what is intelligence?

[AntonioLao]

Is it something that every person is born with? Or is it acquired from experience? Or some from birth and some from experience?

In any case, it is needed to survive in this complex world. Is it right to say that failure to communicate is an indication for a lack of intelligence? The brain might be full of great ideas but until these are communicated, nothing is accomplished.

[yogi]

Here is a definition from infospace on the web ---
intelligence, in psychology, the general mental ability involved in calculating, reasoning, perceiving relationships and analogies, learning quickly, storing and retrieving information, using language fluently, classifying, generalizing, and adjusting to new situations. Alfred Binet, the French psychologist, defined intelligence as the totality of mental processes involved in adapting to the environment. Although there remains a strong tendency to view intelligence as a purely intellectual or cognitive function, considerable evidence suggests that intelligence has many facets.

Very complex definition. I shall get you some other definitions from unusual sources.

Sincerely,
yogi

[AntonioLao]

yogi,

Thanks for the various definitons. My question is really about the relationship of the ability to communicate with that of intelligence.

I am aware of Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences. But he did not mention anything about the ability to communicate. Not even Sternberg's Triarchic Theory of intelligence mentions anything about the ability to communicate.

Is intelligence subjective? Or objective? It can only become objective if it is communicated. Otherwise, it's all subjective.

Anybody can say he/she is the greatest genius that ever lived but unless the statement is proven through concrete communication and linked to facts and actual events, noboby would believe it.

antonio

[yogi]

i should make comment for each question -

ability to communicate -we have only five senses thru which we communicate and that too in only 4 dimensions. quantum theory predicts up to 11 dimensions ( our limited ability to communicate is so restrictive that some people would not even accept multi dimensional cosmos as a reality) so how and what about interdimensional communication?

Is intelligence subjective? Or objective? - depends who is looking and defining
e.g. if intelligence is perceiving an object then it is the subject, and this object percieving subjective intelligence is observed by another intelligence, then it itself becomes object. inshort subject and object are two sides of a coin ( duality of mind and matter )
finally TOE cannot be discussed until and unless we deal with counsciouness. further comments in future!!!!

sincerely,
yogi

[AntonioLao]

yogi,

Thanks again for your high-level thinking.

I have to say that our ability to communicate in the 4th dimension of time is very limited.

If Newton or Einstein or Maxwell have lived till now then the 3 geniuses would have gotten together and come up with a TOE. Now we can't communicate with them and our present problem is to unite Newton-Einstein theory with that of quantum mechanics. Again, using your analogy, these two theories are the 2 sides of a coin. Obviously, there is a connection but it is found inside the coin. But when we split the coin into 2 parts, again, we get 2 coins with the same 2 sides. This is analogous to isolating the quarks inside a proton or a meson, breaking the connections produce more quarks. Same things happen when we try to isolate the N-pole and S-pole of a magnet. Even the smallest neutrino has a N-pole and a S-pole (it possesses a magnetic moment). And neutrinos are all left-handed.

antonio

[Guille]

is intelligence subjetive or objetive?

That question can't be answered. Becuase if inteligence is subjetive or objetive, we would never notice.


about comunication, we actually CAN comunicate via the fourth dimension (aka time) this is because sound (for example of comunication) has a speed much slower than light, so when we talk, our comunication is traveling in time.

[AntonioLao]

so when we talk, our comunication is traveling in time.

without the use of a telephone, voice comm is only good within short distances such as a room with no acoustic walls and the person also need to speak louder since there will be no microphone either.

[force5]

is it something that every person born with? Or is it acquired from experience? Or some from birth and some from experience?

in any case, it is needed to survive in this complex world. Is it right to say that failure to communicate is an indication for a lack of intelligence? The brain might be full of great ideas but until these are communicated, nothing is accomplished.

Hi Antonio;

In answer to your first question;

First, I assume you're limiting the discussion to human intelligence? I believe at birth, we have a limited potential based on our genetics. At that point, our enviorment takes over and provides the experiences that determines our level of awareness. To some extent, intelligence is subjective.

In answer to your second question;

First, I think ones intelligence may aide in survival in some situations. In some cases, an IQ of 200 can't save you.

Second, If we just think of language as one method or tool for communicating, the parties involved may or may not be equally capable of sending or receiving the necessary information to form a common ground for establishing exceptable dialog. This does not necessarily imply that either party is lacking in intelligence, but, may interpert the information in a different way.

Case in point. You and I have had a number of disscussions over the last two years and some of our interest are very simular. But our methods are different in how we are attempting to analyze and define problems and solutions. As I see it, your primary focus has been expanding the knowledge base of QM, whereas, my methods have focused more on concepts and fundamentals. And because of the differences in our methodology, I don't devote alot of time to understanding much of the work you're doing, mainly because it's very detailed and requires to much of a commitment on my part.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that two intelligent people can have problems communicating even when they have a common language and a common commitment, if their focus and methodologies are different.

So, IMHO, failure to communicate in no way is indicative on ones intelligence.

John

[AntonioLao]

So, IMHO, failure to communicate in no way is indicative on ones intelligence.

John,

Is the desire to communicate an indication of ones intelligence? The private organization at http://www.seti.org has been devoting their efforts to the search for extraterrestrial intelligence since 1984. So far, these efforts come up empty. But if there is intelligence out there, why won't it communicate with us?

antonio

[force5]

antonio;

Is the desire to communicate an indication of ones intelligence?

I would say in some cases, depending on the reasons. Of course, some forms or methods of communication indicate just the opposite.

I do believe there is alot of intelligence out there. I also believe the probility of detecting a valid signal is remote but possible. As far as carrying on a conservation, this would be rather difficult when considering the turn-around time. As far as, "why won't they communicate with us?". Maybe they lack the patience to wait for a reply since it could take dozens if not hundreds of years. And if they take the same approach as we do, then they are probably doing more receiving than sending.

John

P.S. Some life forms don't even have a brain. But, still manage to communicate and reproduce.