Different intellegences

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oY2C4YgXm7I

Do you agree with these intelligences?

Do you think it should be 'Jack of all trades' or 'master of one trade'?

and do you think there are other intellegences?

My very short response:
I agree. Jack of all trades, and yes and no: I would say spiritual intelligence, but that could arguably be a mixture of multiple of those.

Yep IQ is just based on a strict set of problems, and really only tests ones skill with those problems. It would seem to make more sense to exercise all parts of ones brain to get the most out of it, so I think its a good approach.

I've used this as part of my Jedi path since before I called it a Jedi path!! I haven't read any of his books yet, but I'm not sure how much of the categories are based on informal behavioural sets (I mean use of one involves use of many of the others to a lesser degree) or formal biological networks (distinct brain areas).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_multiple_intelligences

Adder wrote: Yep IQ is just based on a strict set of problems, and really only tests ones skill with those problems.

But since those problems are built to measure problem-solving capabilities, which are one of the ultimate foundations of human intelligence in any form it takes, it's still not a terrible place to start.

steamboat28 wrote:

Adder wrote: Yep IQ is just based on a strict set of problems, and really only tests ones skill with those problems.

But since those problems are built to measure problem-solving capabilities, which are one of the ultimate foundations of human intelligence in any form it takes, it's still not a terrible place to start.

I disagree. If an IQ test can be stated to be testing how well someone does at problem-solving capabilities (which I'm not convinced is true), then the results reflect how well someone is at tests that require problem-solving. There are two specific skills being utilized in such a test: test-taking abilities and problem-solving abilities. Furthermore, saying "problem-solving capabilities" like it's monolithic discipline is disingenuous. What kind of problem-solving? Someone who tests well in word problems rooted in linguistic reasoning may not do so well on problem-solving centered around spatial organization and geometric reasoning.

I think the value placed on intelligence is inherently problematic, not merely for social justice reasons, but because it's an ever-shifting goalpost skewed by cultural, social, and historical predispositions. While the conversation of multiple types of intelligence is a divergence, it is not really getting away from the larger problem of privileging the abstract and pretentious thing we call intelligence.

If you're an intrepid soul, you might be interested in this related piece by Stephen Jay Gould called Curveball which was written in direct refutation to The Bell Curve which tried to suggest that there is hard data supporting the lack of intelligence among black and Latino people.

I think I've like to point out that IQ only really tests intelligence based on one's place within the current range... 100 is average but today's 100 is the not the 100 of the first IQ test.

Sent from my D6503 using Tapatalk