4 ms·

I think that there's another way of looking at it. My definition of intelligence would be the ability to tell what is true from what is false. The ability to pr

I think that there's another way of looking at it. My definition of intelligence would be the ability to tell what is true from what is false. The ability to predict the future is a by-product of that ability. regarding what is the nature of truth and the issue of self awareness - that's a can of worms that I'll refrain from opening :)

mercer 8y ago
I'd go more abstract and say that intelligence is about pattern recognition. higher intelligence means increased ability to detect patterns 1) over longer timespans and 2) of increasing complexity/subtlety.
edoo 8y ago
And very complex things would have ranges of truth depending on your perspective. All our sensory input and even memory effectively goes through lossy compression algorithms with modifiers for immediate focus. I would like to think getting wiser is those algorithms converging to more optimal performance. I also think working with real logic in science, math, etc, any engineering, is incredibly healthy for the brain and makes it much easier to converge on truth. The only way to be good with logic is to absorb new data into the picture as it becomes available. I've noticed the less people are exposed to real logic the more resistant they are to simple facts that conflict with their assumptions.
umanwizard 8y ago
> intelligence [is] the ability to tell what is true from what is false. This is a poor definition. There are very intelligent Christians and very intelligent atheists. They can't both be right. Isaac Newton, one of the most intelligent people in history, believed in all sorts of weird astrological stuff. Etc. My view is that intelligence is a number that's correlated with a wide variety of different measures of cognitive performance. So it's not really possible to give a glib, one-sentence description of it.
- placebo 8y ago
  >It's not really possible to give a glib, one-sentence description of it. And yet, you just did. My definition is poor if you turn it into something simplistic and not realise the vast number of ways and levels of abstraction in which truth can be distinguished from falsehood, which gives rise to various forms of intelligence. It boils down to having a less limiting understanding of the concept of truth. Intelligent atheists and intelligent Christians can't both be right about what? They can both be right about some things and wrong about other things, but that is true of any two different people, not only any two different groups.
vlehto 8y ago
I think you're onto something here. A person who graduates from technical program of good university, but then falls for the first Ponzi scheme and starts selling vacuum cleaners? Not very smart. It's like he has very good processor able to run any math problem you throw at him. But at the same time he doesn't independently do very good job of discerning what is relevant and what is not. On the other hand some of the greatest scientists of all time have been able to maintain certain "what if" state of mind for years. Doing quick and accurate true/false analysis is often a trait of street smarts, but the most genius of all seem to be able to play with probabilities.

mercer 8y ago

I'd go more abstract and say that intelligence is about pattern recognition. higher intelligence means increased ability to detect patterns 1) over longer timespans and 2) of increasing complexity/subtlety.

edoo 8y ago

And very complex things would have ranges of truth depending on your perspective. All our sensory input and even memory effectively goes through lossy compression algorithms with modifiers for immediate focus. I would like to think getting wiser is those algorithms converging to more optimal performance. I also think working with real logic in science, math, etc, any engineering, is incredibly healthy for the brain and makes it much easier to converge on truth. The only way to be good with logic is to absorb new data into the picture as it becomes available. I've noticed the less people are exposed to real logic the more resistant they are to simple facts that conflict with their assumptions.

umanwizard 8y ago

> intelligence [is] the ability to tell what is true from what is false. This is a poor definition. There are very intelligent Christians and very intelligent atheists. They can't both be right. Isaac Newton, one of the most intelligent people in history, believed in all sorts of weird astrological stuff. Etc. My view is that intelligence is a number that's correlated with a wide variety of different measures of cognitive performance. So it's not really possible to give a glib, one-sentence description of it.

placebo 8y ago
>It's not really possible to give a glib, one-sentence description of it. And yet, you just did. My definition is poor if you turn it into something simplistic and not realise the vast number of ways and levels of abstraction in which truth can be distinguished from falsehood, which gives rise to various forms of intelligence. It boils down to having a less limiting understanding of the concept of truth. Intelligent atheists and intelligent Christians can't both be right about what? They can both be right about some things and wrong about other things, but that is true of any two different people, not only any two different groups.

vlehto 8y ago

I think you're onto something here. A person who graduates from technical program of good university, but then falls for the first Ponzi scheme and starts selling vacuum cleaners? Not very smart. It's like he has very good processor able to run any math problem you throw at him. But at the same time he doesn't independently do very good job of discerning what is relevant and what is not. On the other hand some of the greatest scientists of all time have been able to maintain certain "what if" state of mind for years. Doing quick and accurate true/false analysis is often a trait of street smarts, but the most genius of all seem to be able to play with probabilities.