IMO the reason Slower learners are better in the long run is that they learn work ethic, and how to study at lower level classes. When they got to high level classes, that almost nobody is THAT naturally good at, they know how to study, where as the Algebra genious kid is sittin in class thinking "WTF! I should just KNOW this, I don't know how to study!"

that was my original argument......

within the context of our world, intelligence is not strictly determined by your innate ability

I was trying to relate to your discussion. And later on in it I was starting to agree with you.
Get your posts in really soon guys, I'm going to bed in like 5 minutes.

This post was edited by kegman909650 on Dec 11 2008 11:17pm

It doesn't make sense if you missed this part:

If you could somehow measure how much knowledge you gain, then your known intelligence could only be as high as the sum of all gained knowledge.
By definition, though, known intelligence cannot not be actual intelligence because it would not be constant, and it would never reach the limit (iffy statement) and as far as I'm aware and according to definitions given throughout this thread, intelligence would have some sort of predetermined limit


Lol I wish my thoughts were that organized, but yeah it's the same idea. Btw where do you live? Your state must have the best high schools in the country because I never could have understood any of this crap when I was a sophomore.
About the relevance of A = BI, would it even be possible to know what I is without knowing A? Though, being that any set value to any of those variables is illogical because we have no units to measure any of them by, I'm just getting confused. I guess undefinable variable math is one thing my intelligence has a harder time with grasping.


Well, one caveat concerning practical intelligence is the necessity for a comparison, being that there aren't really defined intelligences. Basically, calling a person intelligent because they understand/know advanced calculus has to be relative to another known (or estimable) level of intelligence (which obviously has to be a less complex math). I kinda feel like I'm just sifting through the semantics though. Advanced calc is, in the relative site of high school, a highly intelligent skill, so you're 100% correct.

Another interesting point, or rather a reinforcing point to previous thoughts, was brought up when I talking about this a few minutes ago with my brother.
If you are born with a predetermined intelligence, i.e., a limit to your capability of understanding, could a 5 year old child be said to be as intelligent as a 30 year old? I would assume not. But why not? My brother argued that your intelligence develops, but that implies growth, which goes against the idea of it being predetermined. It was then that I remembered that awesome equation Keg just came up with, and boom slammed it in his face. It makes perfect sense, too. Two people of drastic age differences are easily able to have the same capacity for understanding, but generally the younger you are, the less gained knowledge you've acquired, lowering the overall intelligence level.

shit man
this is probably the most interesting thing subject i've ever talked about on JSP.

This post was edited by chiefwiggum654 on Dec 12 2008 12:35am

errrr

the reason a 5 year old child isn't as "intelligent" as a 30 year old is because its mind isn't even mature. maturity is not necessarily the same as growth. Also, at such a young age, an infant's mind is very receptive; i would say it has a high capacity for learning.

This post was edited by Abstraction on Dec 12 2008 02:29am

Lol, yeah in reality that is a big hole in what I was trying to get across.
I was thinking more with the theoretical idea of one person, of a significantly lesser age than another person, generally being less intelligent due to less time to gain knowledge.


Ahhh awesome. I only wish there was a feasible way I could add a "speed of learning" variable into that equation.
It seems to vary significantly, especially when comparing different age groups, so it would probably take a ridiculously huge study to try to nail that one.

This post was edited by chiefwiggum654 on Dec 12 2008 02:49am

My take is, those who are intelligent have that ability or rather will to think. Sounds stupid...but I assure you not everyone thinks -- they just remember that type of question and remember how to apply it, but they still do well. Those people who are really intelligent will sit down and try to think about why this equation, or why that answer and see if it makes sense if you look at it more than one way... so yes, I guess even brilliance needs a little initiative.

I know this hispanic kid in one of my classes...typical hispanic kid, doesn't study, doesn't care (yes I'm stereotyping, but the half of our school population is hispanics and blacks...and most are quite lazy), but that kid is actually really smart. He'll hand in a math test or chem test before anyone else can finish and still get a decent grade of b or above...thats natural intelligence, he puts in minimal effort and it yields an okay grade.

That's certainly a more creative way looking at it than we've been yammering about.
Do you consider yourself to fit that definition?

Not for every class no :\...I can get away without studying or even paying attention in Calc or maybe Physics, but in chemistry I had no motivation to think so much...so I just memorized without thinking...because when i thought i over thought things XD, and i would just confuse the hell out of myself...so yea, basically if I'm interested in the class i can fit the definition of motivated thinker

Ah, sorry if this sounds rude, but I'm glad you don't fit it perfectly, and I didn't think you would.
Not because you aren't smart (you're easily one of the smartest guys here), but because you put the definition of a desired trait over your head, so to speak.
What I mean is that instead of arrogantly making it fit what you already are (like a lot of people here might), you objectively recognized the strengths and weaknesses of your own intelligence and created a definition you could strive for.
Perfect example for what you defined intelligence as, really.

Sounds like I'm slobbering all over your cock, I know, but I really have a lot of respect for genuine humility.