^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
think about it dude. Doing something requires some REASON to do that thing. The default is to do nothing. Rocks don't think because they have no reason to. What would a rock want to think about?Monderegal » 10 Aug 2022, 3:16 pm » wrote: ↑ I'm a little confused. Purpose? How does that apply to intelligence?
FOS » 10 Aug 2022, 4:30 pm » wrote: ↑ think about it dude. Doing something requires some REASON to do that thing. The default is to do nothing. Rocks don't think because they have no reason to. What would a rock want to think about?
what is in the interest of a rock?
what could possibly be part of some rock agenda?
your confusion seems from the innate human tendency to anthropomorphize everything. We like to pretend things are sentient when they are not.
purpose has primacy over sentience. Our purpose is reproductive fitness. It is evolution.
If my ancestors did not increase their reproductive fitness for say...inventing the gun...then I never would have inherited a talent for inventing things.
The very simple model of evolution has very deep consequences about intelligence and about the nature of human beings. I actually see fascism as merely a corollary to the theory of evolution.
Reacting to stimuli is not sentience.Monderegal » 10 Aug 2022, 4:54 pm » wrote: ↑ Doesn't AI also have some underlying purpose if it acts in response to some stimuli? You ask Alexa to play a song and does it. The reason is what you asked it to do. I also think making human existence a Darwinian struggle a relic and not in line with how all of us choose to live our lives. Catholic priests and monks for instance take a vow of celibacy. You can find this sort of behavior in many other cultures globally. Weren't not all just trying to score. Especially in cultures where pre marital sex is forbidden.
Your answer was reproductive fitness. Not all societies are closely linked but are in kinship and many places practice arranged marriages. In fact, this used to be the norm in Western societies. Perhaps I invented the gun but my wife was arranged for me long before. The Darwin argument is also misplaced since people want different things in partners. At least on the human level it's not just horns and feathers.FOS » 10 Aug 2022, 5:43 pm » wrote: ↑ Reacting to stimuli is not sentience.
And humans act as an entire society... not as individuals. Your question about priests makes as much sense as asking why worker ants cannot reproduce. The whole community is the organism not one man.
Science invents working social theories life exceeds evolving spontaneously here simultaneously now.Xavier_Onassis » 10 Aug 2022, 4:02 pm » wrote: ↑ In the case of omh, it means that he likes to hear the two words "death spiral" used together.
Intelligence is not a science, it is a mental ability. There are a number of different aspects of intelligence.
The ability to recall related facts is one, the ability to distinguish between logical and illogical statements is another.
Talent in creating music, artwork and literature is another. IQ tests measure some, but certainly not all of these.
there are various kinds of intelligence. Spatial intelligence, for example can help you navigate with no map, remember where your keys are, find your way in the dark, etc. linguistic intelligence can help you communicate a series of important points in a short time. Different types of intelligence can save your life during different types of crises.FOS » 10 Aug 2022, 12:42 pm » wrote: ↑ intelligence itself is a rather vague word and open to interpretation.
the IQ test itself has a measurable value known as g, which basically represents across the board performance on the test...e.g. a highly stratified score will have little impact on g. the measure g seems to correspond most to what we intuitively consider 'intelligence'.
g has also been demonstrated as the most genetically heritable part of the iq test.
IQ has been studied in tremendous depth. there are a LOT of studies and literature on this general subject and it is not philosophy...it is science. Unfortunately the results of the science seems to make liberals cry, so there is some fake 'controversy' about it. but you can go ahead and read what the scientists have actually discovered about iq and g etc. There is no replication crisis in this field. it is very highly predictive.
sure, it is sortof like athletics. people can be gifted in general but in order to be very good at something you do need training. FOr the most part g determines how long it takes to undergo this training, not so much what your plateau is. (whereas athletic ability is somewhat the opposite)
intellectual plane outside natural evolving equally timed apart in plain sight. Reality isn't a natural order, it is the nature of the beasts corrupting their own species arriving one at a time cradle to grave.SJConspirator » 11 Aug 2022, 7:53 am » wrote: ↑ there are various kinds of intelligence. Spatial intelligence, for example can help you navigate with no map, remember where your keys are, find your way in the dark, etc. linguistic intelligence can help you communicate a series of important points in a short time. Different types of intelligence can save your life during different types of crises.
intelligence is the mental acumen that has utility in the real world, I.e. being super philosophical is not a useful intelligence in my view because it renders no real world benefit for survival, success, etc..
If all the different types of intelligence are combined in a meta analysis, and one scores high on all of them, that person is exceptionally intelligent
Measuring intelligence using an IQ test is arguably a type of science, but it is somewhat crude and anecdotal at best. It is actually more like carpentry where all of the measurements are taken using sonar; i.e the ability to indirectly measure something using feedback.FOS » 10 Aug 2022, 12:42 pm » wrote: ↑ intelligence itself is a rather vague word and open to interpretation.
the IQ test itself has a measurable value known as g, which basically represents across the board performance on the test...e.g. a highly stratified score will have little impact on g. the measure g seems to correspond most to what we intuitively consider 'intelligence'.
g has also been demonstrated as the most genetically heritable part of the iq test.
IQ has been studied in tremendous depth. there are a LOT of studies and literature on this general subject and it is not philosophy...it is science. Unfortunately the results of the science seems to make liberals cry, so there is some fake 'controversy' about it. but you can go ahead and read what the scientists have actually discovered about iq and g etc. There is no replication crisis in this field. it is very highly predictive.
sure, it is sortof like athletics. people can be gifted in general but in order to be very good at something you do need training. FOr the most part g determines how long it takes to undergo this training, not so much what your plateau is. (whereas athletic ability is somewhat the opposite)
always hiding behind the "we" pronoun. I understand the kinetics to genetic eternal separation of reproductive results occupying time inhabiting space specifically here never same total sum again forward, as living in series parallel displacement.Skans » 11 Aug 2022, 8:10 am » wrote: ↑ Measuring intelligence using an IQ test is arguably a type of science, but it is somewhat crude and anecdotal at best. It is actually more like carpentry where all of the measurements are taken using sonar; i.e the ability to indirectly measure something using feedback.
The true science of directly measuring intelligence is still beyond our capabilities because we don't understand the exact nature of intelligence. We can't model it, we can't biochemically enhance it, or repair it or even precisely alter it. To do that we would have to fully understand the precise inner workings of the brain down to each chemical reaction inside of it acting in sequence. Then, we would have to devise a method of directly testing and measuring an individual's brain chemistry for performance. The IQ test, while useful and somewhat reliable, is far from being able to directly measure mental/intellectual performance.
what separates a fool from another person ignoring the same thing? The two are allies creating a deep state of mind secret that makes a person's brain choose silence over standing one's time against everyone standing the ground they conquered with conviction to deny life in plain sight.Jinn Martini » 10 Aug 2022, 4:06 pm » wrote: ↑ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The fool is trying to engage me !
Ignorance is indeed bliss . . . and you excel in it !
Skans » 11 Aug 2022, 8:10 am » wrote: ↑ Measuring intelligence using an IQ test is arguably a type of science, but it is somewhat crude and anecdotal at best. It is actually more like carpentry where all of the measurements are taken using sonar; i.e the ability to indirectly measure something using feedback.
The true science of directly measuring intelligence is still beyond our capabilities because we don't understand the exact nature of intelligence. We can't model it, we can't biochemically enhance it, or repair it or even precisely alter it. To do that we would have to fully understand the precise inner workings of the brain down to each chemical reaction inside of it acting in sequence. Then, we would have to devise a method of directly testing and measuring an individual's brain chemistry for performance. The IQ test, while useful and somewhat reliable, is far from being able to directly measure mental/intellectual performance.
Monderegal » 10 Aug 2022, 6:17 pm » wrote: ↑ Your answer was reproductive fitness. Not all societies are closely linked but are in kinship and many places practice arranged marriages. In fact, this used to be the norm in Western societies. Perhaps I invented the gun but my wife was arranged for me long before. The Darwin argument is also misplaced since people want different things in partners. At least on the human level it's not just horns and feathers.
SJConspirator » 11 Aug 2022, 7:53 am » wrote: ↑ there are various kinds of intelligence. Spatial intelligence, for example can help you navigate with no map, remember where your keys are, find your way in the dark, etc. linguistic intelligence can help you communicate a series of important points in a short time. Different types of intelligence can save your life during different types of crises.
intelligence is the mental acumen that has utility in the real world, I.e. being super philosophical is not a useful intelligence in my view because it renders no real world benefit for survival, success, etc..
If all the different types of intelligence are combined in a meta analysis, and one scores high on all of them, that person is exceptionally intelligent
A common archetype is the absent minded professor, maybe similar to idiot savant. That person makes intelligence into a kind of dual expression, where they are genius in some area but lack common senseFOS » 11 Aug 2022, 12:59 pm » wrote: ↑ people can have different sorts of talents...but i personally do not equate talent with intelligence. i guess it just depends on how you define intelligence. I see intelligence as a single scalar...people can simply be more or less intelligent. ANd idiot savants exist...a moron might have some amazing ability at mental arithmetic, for example.
also, human beings do not survive as individuals. THey survive as members of a civilization. Philosophical thought can benefit every member of that civilization and increase their chance to survive.
Or be corrupted by ideology,as in your case.Neo » 10 Aug 2022, 1:27 pm » wrote: ↑ Intelligence is a capacity to learn and apply knowledge, wisdom is gained from experience. Some of the most intelligent people often seem to have blind spots, they lack wisdom in certain areas. I do believe that Intelligence unchallenged will atrophy.
I think if you read what I wrote, you would realize that I am not "pretending that IQ doesn't measure something that matters". IQ tests are statistically valid, and yes, valid predictors of other things that do matter, I would never dispute this. What I question is whether this type of statistical analysis or statistical correlation is actually "science" or is it just another performance-based measurement.FOS » 11 Aug 2022, 12:51 pm » wrote: ↑ what makes something qualify as a 'science' is its predictive power. You may not trust IQ tests but the fact remains that they are very predictive. IQ can be correlated precisely with thousands of other things...from average income to the possibility of developing schizophrenia to the chance of dying in a car accident. And these things replicate very consistently over and over again.
whether IQ represents what you consider 'intelligence' to be is of course an open question because intelligence is a rather vague word.
but to pretend that iq doesnt measure something that matters is demonstrably false. It is 80% heritable so it must have a strong genetic component. And if you know a person's iq you can predict quite a lot about their future...and probably be correct. this may be uncomfortable for people who believe in free will, but it is what it is.