4 ms·

Yes and even more because "intelligence" alone doesn't even help you climb to the highest positions. People, especially on forums like HN, tend to mistake bein

Yes and even more because "intelligence" alone doesn't even help you climb to the highest positions. People, especially on forums like HN, tend to mistake being 'intellectual' to actually 'intelligent'. There are various ways of being "smart" and being good at math and code is only one of them (Emotional intelligence, relationship intelligence, intelligence in career) etc... People who say 'Iam so smart' are usually not so intelligent in the end

necovek 4y ago
The article covers this as well: the author claims that studies show that all of those different intelligences correlate, so it is not very useful to categorise them individually. The thing that is a main driver to "climbing to higher positions" is usually desire and motivation, which is a cultural trait. Intelligence has a high correlation because there are plenty of motivated people across all levels of intelligence, so highly intelligent are better at succeeding at such well-defined problems. Smartness is sometimes about well-educated or simply experienced and knowledgable. Eg. even if I was more intelligent, I'd trust a medical doctor because they have a vast knowledge and experience that I lack. Still, the article makes a nice distinction between well- and poorly-defined problems. It's definitely going in the right direction, so go and have a read!
- marvin 4y ago
  > all of those different intelligences correlate, so it is not very useful to categorise them individually Maybe it's not useful for the sake of discussion to list them individually, but it's definitely useful to measure them individually. Or you'll mistake someone who's a master of rotating abstract shapes in their head for someone who manage to get things done in a complex environments. The full-scale IQ tests (WAIS?) do actually test many different manifestations of intelligence. This is a bit on the side of the point, but it's an important distinction when you're discussing and trying to measure people's real-life abilities.
  - necovek 4y ago
    I am not making this claim, the article is based on a number of studies measuring different types of intelligence. It actually does say that they are all almost exactly the same (sure, highly intelligent individuals will score better on one set of problems than on another, but they will score highly on most of them; similar for average or lower intelligence folks — their scores on each of them correlate but are not in a strict linear relationship). That suggests that they are ultimately one and the same (as per those studies).
- davidguetta 4y ago
  > The article covers this as well: the author claims that studies show that all of those different intelligences correlate, so it is not very useful to categorise them individually. I would strongly doubt that they correlate tbh.. where would the "virgin math genius" cliché would come from ? I have been versed into various socio evonomic and hobby environement over my life, and have met natural geniuses in several unrelated fields (sport, math, chess, boxing, military, art, entrepreneurs /investors, emotional connections and / or sex). I can assure you i didnt not observe such correlation. At best what ive noticed is how some of them would be clueless about their gift, and pretty average on the rest.
  - necovek 4y ago
    > I would strongly doubt that they correlate tbh.. where would the "virgin math genius" cliché would come from ? Article talks of scientific studies supporting that claim: you doubting it and sharing your anecdotal experience does not change what the stats say. I do welcome you to challenge those studies (that's what science is all about), but that's not done with "doubting" them on HackerNews. (Oh, and cliches are just that, cliches: they were never universally true, which is why we don't use words like "facts" for them)
    - davidguetta 4y ago
      I mean I understand and welcome you enthusiasm about science and research papers, unfortunately it's largely misguided in my opinion. Even in actual scientific fields like computer science (In particular machine learning and reinforcement learning academic environement in which I work and hold a PhD) 'doubting' is necessary, since a large percentage of papers are unreproducible and largely biaised for publication... [0] Regarding social sciences papers, I give 0 credit to any of them and that won't change soon. First it's literally impossible define rigorously any term to differentiate (I mean seriously how are you going to "measure" emotional intelligence or entrepreneurship skills). Secondly there a large fraction of the field which is just pretending to do science and circlejkerking each other by accepting their own papers without rigorous due diligence, to the point they can't even detect hoax and fraud [1] At the end of the day I am not here to fight you. If you don't believe me then be it but I stand by my assessment that various kind of intelligence are at best losely related. Some math genius are 100% clueless in emotional or business intelligence, some genius entrepreneurs are 100% clueless with math or girls, some really good artists completely clueless in business or academic stuff. Some athletes too... Of course some will have all but imo it's a lucky minority. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair

necovek 4y ago

The article covers this as well: the author claims that studies show that all of those different intelligences correlate, so it is not very useful to categorise them individually. The thing that is a main driver to "climbing to higher positions" is usually desire and motivation, which is a cultural trait. Intelligence has a high correlation because there are plenty of motivated people across all levels of intelligence, so highly intelligent are better at succeeding at such well-defined problems. Smartness is sometimes about well-educated or simply experienced and knowledgable. Eg. even if I was more intelligent, I'd trust a medical doctor because they have a vast knowledge and experience that I lack. Still, the article makes a nice distinction between well- and poorly-defined problems. It's definitely going in the right direction, so go and have a read!

marvin 4y ago
> all of those different intelligences correlate, so it is not very useful to categorise them individually Maybe it's not useful for the sake of discussion to list them individually, but it's definitely useful to measure them individually. Or you'll mistake someone who's a master of rotating abstract shapes in their head for someone who manage to get things done in a complex environments. The full-scale IQ tests (WAIS?) do actually test many different manifestations of intelligence. This is a bit on the side of the point, but it's an important distinction when you're discussing and trying to measure people's real-life abilities.
- necovek 4y ago
  I am not making this claim, the article is based on a number of studies measuring different types of intelligence. It actually does say that they are all almost exactly the same (sure, highly intelligent individuals will score better on one set of problems than on another, but they will score highly on most of them; similar for average or lower intelligence folks — their scores on each of them correlate but are not in a strict linear relationship). That suggests that they are ultimately one and the same (as per those studies).
davidguetta 4y ago
> The article covers this as well: the author claims that studies show that all of those different intelligences correlate, so it is not very useful to categorise them individually. I would strongly doubt that they correlate tbh.. where would the "virgin math genius" cliché would come from ? I have been versed into various socio evonomic and hobby environement over my life, and have met natural geniuses in several unrelated fields (sport, math, chess, boxing, military, art, entrepreneurs /investors, emotional connections and / or sex). I can assure you i didnt not observe such correlation. At best what ive noticed is how some of them would be clueless about their gift, and pretty average on the rest.
- necovek 4y ago
  > I would strongly doubt that they correlate tbh.. where would the "virgin math genius" cliché would come from ? Article talks of scientific studies supporting that claim: you doubting it and sharing your anecdotal experience does not change what the stats say. I do welcome you to challenge those studies (that's what science is all about), but that's not done with "doubting" them on HackerNews. (Oh, and cliches are just that, cliches: they were never universally true, which is why we don't use words like "facts" for them)
  - davidguetta 4y ago
    I mean I understand and welcome you enthusiasm about science and research papers, unfortunately it's largely misguided in my opinion. Even in actual scientific fields like computer science (In particular machine learning and reinforcement learning academic environement in which I work and hold a PhD) 'doubting' is necessary, since a large percentage of papers are unreproducible and largely biaised for publication... [0] Regarding social sciences papers, I give 0 credit to any of them and that won't change soon. First it's literally impossible define rigorously any term to differentiate (I mean seriously how are you going to "measure" emotional intelligence or entrepreneurship skills). Secondly there a large fraction of the field which is just pretending to do science and circlejkerking each other by accepting their own papers without rigorous due diligence, to the point they can't even detect hoax and fraud [1] At the end of the day I am not here to fight you. If you don't believe me then be it but I stand by my assessment that various kind of intelligence are at best losely related. Some math genius are 100% clueless in emotional or business intelligence, some genius entrepreneurs are 100% clueless with math or girls, some really good artists completely clueless in business or academic stuff. Some athletes too... Of course some will have all but imo it's a lucky minority. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair