5 ms·

Intelligence doesn't seem that complex a thing to define, to me. Oxford Dictionary says "the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills". I generally g

Intelligence doesn't seem that complex a thing to define, to me. Oxford Dictionary says "the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills". I generally go for a slightly wider "The ability to create models of the world around them, and make predictions based on those models" - where "knowledge" would be "models" and "making predictions based on those models" is a sort of proto-skill. Sure, the kinds of things that different people find easy to model vary. One person might find it easy to model mathematical theorems, others the internal working of car engines. But in both cases there's an underlying ability to make a mental model of the thing you're learning about, and use that to predict how it will function, and work out what you can do with it.

visarga 4y ago
We're only as intelligent as the models we learn. Where we don't have models we tend to learn by simple correlation. Discoveries are rare, even researchers only grind at that 0.01% beyond the known modelling space. A human in a primitive society, even with the same IQ with a modern man, would be much less intelligent about solving a variety of tasks because they lack the mental "furniture". Most of our intelligence does not come from the brain, it comes from the culture, which is an evolutionary process.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
TheBigSalad 4y ago
Does memory count as intelligence? I've seen people with great memories and people think they are very intelligent. They people I'm thinking about were actually intelligent, but their great memories really set them apart. For example, the guy at work who remembers every project, every shortcoming, and the reasoning behind every technical decision.
- AndrewDucker 4y ago
  I certainly think more memory allows you to build more complex models and to build them from more information at once.
arethuza 4y ago
I've also got a theory (based on observations) that it takes a really intelligent person to do really stupid things.
mikkergp 4y ago
I think the problem is coming up with a definition of intelligence that is measurable across contexts. I’m worse at creating mental models when traveling in a country with language and cultures I don’t understand. Does that mean my IQ is 100 when I travel and 120 at home? Functionally probably. It would probably measure as such. Also my oral communication tends to be more around vague ideas, not specifics, and I have trouble only communicating one idea at a time linearly. I’m sure I would score differently on the ability to model something depending on how the test was conducted. In general I would say communication, focus and executive functioning will all get in the way of measuring raw intelligence.
galaxyLogic 4y ago
> to model mathematical theorems, You could also say that mathematics is a model of how Sets behave. It is a generalized model of reality. We don't create models of mathematical theorems, the theorems are a property of the very generalized and abstract model which is mathematics.
lo_zamoyski 4y ago
> Oxford Dictionary says "the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills". And what is knowledge? When I say I know p, then p is a proposition. Thus, p is intelligible. Anything intelligible is conceptual. Indeed, if we analyze what a proposition is, we see that it entails predicates and predicates correspond to concepts. However, concepts are abstract and universal, that is, they are not concrete or particular, they are not mere images. Triangularity is not this or that triangle, but that which holds of all triangles, and you will not find triangularity out and about in the world on its own, but only instantiated in particulars, and any particular is not any of the other particulars for which the same predicate holds. When we implement propositions in computers, we really only simulate the formal via mechanical manipulations. When I create a negation operation on a string of symbols, I am only moving symbols around in a way that corresponds to what negation would produce. But the computer is not strictly speaking negating anything. Furthermore, the symbols that stand for predicates are just placeholders at best. There is no concept in the machine. Deep learning does not somehow magically transcend this limitation. > "The ability to create models of the world around them, and make predictions based on those models" Modeling and prediction is not intelligence, but a consequence of it. It is also central to modern science because the purpose of modern science is, to a large degree, less about understanding nature than it is about mastering it for practical purposes (prediction is presupposed by control).

visarga 4y ago

We're only as intelligent as the models we learn. Where we don't have models we tend to learn by simple correlation. Discoveries are rare, even researchers only grind at that 0.01% beyond the known modelling space. A human in a primitive society, even with the same IQ with a modern man, would be much less intelligent about solving a variety of tasks because they lack the mental "furniture". Most of our intelligence does not come from the brain, it comes from the culture, which is an evolutionary process.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

TheBigSalad 4y ago

Does memory count as intelligence? I've seen people with great memories and people think they are very intelligent. They people I'm thinking about were actually intelligent, but their great memories really set them apart. For example, the guy at work who remembers every project, every shortcoming, and the reasoning behind every technical decision.

AndrewDucker 4y ago
I certainly think more memory allows you to build more complex models and to build them from more information at once.

arethuza 4y ago

I've also got a theory (based on observations) that it takes a really intelligent person to do really stupid things.

mikkergp 4y ago

I think the problem is coming up with a definition of intelligence that is measurable across contexts. I’m worse at creating mental models when traveling in a country with language and cultures I don’t understand. Does that mean my IQ is 100 when I travel and 120 at home? Functionally probably. It would probably measure as such. Also my oral communication tends to be more around vague ideas, not specifics, and I have trouble only communicating one idea at a time linearly. I’m sure I would score differently on the ability to model something depending on how the test was conducted. In general I would say communication, focus and executive functioning will all get in the way of measuring raw intelligence.

galaxyLogic 4y ago

> to model mathematical theorems, You could also say that mathematics is a model of how Sets behave. It is a generalized model of reality. We don't create models of mathematical theorems, the theorems are a property of the very generalized and abstract model which is mathematics.

lo_zamoyski 4y ago

> Oxford Dictionary says "the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills". And what is knowledge? When I say I know p, then p is a proposition. Thus, p is intelligible. Anything intelligible is conceptual. Indeed, if we analyze what a proposition is, we see that it entails predicates and predicates correspond to concepts. However, concepts are abstract and universal, that is, they are not concrete or particular, they are not mere images. Triangularity is not this or that triangle, but that which holds of all triangles, and you will not find triangularity out and about in the world on its own, but only instantiated in particulars, and any particular is not any of the other particulars for which the same predicate holds. When we implement propositions in computers, we really only simulate the formal via mechanical manipulations. When I create a negation operation on a string of symbols, I am only moving symbols around in a way that corresponds to what negation would produce. But the computer is not strictly speaking negating anything. Furthermore, the symbols that stand for predicates are just placeholders at best. There is no concept in the machine. Deep learning does not somehow magically transcend this limitation. > "The ability to create models of the world around them, and make predictions based on those models" Modeling and prediction is not intelligence, but a consequence of it. It is also central to modern science because the purpose of modern science is, to a large degree, less about understanding nature than it is about mastering it for practical purposes (prediction is presupposed by control).