h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

There is a positive feature of intelligence. If it DOES include being able to see relationships between ideas, concepts, etc. it should give the person the ability to view life with a higher awareness, more enjoyment, better understanding. This is theoretical, you understand.

Of course, some of the most brilliant 'curmudgeons' had rather a sharp edge to their understanding. Oscar Wilde and Dorothy Parker among others come to mind. See article on WIT [http://www.h2g2.com/A161939] for some examples.

And as I tell my daughter [who has a 150+ IQ] 'smart don't make happy'...

Being able to memorize anything (regardless of quantity) is hardly a measure of intelligence. I've known plain idiots with perfect memory, as well as geniuses who had to write down their own name, in order not to forget it.

exactly.

The common interpretation of 'intelligent' is 'knows lots of stuff'

when actually a better interpretation would be 'can figure out what to do with stuff'

now 'wisdom' is another matter entirely...

Memorizing stuff is a type of intelligence. Someone who is amazing at it can rarely figure out how to change a light bulb, and people who can't do it at all are called "senile." But obviously, there's more to intelligence than recall. I personally think intelligence is best measured by how well one can apply knowledge to everyday situations.

I'll repeat myself: intelligence has got NOTHING to do with memory and/or recall. Those who seem unable to memorize or recall anything, may still be very apt at using logic and reasoning to solve problems of some sorts.

The only differentiation we can make, is the *kind* of problems to be solved. Some of us only show intelligence in puzzles that are of no value towards survival, while others can solve problems of a more practical nature, but can't even put together a twelve-piece jigsaw.

The problem with most of the IQ-tests is, that they WILL acknowledge the former to be intelligent, while dismissing the latter as a possible retard.

Those without any memory "may be able to solve problems of some sorts." Exactly. It may take them several hours to figure out how to, for example, dissasemble a washing machine. The difference is, the second time, it'll still take them several hours. Someone with a bit of memory recall could do it in a matter of minutes. And when I say apply knowledge, I'm talking about that second person then moving on to dissassemble an automobile in quicker time, using his experience with the washing machine as a knowledge base. That is the true measure of intelligence...being able to figure out new challenges using the knowledge and experience gleaned from old ones.

The above example seems rather silly, but let's put it into practical application. The first time you use an internet browser, you have to figure out how to do everything. Then, you decide Microsoft's Internet Explorer sucks, so you upgrade to Netscape Communicator (a wise decision). The difference between someone with no recall and someone with memory is that the second person will have full use of the internet in a matter of minutes. But obviously, you have to be able to translate all your old experience successfully in order for the change to be smooth.

We're going round in circles, I believe... Oh hell why not another round. This one's on the house

Experience and recall may help REPEATING something you've done before. So, if you've disassembled a washing machine, the automobile may be a bit easier to disassemble as well. But that wil NOT help you Re-assembling it. Not only would you have to recall everything in reverse, you'll also have to understand why some things can be done in ANY order while disassembling, though needing a certain methodology when assembling!

One very simple example will explain this:

When removing a wheel from the axis, you can unscrwe the nuts in any order you like, but when putting it back on, you would best screw the nuts on in pairs accross the hub. If you don't, the wheel will be oddly balanced and might even come off after a few miles.

Memory won't tell you that, unless it has been mentioned before.
But THAT is still not intelligence, but mere "recallability".

Intelligence is about "figuring things out". Which implies: without any prior knowledge, except for the occasional analogy. Just check your dictionary, and you'll find out.

I have modified this approach to memorization.

1. Don't memorize anything.

If it's on a table in a book somwhere, remember what book it is or how to find out what book it is. This doesn't require memorization if you understand what the book is about (see 2.). If the book is hard to get at, write the info down somewhere where you can get at it, like on your computer.

I keep my phone number on my watch.

2. Everything else can be remembered by understanding it.

If you understand how your computer works, you don't have to go find the instructions on how to install your software every time you format your drive to clean it up.

Oops, there goes all of that hard to get at information I was saving.

That's exactly why each and every IQ-test is accompanied by a statement telling you that the result of the test is worthless, if you repeat it. The second time you'll simply remember things from your first attempt, which defies the need for figuring something out!

I've seen people taking the same test three times on a single day. They were even surprised that the results got better every time! And that's what you call "intelligence"? Well, if that's the case, I'll keep repeating the same test 30 times without interruption. I WILL get that magical 160+ IQ somehow!

Geniuses aren't necisarily good at spelling. That's why they invented spell checkers; unfortunately, they are too involved in thinking about what they are typing to use them.

I am not necisarilly good a spelling either, this posting system is not equipped with a spell checker, and I'm too inteligent to waste my time cutting and pasting from something that will spell check when you should be able to figure out what I am trying to spell.

Well, I've met a few Menza-members a while ago. The only thing occupying their minds was: how to intelligently lure someone into a good f**k that may yield even smarter offspring! I call that a frustrated bunch of maniacs, and those special get-togethers suddenly make sense, too!

it is said, by those who study such things, that creativity is linked to the inability to spel...

-blu
}:=8

That would explain may lack of creativity. My spelling seems to be (almost) perfect (sometimes).

Anyway, it must have been a wise creature (regardless race or gender) who said that!

In short: read more Heinlein. But I could give that advice to anyone. To elaborate: Geniuses are quirky because they are.... Geniuses. Nothing more to it. They see and understand more than we -or well, I- do, and simply don't put up with nonsense like fashion, sexual habits of the culture, etiquette, or whatever. And, in my opinion, have that right.

I guess that explains it. Rappers have the worst spelling on the planet, so they must be mind-bogglingly creative. The lyrics ("you is my bitch!") repeated endlessly must be just to ingenius for my tiny little grammar correcting brain to accept.

I'd almost made a very naughty remark...

nooooonoooonoooooooooonoooooonoooooooo

'grammar' is NOT the same as 'speling'

grammar is an indication of how we THINK, communicating in dialects and sloppy construction does not necessarily indicate either clear thinking, nor 'creative' thinking. If anything it indicates a certain laziness and sloppiness of thought, as well as being narrow in vocabulary and originality.

speling is simply the mechanics of translating the spoken word into a written form so that [hopefully] others can identify the words that were spoken.

This so-called "genius" (heh, that's so weird, that is a definition made by others, not me, that's for sure) is now awfully confused about just what he should call all these rules and stuff that govern the writing and speaking of "correct" English. What do you call that? I always referred to that as "grammar". Spelling to me would be one of its subsets.

Geniuses generally aren't freaky...savants(very, very focused people)could be. Probably, it comes down to perception.

The truly brilliant people I have met (usually scientists in my sphere of contacts), that I could best guess to be geniuses (no ID tag attached to them), were normal...generally engaging, civilized, appropriately dressed (subjective analysis, my standards are questionable), good table manners, clean, etc., etc., informed, usually helpful and INTERESTING. Can't say anything about their grammar or spelling.

Now, freaky people...consider politicians
(geniuses or not)!

Kudos bluDragon, I was enjoying your postings.