Obsession with Intelligence

[Rival]

What's with this?

Does it matter which group has the most 'intelligence' (usually used in a very limited way to mean most 'scientific knowhow')? Isn't social cohesion a good measure to take, too? Things like how societies treat children, disabled folks etc? Must we judge whole groups based on 'intellect' - in especially a very Western way, that basically equates intellect with logic, biology knowledge etc? Isn't it better that we have one small tribe with superb social cohesion, low crime rates etc. than a large nationstate full of scientists?

 

[Vee]

When we talk intelligence, people immediately think IQ, but we know there are several types of intelligence and IQ might not even be the most important. I'm no expert, but I've encountered a number of people who are very smart when it comes to books and memorizing stuff but leave them alone in the world and they'll starve, whereas others might not be that good intellectually speaking, but they have "street smarts" and sometimes become very successful at what they decide to in life. I think everyone can play a role in society, but if I had to chose between one or the other, I'd go with the social cohesion, low crimes rates , etc.

 

[sun rise]

There are many forms of intelligence. Emotional intelligence is to me as important or maybe more important than other forms of intelligence.

Some postulate many different kinds of intelligence. Here's one image of nine:

 

[Rival]

I'm talking about the obsession with academic education/intelligence etc.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I'd rather not have tribes at all. Since the social cohesion only extends to the limits of the in group and they tend to treat the minorities or out groups that exist there poorly.

But I agree that limiting intelligence to just scientific literacy is not useful or helpful.

 

[Vee]

I'm talking about the obsession with academic education/intelligence etc.

Ah, ok. I think it's great that there is so much to learn today, but sometimes it's overwhelming. I feel sorry for the pressure kids suffer to excel at school these days. I have a little cousin who is 10 y.o and she's not doing good in English, which is no surprise given the way English is taught in France. She's constantly being told off because of that. As if the world is going to end because she's not good in English at that age. Its like she's only 10 but the parents have already decided she's a failure.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

What's with this?

Does it matter which group has the most 'intelligence' (usually used in a very limited way to mean most 'scientific knowhow')? Isn't social cohesion a good measure to take, too? Things like how societies treat children, disabled folks etc? Must we judge whole groups based on 'intellect' - in especially a very Western way, that basically equates intellect with logic, biology etc? Isn't it better that we have one small tribe with superb social cohesion, low crimes rates etc. than a large nationstate full of scientists?

A nation state full of scientists! That would be awesome! Imagine the wars that could be waged over funding.

 

[We Never Know]

What's with this?

Does it matter which group has the most 'intelligence' (usually used in a very limited way to mean most 'scientific knowhow')? Isn't social cohesion a good measure to take, too? Things like how societies treat children, disabled folks etc? Must we judge whole groups based on 'intellect' - in especially a very Western way, that basically equates intellect with logic, biology etc? Isn't it better that we have one small tribe with superb social cohesion, low crimes rates etc. than a large nationstate full of scientists?

There are a lot of closed minded people regardless of being religious or non-religious who never look outside the box seeking more information. Thinking they have all the answers and its their way or no way. Anyone that disagrees is wrong/uneducated.
In my opinion they live in a box and nothing outside their box matters. Closed minded people have learning limits.

There are a lot of open minded people regardless of being religious or non-religious who look outside the box seeking more information. In my opinion they realize not everything is set in stone. These people realize there is more to learn and seek it. Open minded people continue to learn or try to learn about things even if they don't completely agree with it.

 

[Rival]

So, why aren't things like virtue prised as highly? There seems to be the implicit assumption that intelligent people are somehow 'good' people. There may be someone who doesn't believe in the theory of evolution and immediately our respect for this person drops. Why?

 

[Rival]

There are a lot of closed minded people regardless of being religious or non-religious who never look outside the box seeking more information. Thinking they have all the answers and its their way or no way. Anyone that disagrees is wrong/uneducated.
In my opinion they live in a box and nothing outside their box matters. Closed minded people have learning limits.

There are a lot of open minded people regardless of being religious or non-religious who look outside the box seeking more information. In my opinion they realize not everything is set in stone. These people realize there is more to learn and seek it. Open minded people continue to learn or try to learn about things even if they don't completely agree with it.

But why does it matter if someone lives in a box?

 

[Augustus]

What's with this?

Does it matter which group has the most 'intelligence' (usually used in a very limited way to mean most 'scientific knowhow')? Isn't social cohesion a good measure to take, too? Things like how societies treat children, disabled folks etc? Must we judge whole groups based on 'intellect' - in especially a very Western way, that basically equates intellect with logic, biology etc? Isn't it better that we have one small tribe with superb social cohesion, low crimes rates etc. than a large nationstate full of scientists?

I'd say intelligence can only really be defined as something like 'a quality that helps us succeed over the long term in our environment'.

So it does matter that you have intelligence, but intelligence is not primarily about silly metrics like IQ or ability to perform well in tests of 'book learning'.

Some forms of 'book learning' may even you less intelligent as it reduces your ability to succeed over the long term.

Intelligence is environment specific though, not universal.

 

[Rival]

I'd say intelligence can only really be defined as something like 'a quality that helps us succeed over the long term in our environment'.

So it does matter that you have intelligence, but intelligence is not primarily about silly metrics like IQ or ability to perform well in tests of 'book learning'.

Some forms of 'book learning' may even you less intelligent as it reduces your ability to succeed over the long term.

Intelligence is environment specific though, not universal.

But, at the baseline, do we need to know how, say, viruses work to be happy? We went millennia without knowing so much as we do now and have this idea that societies with more knowledge are somehow better societies and I don't see how.

 

[oldbadger]

What's with this?

Does it matter which group has the most 'intelligence' (usually used in a very limited way to mean most 'scientific knowhow')? Isn't social cohesion a good measure to take, too? Things like how societies treat children, disabled folks etc? Must we judge whole groups based on 'intellect' - in especially a very Western way, that basically equates intellect with logic, biology etc? Isn't it better that we have one small tribe with superb social cohesion, low crimes rates etc. than a large nationstate full of scientists?

Well done!
This devotion to intelligence by so many has become some kind of fashion accessory. Everybody wants to be recognised as holding an IQ of over 120 .... at least!
Common sense, social aptitude and simple contentment are equally as important if not more so.
And I notice that many people who have paid fortunes to gain degrees in many areas of study cannot actually gain employment in relevant positions and employments.

 

[We Never Know]

But why does it matter if someone lives in a box?

What's in their box is their limit. They know nothing outside the box. Which makes them limited, not unintelligent.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

So, why aren't things like virtue prised as highly? There seems to be the implicit assumption that intelligent people are somehow 'good' people. There may be someone who doesn't believe in the theory of evolution and immediately our respect for this person drops. Why?

I imagine that there are a lot of people I respect that do not accept the theory of evolution.

 

[Rival]

What's in their box is their limit. They know nothing outside the box.

But as long as that's not affecting personal happiness, how he treats others etc. I see no problem.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

So, why aren't things like virtue prised as highly? There seems to be the implicit assumption that intelligent people are somehow 'good' people. There may be someone who doesn't believe in the theory of evolution and immediately our respect for this person drops. Why?

I accept the theory of evolution and I am also a Christian. When those two facts become known, I often appear to lose the respect of people on both sides of the discussion.

 

[We Never Know]

But as long as that's not affecting personal happiness, how he treats others etc. I see no problem.

I agree 100%. The box makes them limited, not unintelligent.

 

[JustGeorge]

I don't really get it myself.

I did well in school. Everyone I assumed I loved it, and that I was invested in my studies. Honestly, the only reason I did my work was because I didn't like to cause a stir, and the sooner I got it over with, the sooner I could do what I enjoyed, which was to read books and draw pictures.

In my oldest son's school work, I find so much expected regurgitation and simple memorization that its hard to be impressed by any of it. What he's taught is low quality, and through one lens typically. Very little critical thinking involved.

I do find a lot of respect for a person's passion for learning a specific topic/s. The ones that really love what they study, and the ones that can make it come alive for those around them. I don't have much respect for people who wear their education like a badge; just something to show off and to try to impress others. That often works against the topics they are so invested in; rather than sharing their knowledge, they try to make it exclusive, and I think that's a bit backwards.

 

[Augustus]

But, at the baseline, do we need to know how, say, viruses work to be happy? We went millennia without knowing so much as we do now and have this idea that societies with more knowledge are somehow better societies and I don't see how.

Having a good familial and social network, a sense of community, feeling part of something more than the self and having a sense of security are more important to happiness than 'intelligence'.