I will admit, the impression I give to others is one of intelligence. They hear my choice of words, my turns of phrases and they assume I’m in full command of the English language. Language is used to construct a certain reality or perception in others. They hear the concepts I use in general conversation, things like time, eternity, free will, virutal reality, ect. and they assume I’m of higher learning.
But let’s be honest. I don’t know jack shit about any of these things I talk about. I have few skills in life. I’m a faker. Sure I read a lot, but I have no opinions of my own.
Which brings me to this possible debate: Intelligence, is it something you are, or something you do? And how can you recognize the difference?
Don’t worry, I’ve never thought of you as intelligent.
More seriously, I was wondering today whether the whole of philosophy could be subjugated under the ‘will to appear intelligent’. It would explain its somewhat pathetic obsession with its own tradition, because it would make philosophy students merely people who wish to appear intelligent and so find others who appear intelligent (dead Europeans, mostly) and agree with them.
A tempting but ultimately bullshit way of understanding philosophy. The stuff of cynical teenage or middle-aged poetry.
Even more seriously, all virtues (and intelligence is a virtue) should only be talked about in terms of actions in the world. This includes words, but should be careful of ranking words above other actions.
The word intelligence is at once used to describe a universal human faculty, and the degree to which that faculty is possessed or demonstrated by particular individuals.
To my mind, one demonstrates intelligence when they demonstrated a comprehension of received data. The more intelligent among us not only demonstrate a comprehension of said received data but also demonstrate the ability to make wider application of it; to compare, contrast, and combine it with other sets of data.
Directly related to and connected with intelligence is memory, however, one must be careful to differentiate between the two. I myself do not consider someone who has memorized a great deal of information to be “intelligent” per se (e.g. savants who memorize innumerable statistics). I would consider such persons to be of gifted memory but not, at least by necessity, of gifted intellect.
One caveat to this is that I do recognize “types” of intelligences beyond the traditional cogitative type. There is undoubtedly a type emotional intelligence, and a type of bio-physical intelligence. However, the binding word is intelligence, my view of which I have already recorded.
It is not enough to have the information/data, it is needful to manipulate it, to make use and application of it in some way; it is a taking of that which is received or “known” and turning it over within oneself (thinking, which is an internal doing) so as to apply it outside of oneself (which is an external doing).
I would say that intelligence is your capacity to learn. Some people catch on to things quickly, can learn a variety of things with ease, these people are intelligent.
Some people have been arround , so to speak, and have attained a vast ammount of knowledge, yet would not be considered as intelligent as some others because of the ease at which they aquire new knowledge.
A 40 year old man starting unniversity may have attained more knowledge to date than the 20 year old man sitting beside him in class, but this doesn’t necessarily mean that the more knowledgable man(40 year old) is more intelligent. 1/2 way through the year the more wise or knowledgable 40 year old may be asking the 20 year old for help with a paper or a problem ect.
Intelligence is not the mass of knowledge attained but the faculty(or collection of facualites) by which we attain knowledge.
More seriously, I was wondering today whether the whole of philosophy could be subjugated under the ‘will to appear intelligent’. It would explain its somewhat pathetic obsession with its own tradition, because it would make philosophy students merely people who wish to appear intelligent and so find others who appear intelligent (dead Europeans, mostly) and agree with them.
some people ( a very small percentage ) are interested in using philosophy to better the condition of the world, they try to find systems which will benefit the majority of people the most, but not systems at the cost of the few individuals either. I will admit that I love challenges and puzzles, but I feel I have a moral responsibility as a rational thinking person to try to help work out systems that will benefit everyone. Naturally, few persons appreciate my efforts, but they will at least offer an alternative if they can be called that. It is tempting to play the animal eats animal game, but then I remember the existence of innocence in the world and I realise this innocence must be protected at all costs to avoid further pain and corruption. My personal philosophy is of course that anyone who deliberately sets out to destroy innocence should be destroyed in turn without a hint of guilt.
A tempting but ultimately bullshit way of understanding philosophy. The stuff of cynical teenage or middle-aged poetry.
i am glad you admitted this, and yet it might just be true.
Even more seriously, all virtues (and intelligence is a virtue) should only be talked about in terms of actions in the world. This includes words, but should be careful of ranking words above other actions.
[/quote]
someone might still have the potential to do something intelligent and hence they are. sometimes doing nothing at all is an act of intelligence, of course.
==============
I think from the moment of conception, we were already equipped with intelligence. isn’t it intelligence when cells divide and group together to form the skin, or the bones, or hair, etc. and they make sure no bone is mixed with the hair or skin.
Each living being from highest to lowest is endowed with intelligence proportionate to its requirement in it’s life work and activities. So a dog can never talk like a human being or a cat can never bark like a dog. Or a plant can never run like an animal.
How can we recognize intelligence? Adaptation is one method living beings, not just humans, use to fight against the destructive conditions of nature. For example the flu virus mutate, so maybe last years flue vaccine is no longer effective to this years flu virus.