Though I generally like to think about the benefits in the field of
biological adaptations/innovations the foundations they are built on are
definitely important, so I agree. I think it is likely that we have a
more advanced and specialized biological machinery that allows our
thinking to carry so far. he crystallized and fluid intelligence sound
familiar but I need some sleep before delving further. Do you think this
supports a general intellect or man's brand of intelligence most? My
mention of multiple intelligences (and relatedly behavioral
activation/environmental) was to point out that our ideas of intellect
are likely to center on our experience of it, if the intelligences are
expanded diversely that is.
On 5/11/2011 12:32 AM, Chuck Bowling wrote:
I agree that abstract thought is a good indicator of intellect.
However, I don't think the idea of intellect can be characterized
entirely by the ability for abstract thought.
In fact, I think that abstract thought and communication are simply
products of an underlying functionality.
Specifically a psychologist named Cattell identified two brain
functions called crystallized and fluid intelligence. Generally
speaking crystallized intelligence encompasses accumulated knowledge
and learned behaviors while fluid intelligence encompasses executive
functions and short term memory.
In order to quantify intellect I think it's necessary to understand
the foundation on which it is built. I think the issue is far more
complex than just the ability for abstract communication.
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 10:46 PM, Ash <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I think in this instance abstract symbols are a good indicator of
intelligence, the idea of multiple intelligences (or aptitudes)
seems like the type of theory that would avoid the campy, 'gift
from god' type reasoning. With diverse symbols to communicate, we
can reenact our tactic in a hunt, tell stories about herd
movements or plant/animal characteristics. It is the next obvious
evolutionary step, as only so much can be carried in one mind or
passed on verbally our knowledge of the world and the tools we use
to carry it on must progress. It seems that the more refined and
diverse an intelligence the more robust representations can be
offered by the holder of it, that could be an assumption or bias
though.
On 5/10/2011 3:19 PM, Chuck Bowling wrote:
What is intellect?
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 8:18 PM, the taoist shaman
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
is language a good or poor indicator of intellect ?
