I think can be done only by putting them in a situation they're unfamiliar with. Otherwise other traits such as experience and knowledge come into play to harshly to accurately depict their intelligence. I'm saying this because I have a friend who is very knowledgeable, but whenever I introduce him to something he's not familiar with he's extremely bad at it.

Intelligence is subjective, and one person's opinion should not be used to encompass all of it. Personally, I choose not to judge intelligence; I prefer to judge how slow someone might be. That way, I can bound their lack of sense to a certain degree whilst still leaving an open end for them to expand positively (or so I hope).

Intelligence is far from subjective. Knowledge is. Smarts are. Intelligence is not. It's no more subjective than strength or speed. It can be measured, and it is a trait that can only be on a line somewhere from point A to point B (assuming B is infinity). You either are or are not more intelligent than somebody. Intelligence is genetic.

That being said. In an ideal world everyone would be as intelligent as each other. Sadly, we find different ways to bring on disorders and such to make us a bit more daft, for lack of a better word.

Intelligence is more than just your ability to adapt, Khriss.

"1. The capacity to acquire and apply knowledge."

Putting somebody in a situation they're unfamiliar with and seeing how quickly they can acquire and apply knowledge does sound like an astute way of measuring intelligence.

Yes, but seeing how well someone applies knowledge in known situations also matters. That can test out memory while adaptation doesn't.

Intelligence isn't memory.

Application of memory requires intelligence.

...'kay?

lol, Near got my point, and you didn't.

Nub.

Breathing requires intelligence.
Walking requires intelligence.
Doing X requires intelligence.

There was no point.

Successfully applying a familiar skill takes far more intelligence than any of those things.

...

Degree of the matter doesn't change if there was a point or not.

QFT

And that's what fighting games are all about. :rose:

Something requiring intelligence doesn't make it intelligence.

Relevance check?

...

It's not relevant to the topic. It's telling you that your irrelevant comments are, in fact, irrelevant.

(Isn't this is all off topic?) There are a variety of ways to measure intelligence, however, all of them are flawed. One way, as said is to put them into a situation they have no knowledge of or experience in, and is flawed in that it only tests only a small part of ones intelligence. Another way involves watching someone and how they apply their knowledge in varying environments, which, while being comprehensive, also slights people who use their intelligence to adapt quickly. Knowledge and memory are really just used by the person with intelligence in much the same way that the intelligence is used, so it is fairly difficult to sort them out from each other, and this is one of the reasons why it is so hard to judge intelligence. I usually just stick around a person, simply obsrving them, intelligence, for the most part, shows itself best over time, I think.(sorry for the wall of text)

The relevance check was referring to the relevance of your post with regard to the posts you were arguing against. You keep saying that "intelligence is not x" when no one said it was.

There is no way of seriously finding out how intelligent someone is.

IQ tests? lol. All they give out is random questions, some based on history. You could guess and be either insanely dumb or ridiculously smart. I don't see really too many of the situations listed in this topic so far as being intelligent, either. I mean, even animals less intelligent than humans adapt to situations in the wild, for example, if they have the ability. Being placed in certain situations is more of a test of fortitude than intelligence, because even an intelligent person can crumble under pressure.

IQ is ridiculously far from intelligence. It includes knowledge and memory in it, too. I think you're working with a skewed definition of sorts.

Aren't we all?

It wasn't too hard to realize that one, which is something we can all agree on...

I only brought up intelligence quotient tests because I pretty much saw someone ready to roll in and post something about them, in a topic like this that discusses means of gauging intelligence. I've taken an IQ test before and I got an 85, so that obviously doesn't prove anything. However, people seem to think that IQ tests are a good way to measure intelligence...it's not, and I never said otherwise, really.

Regardless, I still don't see other gauges mentioned in this topic as reliable measurements of intelligence. How exactly would it be judged, anyhow? You might as well go and say that there's no real means of judging intelligence. Not like it matters too much, anyway.

Just want to point some things out:

1) Knowledge = how much you know of something/someone etc. Example being... The Sky is blue...

2) Wisdom = how well you are at applying said knowledge. Example being... The Sky is blue BECAUSE light reflects off of the water and into the sky (this is actually true... yea surprised me too).

3) IQ tests = They don't measure knowledge, they measure wisdom... you see they don't show how smart you are, they measure how well you can apply ideas and thoughts. Another way of saying this is, ok there is having Common Sense and then there is having Wisdom.

If someone told you to kick a soccer ball "Correctly" however you never played Soccer before... so Common Sense kicks in and says "Just kick it" and so you do... but in Soccer there is a special way to kick the ball (the side of your foot, not your toes)... if you had used Wisdom then you would know HOW to kick the ball correctly... then you would have APPLIED it and kicked the ball.

IQ tests are not made to show how smart one is... Knowledge would work in an IQ test and fail at it as well... Knowledge is you knowing something... Common Sense is using your head to get an idea without thinking at all... Wisdom requires you to say to your self "How does this work" and use the information your brain gives back.

So you want to know how to show their intelegence? I have some advise for you... you are going to fail miseribly.

Some people are not very good at soem things, while others are VERY good at other things... it doesn't make you an idiot if you aren't good at one thing.

For example... I am not the greatest Artist, or writer, or math magician or physcial person... and saying stuff correctly... this doesn't make me an idiot... it means I am not good at them... an idiot is just a word to make someone else feel bad about their intellegence... however lets look at some things.

I suck at the things at the top... however I ROCK at video games and I have many ideas... I am a very good thinker with making Game ideas, Movie ideas, Book ideas, Anime ideas etc. What jobs use those? Video Game industry, movie industry, every book in the whole world, all the great animes we have...

If you are trying to measure your friends knowledge... I will say this, give them A WHOLE BUNCH of different situuations... he is not going to be great in all of them... but he isn't super man and neither are you :)

Thread relevance is the first one only.

The definition speaks for itself, there's almost nothing to debate.

This topic wasn't meant for a debate on what intelligence is. I was hoping that was common knowledge.

It might not have been, but the given topic is closely-enough related to it. Tangents happen; it's to be expected.

It's not something that's at all unavoidable, though. I stopped reading this topic after it turned into a debate about garbage. It was supposed to be a cool discussion. :(

I don't see how a biased debate is 'cool.' /: It was never a discussion to begin with. It was a pointless game of 'Stump the DH.' It isn't a discussion if all you do is knock down the ideas given to you; THAT is called a one-sided argument. The impression I get from your posts makes me feel that you don't even try to consider the suggested, much less than even bother accepting the slim truth they might contain.

There's no point in 'discussing' with you. You don't discuss. You force your ideas onto others.

I don't see where I did that anywhere. <__<

I meant discuss actually >__>;;

My response would remain the same. Just with discuss instead of debate.

So this thread is irrelevant then?

The first post hasn't been discussed past my second post. So it's pretty much worthless.

I know this topic is pretty much over, but I just have to give my two bits' worth.

For one thing, what do you really hope to gain from measuring your friends' intelligence anyway? If you find out that they are of low or high intelligence, does that change them? No. Intelligence is, after all, only one part of one's being and personality!

Besides, intelligence is a rather elusive thing to measure. An intelligent person still has strengths and weaknesses. I, for example, can learn new languages and use them like a native very quickly, but I have some difficulty in mathematics. So am I unintelligent? No. I happen to be stronger in one area than another. If you want to measure someone's intelligence, observing them over time is the way to go. Let's face it, the human mind has too many facets to be measured through just one method. It's only after seeing a person in many situations that one get get an idea of how intelligent a person is.

I agree with Lumoroske, Intelligence has pluses and minuses. for me I suck at languages and I'm strong at science, math and social abit because i'm good at recalling infomation that i've learned before(that why I questioned chris' answer). Newer intelligence test and training involves 5 areas:thinking, memorization, computation, analysis, and identification. This gives a better idea, please note 'better', of a persons intelligence, it covers different area giving a person an idea of where their strong, and where their weak. Where they have great or good intelligence and where they have not so great or horrible intelligence.

* the ability to comprehend; to understand and profit from experience

so it doesn't cover everything, one try/test doesn't work, you still don't have a full view of their intelligence, and as chris made mention of, some people have strengths that you can't measure using a intelligence test of any kind.


@ chris, ya... your wrong the sky is blue because:
The blue color of the sky is due to Rayleigh scattering. As light moves through the atmosphere, most of the longer wavelengths pass straight through. Little of the red, orange and yellow light is affected by the air.

However, much of the shorter wavelength light is absorbed by the gas molecules. The absorbed blue light is then radiated in different directions. It gets scattered all around the sky. Whichever direction you look, some of this scattered blue light reaches you. Since you see the blue light from everywhere overhead, the sky looks blue.
image of this
its down a little ways.

I may add more later.