis, and therefore is as important or unimportant as deemed by the individual them self. Obviously intelligence is valuable when intelligence is required, i.e. theoretical physics, analytical thought, but I never provided an argument to the contrary. So to say this is nonsense leads me to believe you bestow a great importance on your own intellect, and feel that somehow I'm trying to detract from it, which I'm not. That's just nonsense.

 

[Evo]

This thread is going nowhere, I meant to close it the other day. The more intelligence a person has, the more they are capable of understanding. More understanding leads to being more capable of doing things, on any level.