4 ms·
Definition of "smartness" is subjective though, isn't it? If a person is a brilliant scientist, engineer or whatever, but he makes incredibly stupid decisions i
by neverminder 5y ago
Definition of "smartness" is subjective though, isn't it? If a person is a brilliant scientist, engineer or whatever, but he makes incredibly stupid decisions in other areas of his life, is he still smart? Not in my book, which is why from my perspective the number of actually smart people is vanishingly small.
- bena 5y agoThe problem is that we've conflated knowledgeable with intelligent. Knowing a lot of things is not the same as being intelligent. People think intelligence is something that expresses itself on its own. It doesn't, which is why it's hard to define. IIRC, if you have an IQ of about 125, you can handle any mental task set before you. If you want to become a world-class X, you can, with enough work. The thing is, intelligence is more like a multiplying force. It doesn't do anything on its own. What's 1 times 0? Zero. What's 1000 times 0? Still zero. Now, what if we multiply by 2 instead of 0? Or 3? So someone with a higher intelligence would need to put in less time to get good at a mental task, but they still need to actually put in the time. They need the knowledge. I think you get it on an intuitive level. Because you say from your "perspective that the number of actually smart people is vanishingly small". That's likely true. Because intelligence isn't measured in degrees or being able to rattle off trivia, it's in being able to make the connections and work out the logic better, faster, and with fewer details than someone else.
- jbluepolarbear 5y agoWhat do you considered smart? Does your definition account for neurodivergence?