What Truly Defines Intelligence Beyond IQ Tests?

[castro94]

i agree with you to certain extent. but isn't it the seek for knowledge that makes you question things and try to come up with new ideas , and learn more ? and if you think about it , the only way to get better at something is practise , so the seek for knowledge alows a person to train its brain more efficiently
i don't believe that a person is genetically born to be more intelligent than others, they may have a brain that is physiological adapted to resolve certain problems in a better way than others , but this is nothing that cannot be achieved through training.
and to try to answer your question , we people use our brains differnetly . scientist have long believed that each of the function of the brain is "placed " in a specific area of the brain , but research is now showing that all the functions of the brain is achived through the cooperation of diffferent areas , deiffrent people can thus deal with the same problem using different areas of the brain , one way maybe more efficient than the other , here we can go back to my point , a brain that has been better " trained " can "choose " or is able to do a more effective way of dealing with problems , and the same may aply for your friend , he may just have trainded is brain to work better under pressure
another explanation maybe that his brain reacts differently to pressure than other people , when the brain is exposed to pressure it can send out different types of hormones , they may aid to the brain function or just make it worse , dependig on how the brain has been "trained" to react, and which areas he uses to deal with problems
of course environment matters , afterall its our response to the environment and how we learn from it and adapt to it that decide how "intellignet " we are

 

[RoshanBBQ]

I don't know whether I got your point well enough. Did you say that intelligence is an ability to distinguish one's self from their surroundings, but in another sense say it's just the aspect of unconscious thinking, and my question to that, is it contradictory?

The other few questions are, aren't you simplifying "genius" a bit much? If a person hates something it is more because of a difference of taste than a genius. But while speaking on like and hate, aren't you saying, if it doesn't require conscious effort, you are saying that there are objective goods and that the genius can see through the non-good so to speak and the good rather than it being some sort of preference?

I didn't say intelligence is the ability to distinguish self from surrounding. I said intelligence is the ability to distinguish things. That was merely a specific example of intellectual capacity seen through ability to distinguish.

I also didn't say it is just the aspect of unconscious thinking. I said it need not be conscious. For example, someone could be a social genius without verbalizing his plans in his head. That is, it just comes naturally to him. On the other hand, I can envision another social genius who verbalizes all of his plans before acting, and in this way, it can also be a conscious effort.

I think you misunderstood my viewpoint. I wasn't defining characteristics of a singular genius. I was merely giving single examples of ability to distinguish that could be used to characterize a certain type of genius. Your point that certain things are a matter of opinion is moot, because you can still have a political, social, or artistic genius whose expertise is to maneuver that opinionated world. I also don't recall speaking about any absolute rights and wrongs (morality?). My other example of distinguishing truth and falsehood is closer to the standard IQ definition of a genius where people are tested on logical grounds.

 

[jim hardy]

ability to solve problems. Needs a new paradigm, weighted less to problems of math and mechanics and more toward problems with human nature than current one.

 

[RoshanBBQ]

ability to solve problems. Needs a new paradigm, weighted less to problems of math and mechanics and more toward problems with human nature than current one.

Does music, art, and other types of beauty solve problems? If so, what problems do they solve. If not, is there no such thing as an artistic genius?

 

[chiro]

Does music, art, and other types of beauty solve problems? If so, what problems do they solve. If not, is there no such thing as an artistic genius?

To me art, music, and other things create stimuli, patterns, and other forms that help indirectly with solving problems.

We might see art or music as something that is completely separated from problem solving, but then we have to go back to a fundamental question which is "What exactly is a problem?"

The thing is, most problems to us in our mind, are knowable. We usually are able to clearly define what the problem is. But what if we are currently solving problems that we unknowingly haven't realized or even had a chance to define?

If we don't see something as a problem, then we won't even acknowledge something as a problem. Problems are usually defined because we have often faced interference at some point which has prevented us from progressing (hence the word problem).

But what if the actual 'problem' was not something that was immediately stopping us from progressing? It might be something that later on without our knowledge at that or previous time ends up helping us or other people 'progress' but at the time it by no means would have been considered 'a problem'.

Music and art might not seem to be 'problem solving', but look at what music and art do to culture, to patterns, to new information and ideas being created in which these later become used in ways that are unforeseen and also in applications that solve 'problems'.

 

[jim hardy]

Does music, art, and other types of beauty solve problems? If so, what problems do they solve. If not, is there no such thing as an artistic genius?

Good thought.

As I am utterly lacking in the skills required to produce such things,

i can only imagine that creating them involves much problem solving.

Music is built from themes and progressions and i don't know what other terms. I know from listening that Mozart always has at least 3 melodies in progress that mesh and gyrate like planetary gears. Dave Brubeck mimicked the syncopation of oil wells in "Take Five". How do they make it sound so good? Got to be lots of details to work out.
My wife paints and i see her working to get just the right colors, which she sees with far greater discernment than i.
Bouguereau's peasant girls are so realistic they look like they're aout to step out of the canvas. He even paints the flecks in the iris of their eye.

credit to Wikimedia, http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/91/Crown.jpg
(original is in Musee de Beaux Arts , Montreal, and worth stopping into see.)

So the ability to solve the problems necessary to make order out of disorder , be it on a chapel ceiling, or on a lathe, or in a town hall meeting, or in a physics book, is what i see .

Your art & music are the products of intelligence but are still just objects. As is the old Ford truck engine i have apart right now.

old jim

 

[phoenix:\\]

I didn't say intelligence is the ability to distinguish self from surrounding. I said intelligence is the ability to distinguish things. That was merely a specific example of intellectual capacity seen through ability to distinguish.

I also didn't say it is just the aspect of unconscious thinking. I said it need not be conscious. For example, someone could be a social genius without verbalizing his plans in his head. That is, it just comes naturally to him. On the other hand, I can envision another social genius who verbalizes all of his plans before acting, and in this way, it can also be a conscious effort.

I think you misunderstood my viewpoint. I wasn't defining characteristics of a singular genius. I was merely giving single examples of ability to distinguish that could be used to characterize a certain type of genius. Your point that certain things are a matter of opinion is moot, because you can still have a political, social, or artistic genius whose expertise is to maneuver that opinionated world. I also don't recall speaking about any absolute rights and wrongs (morality?). My other example of distinguishing truth and falsehood is closer to the standard IQ definition of a genius where people are tested on logical grounds.

Yup. I misunderstood what you were saying and went from there which is where the morality bit came from.

 

[wuliheron]

Words only have demonstrable meaning according to their function in specific contexts, so the meaning of intelligence can change according to the context in which you use the word. However, for a general definition I'd have to go with Socrates on this one who said, "True wisdom is knowing you don't know." He wasn't just talking about humility either, but literally knowing that you don't know something like how to swim or do calculus. Intelligence then can be viewed as the overall capacity to know you don't know things as well as the ability to learn other things.

I'm reminded of Helen Keller's teacher spending endless hours trying to teach her sign language which Keller resisted learning in every way possible. For all intents she was an animal living only for immediate gratification because she literally had no clue what language was and, therefore, no clue what she didn't know. Once the light bulb finally went off she couldn't get enough.

 

[Pkruse]

This is a wonderful thread. I normally spend time on the engineering forums. I’m glad I wondered over here, where I find this thread on a topic that I’ve studied since childhood, more than five decades ago. Intelligence encompasses many concepts and ideas, many of which have already been mentioned in a piecemeal way in the notes posted above. So now I’ll add my two cents worth.

As a very small child, I was identified as being extremely intelligent and creative. They were looking for kids like us in the post Sputnik era, because we were the ones who were going to save the USA from the Great Red Menace. The fear was that Russia was already ahead of us in science and engineering, and that we had better start educating the next generation to fix that problem. The Space Race evolved out of this sort of thinking. So they set me aside and made sure that I had the most excellent education. The kids who got left out really got left out. Nobody really cared about them. One mantra I heard from my parents and teachers many times when I would ask about the other kids was, “Well, someone has to dig our ditches, but you and your peers are going to save this country.”

They told me that my IQ was at least 145, which is three standard deviations above the mean. They said that IQ measurements above that were unreliable because the sample size was to small to standardize a reliable test in that range. So if anyone talks about an IQ of 170 or 190, they are blowing smoke up your tail pipe. An IQ score can be one of many useful measurements for anyone in the normal range, but it means nothing for those who are truly brilliant. All I knew was that most of the kids in these special classes were a whole lot more intelligent than me, so I grew up thinking that I was less than average. Some were awarded degrees in math and physics simply by passing all the finals without taking any classes, so they started their post graduate work at 17 or 18.

I have always believed that it is possible to train your brain to be more intelligent and more creative by certain techniques, but it has only been recently when some of the cognitive researchers have begun to believe the same thing and figure out how. What they are finding is what I’ve always known, because I learned it by experience. We can thank the Dali Lama for this new research. He chided them for always spending time studying minds that don’t work well. He said they should instead be finding minds that work extremely well and study those. With his endorsement, much of this new research has found funding. Money always seems to follow him around. Every time he suggests that something is a good idea, the funds become available.

Since I was a small child, I have been taught to believe that I would always be successful and that I will accomplish anything I set my mind to do. I believe it much more today than then after all these decades, because I’ve never had an example where it failed me, and I have thousands of examples where it worked exactly like that. This is where the passion comes in that has already been mentioned. The higher the level of passion I can maintain for what I’m doing, the more creative and successful my behavior. After maintaining a fleet of heavy equipment for many years, I got laid off very late in my career. I saw it as a wonderful opportunity to become a jet engine design engineer. That is like an old animal doctor becoming a human brain surgeon. I had not been any sort of design engineer since 1984, I had not kept up with any of the modern design tools, and I knew nothing at all about jet engines. I told this to the first jet engine company that interviewed me, and they hired me with the comment: “You will pick it up in six weeks.” My reputation had preceded me and I’m now designing gas turbines, having fun, and doing well. This is pretty much how my whole life has transpired.

High intelligence has nothing to do with learning stuff, retaining it, and spitting it back out on request. It has to do with finding new and creative applications for what we already know, and with expanding our collective knowledge base by learning things that nobody had known previously. Kelly Johnson studied buzzard wings, which were the basis for his ground breaking and new technology that he put into the U-2 spy plane, and now you will find it on every jet liner. That is true genius. Truly intelligent people have little respect for rules, except those that continue to prove themselves to be useful. They question all rules and everything else we think we know, and from that mental process they will find better ways of living. No paradigm or tradition is scared. I introduced a concept from the Boiler Code to fix a long standing concern in gas turbine design that nobody had as of yet figured out. But the solution was clear, simple, and obvious to me the first time someone showed me the concern. I work with some very brilliant people. They understood and appreciated the solution immediately. I was told by management to document it and teach it to the other engineers.

I’ve never been able to explain to anyone how to train the mind to be more intelligent. We simply don’t have the words or concepts in our English language. But in recent years I’ve become a student of the Christian Kabbalah, because they do have the words and teaching methods to transmit this understanding. All the wisdom traditions teach the same thing, with slight variations in the language they use. Modern psychology is mostly plagiarized from ancient mystics. This is a language filled with esoteric figures of speech—metaphors, parables, similes, and the like. These are the myths and legends of old that are not truly understood, except by those who have studied the language. A story might talk about a river or a mustard seed, for example; but those are just stand-ins for much more sophisticated concepts. Another tradition might substitue an almond or a grain of rice for the mustard seed, but they all seem to speak of rivers in the same way.

The long and the short of it is this: We only use a very small part of our brain for conscious thought, some say only ten percent. The rest is for unconscious thought. It has often been postulated that we could be much more intelligent if we could use more of the brain for conscious thought. Every once in a while, everyone gets a sudden and unexpected download of unconscious thought into the conscious part of the brain. These are those sudden flashes of inspiration or insight that surprise and delight us. Intelligent people get them more often, but the truly brilliant understand how to go into the unconscious mind and draw out what is needed. This explains people like the great masters of old, and some of the ones still living. The things we draw out of our unconscious mind will relate to whatever we are most passionate about.

Another thing the truly brilliant do is to refuse to file data in the mind under a rigid rule of classification. Much better to let it float around and find a new home. I’ve used things I learned studying ancient Philistine architecture in aerospace design. Other engineers said that was an excellent idea, but how did I ever think of it or make the connection? It just came naturally to me, because of the loose structure in my mind. Everything that I’ve ever learned is in my subconscious mind, but I will download it to conscious thought if and when I need it.

I’ve seen it mentioned that what is done by instinct, like some of our best sports stars, is not really intelligence. What is done by instinct is coming from the subconscious mind. I’d prefer to say that they have learned to be very intelligent concerning they things about which they are most passionate.

I am not in the least bit religious. But consider this: The words “spiritual,” “philosophy,” and “psychological” all come from the same ancient root concept. It was an endeavor to better understand how our minds work. Those that have failed to understand this are the ones who have invented all these religions that depend on faith rather than rational thought. I have faith, which is literally to say that I believe. But what I believe most strongly is that which I’ve experienced, and that which I can duplicate in similar circumstances.