4 ms·
Lets approach this via another tack, since you seem to want to drop more platitudes. Suppose you have two humans - one who integrated shakespeare, one who didn
by yummyfajitas 11y ago
Lets approach this via another tack, since you seem to want to drop more platitudes.
Suppose you have two humans - one who integrated shakespeare, one who didn't. (Or make it two samples of humans to reduce statistical noise, if you prefer.) Beyond quizzing them on lines from plays, what measurement can you make to determine which human/group of humans "integrated" and "generalized" shakespeare and which didn't?
If no such measurement exists, I'd assert that rather than shakespeare, we need invisible dragons to breath the fire of knowledge. http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/Dragon.htm http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/Dragon.htm
- Retra 11y agoI don't think you know what a platitude is. > what measurement can you make to determine which human/group of humans "integrated" and "generalized" shakespeare and which didn't? What measurement can you make to determine if someone is intelligent or not? You solve that, and I'll get back to you.
- yummyfajitas 11y agoWhat measurement can you make to determine if someone is intelligent or not? Any of a variety of IQ tests, to measure directly. But that might be cheating, analogous to asking directly about Hamlet. So instead, ask them to perform any of the variety of real world tasks that are highly correlated with IQ (e.g., "here is a device you've never seen before, figure it out"). Measure their income - the theory of IQ claims income will be higher in the more intelligent group. Measure their criminality, risky sexual behavior or drug use; these will also be lower in the high IQ group. I wouldn't claim intelligence existed if I couldn't make claims of this sort. Your turn.