Stupidity is general slowness in learning. If someone is not good at _anything_ then it's a good bayesian guess to say they're stupid. If someone has high-achi

Stupidity is general slowness in learning. If someone is not good at _anything_ then it's a good bayesian guess to say they're stupid. If someone has high-achievement in one or more specialities it's safe to say they're smart. [edit: Feel free to explain the downvotes! I understand the parent-comment was arguing for a "there are different types of intelligence" kind of theory, but I do think that the "aggregate smartness" is more useful/correct. Think of the smart people you know-- aren't they often kind of polymaths? And even things they're new to, they kind of pick up fast? And think of the really stupid people you know--- don't they kind of suck of everything?]