5 ms·

This may seem very good and useful at first sight but it actually doesn't mean anything. The classical stance is that intelligence it's something fixed and can'

This may seem very good and useful at first sight but it actually doesn't mean anything. The classical stance is that intelligence it's something fixed and can't be improved, so the smart guy will outsmart the average guy. Now they say that intelligence can actually improve so it's possible for the average guy to outsmart the smart guy. Well, not at all. If intelligence can improve this means that the average guy can achieve an intelligence on par with that of the smart guy, but the smart guy can also, so the gap still remains. Maybe I'm missing the point but I don't really know what make of the whole article.

itsybitsycoder 13y ago
It means that effort becomes more of a factor. OK, if you hold effort constant, maybe the gap remains, but not everyone is equally hard-working.
ekm2 13y ago
Are you suggesting that if both weak and strong people go to the gym regularly then the differences between them will remain?
- csomar 13y ago
  Not weak and strong, but rather big and small. If someone is 1.6m and another one is 1.8m; the second guy obviously has an advantage (being a bigger guy). Sure the 1.6m can beat him. (exercise often, learn fighting techniques...) but if they both exercise in the same amount, the difference will remain.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - joyeuse6701 13y ago
    I was going to counter this with gymnasts, since size past a point becomes a problem that can't be overcome by the larger man (it is better to be smaller), and then I realized that the idea still holds, there are certain limitations of which we cannot overcome no matter how hard we try.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - ekm2 13y ago
    People do not go to the gym to increase their height.They are focused on things like increasing the size of their bicep,so the weak/strong analogy holds better.
    - csomar 13y ago
      I was not talking about biceps size, but about who is stronger in a fight. The bigger guy has an advantage. See the other child comment as it explains that it can work the other way around (bigger being a disadvantage)
      - zxcdw 13y ago
        Your comparison is completely silly as it relies on something which can't be changed by determinated effort, unlike human brain and mental skills/capabilities and our physical body. The comparison of going to gym holds perfectly, as anybody can go there and bulk themselves way, way bigger, fitter and more muscular with effort than almost anybody else who doesn't go there. Same is definitely possible with human brain as numerous studies show that after exposure to a new skill, learning it does physical changes to our brain(neuroplasticity) and thus modifies it to work better/more optimally, making it more capable.
  - gugol 13y ago
    So the taller guy could always lift more weight?
  - gugol 13y ago
    So the taller guy could always lift more weight?
BigChiefSmokem 13y ago
The Holy One can elaborate: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYfNvmF0Bqw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYfNvmF0Bqw
dnissley 13y ago
You're forgetting that plenty of intelligent people don't work to maintain their intelligence, which means their intelligence will flatline or even decline. To take the gym metaphor you used, some people are naturally athletic and some are not. A non-athletic person can work out to improve their fitness level, and a naturally athletic person can eat pizza and smoke a pack of cigarettes every day. In not too much time at all they will have traded places as far as their athletic ability goes.
regularfry 13y ago
You don't see the point for the average guy to be better than they themselves were 6 months ago? Why must this be adversarial?
epo 13y ago
"The point" is that, with work, intelligence can allegedly be improved. Your comparison is false as the not-smart guy who works hard will almost always outperform the smart guy who doesn't work hard. The smart guy who works hard is something to be feared (or followed). HN is full of people who were told they were smart and then stopped trying. That is why they are on websites like HN rather than, you know, actually achieving anything.

itsybitsycoder 13y ago

It means that effort becomes more of a factor. OK, if you hold effort constant, maybe the gap remains, but not everyone is equally hard-working.

ekm2 13y ago

Are you suggesting that if both weak and strong people go to the gym regularly then the differences between them will remain?

csomar 13y ago
Not weak and strong, but rather big and small. If someone is 1.6m and another one is 1.8m; the second guy obviously has an advantage (being a bigger guy). Sure the 1.6m can beat him. (exercise often, learn fighting techniques...) but if they both exercise in the same amount, the difference will remain.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- joyeuse6701 13y ago
  I was going to counter this with gymnasts, since size past a point becomes a problem that can't be overcome by the larger man (it is better to be smaller), and then I realized that the idea still holds, there are certain limitations of which we cannot overcome no matter how hard we try.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- ekm2 13y ago
  People do not go to the gym to increase their height.They are focused on things like increasing the size of their bicep,so the weak/strong analogy holds better.
  - csomar 13y ago
    I was not talking about biceps size, but about who is stronger in a fight. The bigger guy has an advantage. See the other child comment as it explains that it can work the other way around (bigger being a disadvantage)
    - zxcdw 13y ago
      Your comparison is completely silly as it relies on something which can't be changed by determinated effort, unlike human brain and mental skills/capabilities and our physical body. The comparison of going to gym holds perfectly, as anybody can go there and bulk themselves way, way bigger, fitter and more muscular with effort than almost anybody else who doesn't go there. Same is definitely possible with human brain as numerous studies show that after exposure to a new skill, learning it does physical changes to our brain(neuroplasticity) and thus modifies it to work better/more optimally, making it more capable.
- gugol 13y ago
  So the taller guy could always lift more weight?
- gugol 13y ago
  So the taller guy could always lift more weight?

BigChiefSmokem 13y ago

The Holy One can elaborate: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYfNvmF0Bqw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYfNvmF0Bqw

dnissley 13y ago

You're forgetting that plenty of intelligent people don't work to maintain their intelligence, which means their intelligence will flatline or even decline. To take the gym metaphor you used, some people are naturally athletic and some are not. A non-athletic person can work out to improve their fitness level, and a naturally athletic person can eat pizza and smoke a pack of cigarettes every day. In not too much time at all they will have traded places as far as their athletic ability goes.

regularfry 13y ago

You don't see the point for the average guy to be better than they themselves were 6 months ago? Why must this be adversarial?

epo 13y ago

"The point" is that, with work, intelligence can allegedly be improved. Your comparison is false as the not-smart guy who works hard will almost always outperform the smart guy who doesn't work hard. The smart guy who works hard is something to be feared (or followed). HN is full of people who were told they were smart and then stopped trying. That is why they are on websites like HN rather than, you know, actually achieving anything.