On Being "Naturally Smart"

[NeuroSmog]

Am I the only one that thinks that being "naturally smart" is bullshit? The way I see it, people are intelligent in different fields, and people grow up in different environments that could either impede or accelerate their learning process. There's no way that an average person could simply be "naturally" (in other words, "born") smarter than another average person.

Let's take this for example:
Sam doesn't do well in math but is an amazing writer. Meanwhile, Lisa is an amazing mathematician but her writing is sub-par. Is Sam smarter than Lisa, or is Lisa smarter than Sam?

Also:
Tyler was born in a very abusive household, and was not emotionally stable enough to concentrate on his education. As a result, his grades plummet and he often can't form comprehensible thoughts. Would he have been "smarter" if he were born in a more comfortable environment?

I also think that as long as someone invests their time to learn something, they'll be "smart" in that area.

Anyway, I'm sorry if it seems like I'm blathering. That happens a lot. I just want to hear your thoughts on this subject.

[Elfy]

I think everybody has the capacity to learn, as long as it is a genuine interest you just have to put the work in yourself.

Although I think it can be disputed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Ung-Yong

Kim Ung Yong began speaking in 2 months and could read Japanese, Korean, German and English by 2 years. He could understand the concept of differential calculus at 7 months...

I think he could arguably have been born smart.

[SaintVicious]

Everyone has limits on what they can learn some are just higher than others. I was really successful in school but i only give about a half ass try on it to get the A. While others in my class busted their ass every night to make sense of what we were learning. Sorry for them.

[SoulRiser]

I think the brain functions similar to a muscle... the more you exercise it, the stronger it gets. So people who think more will be smarter, but of course the catch is that they'll generally get smarter at the kinds of things they think about. So thinking about math won't make you smarter at dealing with people for example. I actually read something that supports this theory somewhere, but have no idea where I found it.

[Land Of The NotSoFree]

I was born into shit. Not at all that shitty, but still shit. Im surrounded by fools everyday of my life who are dumbed down by everything they take in. I consider myself very street smart because of the way I grew up, have good intellect and im excellent at reading. However, im average(or a bit below average) at math. The way we all learn depends on different experiences, and some people just don't experience certain things that others have.

& that leads me to everyone being better at learning in their own way. Which leads me to compulsory school sucking.

Now im angry.

but man...what the fuck @ that kim guy. Thats crazy. Makes me wonder alot about the human brain... no doubt he's ridiculously gifted. They say we tend to learn better when we're younger.

Hmm. I wouldn't say people can be born smarter...but born with higher ability to learn, perhaps.

[Absnt]

^ You're on the mark.

Intelligence = ability to learn. Not knowledge. Someone could be hyper intelligent and still very ignorant. My intelligence is only slightly above average, and I'm very, very good at what I do. On the other hand, I know a guy who has an I.Q that is almost 20 points above mine, nearing 145 or so, but he hasn't put much time into any single thing, so while he's smart in his own way, he's not that knowledgeable in any one subject while I am. He can figure shit out quicker than I can, but I can fix almost any computer problem, and I'm a pretty good musician.

Knowledge can be measured in what you know.
Intelligence can be measured in how fast you can learn.
The word "smart" is a term that seems to be a combination of the two or something. It's arbitrary. Scientists, as far as I can tell, are still studding the effects of Intelligence on upbringing, environment, and genetics. Last I heard here's what they figured out:

Those of us who are raised correctly, on a good diet, in a good environment tend to get better grades on average. Intelligence, however, is only minimally enhanced. Don't quote me on this, but from what I've read intelligence is largely genetic. (I think.) You'll have to look into it more, I'm just saying what I think I remember reading one time, but I'm probably wrong.

[NeuroSmog]

What makes an IQ test different from an exam you take in school?

I think that most of us would agree that an in-school exam doesn't measure our intelligence. Anyone could memorize notes, regurgitate them the next day and get an A. (Of course, this only works if you're motivated enough to do that over and over again...) But what causes a person to fail a test? Not studying. Grogginess. Sickness. Lack of motivation. Bad mood. There are a lot of factors that could cause someone to pass or fail a test, right?

Can't the same be said for IQ tests? What if a kid didn't understand (or care about) the importance of an IQ test and randomly bubbled in answers to get it over with? What if that kid was sick, groggy, in a bad mood or simply not motivated? Would he be considered "retarded" just because he didn't try on one test?

[Absnt]

^ I.Q. tests aren't the end all be all of measures. They are somewhat useful, but they aren't perfect. And obviously, if the person taking it isn't giving it their all, it won't measure their intelligence accurately. What makes I.Q. tests different from regular tests is that, ideally, you should be able to figure out the answer to the problems with no prior knowledge. There are many forms of I.Q. tests, some that solely involve pattern recognition, and that sort of thing. I'm not an expert, mind you.

---

They do assume you know some basic knowledge on most of the tests, though.

[Prince Rilian]

I once said to my friend Diana that everyone in my family is really smart, and she said, "What does that even mean? Are you saying that someone who's good at basketball isn't smart?" I had never thought about it before, really, and her saying that really changed the way I judge other people. It's stupid how the culture makes these distinctions between smart, athletic, and creative. They're all the same.

[Amortisatie]

There are different types of intelligence, it's not so much who is smarter than whom, but more of how you apply your intelligence to improving yourself and the world. Also, about the writer and the mathematician; the mathematician would be good at analyzing data, whereas the writer would be good at creative thinking.

[Story and Myth]

Ah, the old "nature vs. nurture" argument. This one's been going on for a long, long time.

[IamNoone]

(12-19-2011 09:30 PM)Absentinsomniac Wrote:  ^ You're on the mark.

Intelligence = ability to learn. Not knowledge. Someone could be hyper intelligent and still very ignorant. My intelligence is only slightly above average, and I'm very, very good at what I do. On the other hand, I know a guy who has an I.Q that is almost 20 points above mine, nearing 145 or so, but he hasn't put much time into any single thing, so while he's smart in his own way, he's not that knowledgeable in any one subject while I am. He can figure shit out quicker than I can, but I can fix almost any computer problem, and I'm a pretty good musician.

Knowledge can be measured in what you know.
Intelligence can be measured in how fast you can learn.
The word "smart" is a term that seems to be a combination of the two or something. It's arbitrary. Scientists, as far as I can tell, are still studding the effects of Intelligence on upbringing, environment, and genetics. Last I heard here's what they figured out:

Those of us who are raised correctly, on a good diet, in a good environment tend to get better grades on average. Intelligence, however, is only minimally enhanced. Don't quote me on this, but from what I've read intelligence is largely genetic. (I think.) You'll have to look into it more, I'm just saying what I think I remember reading one time, but I'm probably wrong.

You hit the nail on the head.

[Sunbourn]

(12-19-2011 04:43 PM)SoulRiser Wrote:  I think the brain functions similar to a muscle... the more you exercise it, the stronger it gets. So people who think more will be smarter, but of course the catch is that they'll generally get smarter at the kinds of things they think about. So thinking about math won't make you smarter at dealing with people for example. I actually read something that supports this theory somewhere, but have no idea where I found it.

True as this is, some people are born with a predisposition to learn well ahead of the rest of the pack. Others are born without the ability to learn at any reasonable pace at all. Life truly is unfair, isn't it?

[SoulRiser]

Yeah, but maybe not everyone is meant to be that kind of smart.

[Sunbourn]

(12-23-2011 11:36 AM)SoulRiser Wrote:  Yeah, but maybe not everyone is meant to be that kind of smart.

I'm not talking about book smarts. I'm speaking about an ability to learn in general.

[Absnt]

Plus, honestly, the world is definitely unfair. Thinking everyone is smart in their own way is kind of idealistic. If you're agnostic, or atheist then, which I guess I am for now, it follows logically that there is no supreme being to dictate what is "meant to be". Some people aren't meant to be smart in this field and others aren't meant to be smart in other fields, everything just kind of happened through a natural process. It's not fair, but it is what it is.

[SoulRiser]

I know, and maybe not everyone is meant to be able to learn fast or whatever. Take for example people with Down Syndrome... yeah, they have lower IQ and all that shit, but:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Down_syndro...ndividuals

They're still quite capable in their own way. Also, if they didn't exist, we'd all take our intelligence for granted. If everyone was equally capable, it'd be boring. Life is unfair, this is true, but if life was always completely fair... wouldn't it be boring?

And there's also a certain amount of satisfaction in doing something that's supposed to be 'too difficult' for you to do.

[Absnt]

^ Yeah, I can get behind that...