What is being Really Intelligent?

[ChrLzs]

OP, just step away from the Thesaurus..

or..

..perambulate in a vector directly opposed to that which you might imagine connects you to the publication containing alphabetically or functionally ordered synonyms.

[libstaK]

If you can't say it simply - you really aren't saying anything.

[Frank Merton]

I've always thought that one should use the word that best and most exactly expresses the idea you want to convey, and if that has to be a two-bit word, then so be it. Thing is, it almost never is.

[JGirl]

OP, just step away from the Thesaurus..

or..

..perambulate in a vector directly opposed to that which you might imagine connects you to the publication containing alphabetically or functionally ordered synonyms.

amen

If you can't say it simply - you really aren't saying anything.

totally agree

[behavioralist]

Intelligence is to be fully alive to the difference between having fallen into the plans of diabolical elders and in roles they deprecate, and consummating unmolested prospects.

The bliss of ignorance, for example, is simply that your role means you don't have to rise to any challenge. Why can't you love a challenge? Because your curiosity is loyally bound to a conditioned rut. It can go wherever commonplace vernacular takes it.

"The working class hero... ---still f______ peasants to me!"

Refute the grip corruption has on your development and your lot is no less than you deserve. Bliss!

As for language, why do they call it "mandatory schooling"? Because you're just effing peasants to them too, except in their case it's because you are not vile enough to win ugly. There is more language, for saying more things more concisely, while most do tend to feather out the impression they are hoping to make with it, because corruption is the social paradigm and actual Learning and research are like carrying your Brothers in the Marathon.

Edited January 7, 2014 by behavioralist

[ChrLzs]

??? I'm beginning to suspect a bot, actually. I mean first it was ridiculously overdone verbiage, now it is sentences that make no sense whatsoever and it is answering questions never asked with solutions that aren't applicable or are meaningless...

But perhaps I'm just not worthy. Either way, I'm out of this trainwreck..

BTW, quoting one of Marianne Faithfull's most brilliant pieces of vocalisation isn't cool in this context - she is viciously concise with her renditions of rapier-witted lyrics (in this case from John Lennon) and those two are both wordsmiths WAY out of your league..

[Leonardo]

Intelligence is to be fully alive to the difference between having fallen into the plans of diabolical elders and in roles they deprecate, and consummating unmolested prospects.

The bliss of ignorance, for example, is simply that your role means you don't have to rise to any challenge. Why can't you love a challenge? Because your curiosity is loyally bound to a conditioned rut. It can go wherever commonplace vernacular takes it.

"The working class hero... ---still f______ peasants to me!"

Refute the grip corruption has on your development and your lot is no less than you deserve. Bliss!

As for language, why do they call it "mandatory schooling"? Because you're just effing peasants to them too, except in their case it's because you are not vile enough to win ugly. There is more language, for saying more things more concisely, while most do tend to feather out the impression they are hoping to make with it, because corruption is the social paradigm and actual Learning and research are like carrying your Brothers in the Marathon.

So, I was correct way back in my first post in this thread and this is an anti-authority diatribe?

What you misunderstand regarding "schooling" is part of our very nature.

You approach the issue as if we were all selfish beings, entitled within ourselves to behave precisely as we desire to - but this is only half the story. We are social, selfish beings and, because of the social part of our nature, it is incumbent upon us to learn to be, and behave, in accord with others. Our societies are a careful (or not-so-careful) balancing act of this duality of our nature - allowing the freedom of individual expression while at the same time impressing upon us the need for accord and harmony.

Your 'solution' would have society develop into a sort of "Lord of the Flies" anarchy and would be ultimately detrimental to all.

[ChrLzs]

BTW, I can't let that bad quote of Marianne Faithfull's rendition of Working Class Hero stay uncorrected.

The correct lyrics, in context, are:

...

A working class hero is something to be

{they} keep you doped with religion and sex and TV (tv, tv..)

and you think you're so clever and classless and free

but you're still ******g peasants as far as I can see

Great song from the great album "Broken English"- one of the five albums I'd take to a desert island..

[SpiritWriter]

We are all intelligent in different ways. It is important to know the ways you are intelligent and try to see the ways of others intelligence and let those things grow instead of being tied into a system that tries to define intelligence. Yes there is a genius aspect or phenomenon among various groups but I think that also would be very broad in its definition. Some people are just as intelligent as other seemingly intelligent people, but the former was unable to express it for any number of reasons. True intelligence is either untapped or speaks for itself upon its display.

[behavioralist]

We are all intelligent in different ways. It is important to know the ways you are intelligent and try to see the ways of others intelligence and let those things grow instead of being tied into a system that tries to define intelligence. Yes there is a genius aspect or phenomenon among various groups but I think that also would be very broad in its definition. Some people are just as intelligent as other seemingly intelligent people, but the former was unable to express it for any number of reasons. True intelligence is either untapped or speaks for itself upon its display.

Perhaps you feel you are applying the quote from Jung, but even Jung was incapable of stepping back from his own duplicity, so his conclusions are limited by his conscious prospects, the conscious "possible"; which is like "chaos" math that can't make chaos the possible, the purview of real perception and intelligence.

There is an inference in your statement that there is wisdom in being gulled (while science states that we are gulled more readily if we were abused more by parents; all abused kids know "real superheroes" they have met in person, but in disguise); or conversely that there is no such thing as being gulled.

And if there is no being gulled then there is no commensurate degredation of the perception, and people vary in the verisimilitude of their perception only the way crabs are less senstive to pain than rats.

It is true that the insensitivity of a crab is not its stupidity, but its wisdom. It's chances of survival are millions to one, reflecting its prolificacy, so it needs to be cavalier about risks, while elephants must take quite the opposite perspective. But I don't see being gulled in quite this light, but rather as de-evolution, despite that science has uncovered that the deepest dissembled culpability arises from being gulled the worst, which is to say that a conspiracy gulls its new recruits to the highest degree and must seek them from the ranks of the abused.

[SpiritWriter]

Perhaps you feel you are applying the quote from Jung, but even Jung was incapable of stepping back from his own duplicity, so his conclusions are limited by his conscious prospects, the conscious "possible"; which is like "chaos" math that can't make chaos the possible, the purview of real perception and intelligence.

There is an inference in your statement that there is wisdom in being gulled (while science states that we are gulled more readily if we were abused more by parents; all abused kids know "real superheroes" they have met in person, but in disguise); or conversely that there is no such thing as being gulled.

And if there is no being gulled then there is no commensurate degredation of the perception, and people vary in the verisimilitude of their perception only the way crabs are less senstive to pain than rats.

It is true that the insensitivity of a crab is not its stupidity, but its wisdom. It's chances of survival are millions to one, reflecting its prolificacy, so it needs to be cavalier about risks, while elephants must take quite the opposite perspective. But I don't see being gulled in quite this light, but rather as de-evolution, despite that science has uncovered that the deepest dissembled culpability arises from being gulled the worst, which is to say that a conspiracy gulls its new recruits to the highest degree and must seek them from the ranks of the abused.

All of us are being gulled, we grow in wisdom but in different ways. I know something you don't know sort of thing. Intelligence is not that. Intelligence is a measurement at any current state in comparison to a peer group, no matter if you are abused etc... it is still a measurement. But a thing like that is hard to measure and probably hard to quantify enough to talk about, I will admit I had to re-read your post to see what you were saying as well as look up the word GULL.

Am not incorrect in what I stated in my first reply.

[SpiritWriter]

My Jung quote is in reference to God, nothing to do with this post.

edit: although I know it can be applied to different things, but that was the idea I was thinking of when I put it on my signature, nothing at all to do with my response here. It may apply somehow though, it is pretty broad.

Edited January 9, 2014 by SpiritWriter

[behavioralist]

So, I was correct way back in my first post in this thread and this is an anti-authority diatribe?

What you misunderstand regarding "schooling" is part of our very nature.

You approach the issue as if we were all selfish beings, entitled within ourselves to behave precisely as we desire to - but this is only half the story. We are social, selfish beings and, because of the social part of our nature, it is incumbent upon us to learn to be, and behave, in accord with others. Our societies are a careful (or not-so-careful) balancing act of this duality of our nature - allowing the freedom of individual expression while at the same time impressing upon us the need for accord and harmony.

Your 'solution' would have society develop into a sort of "Lord of the Flies" anarchy and would be ultimately detrimental to all.

A solution has to be devoid of authority, or it will serve the one with authority better than anyone else.

I see no rational way to explore authority without exploring duplicity. The more to gain the more duplicity is "justified". If I am exceptional at duplicity, would I use it to sell oregano-joints in the park?

Nothing applies as much of the mind as submitting what one needs to explore together in a form devoid of authority. Do I want to suddenly believe with all my heart that the mother of Jesus was "assumed" bodily into heaven, because some old farts in the most pretentious garb on Earth have decided to declare it so?

I produce the most difficult text on Earth because I have absolutely no authority. Only the reader's own intelligence, where it matters nothing to him/her if I live or die as long as I left the Words, and where the Words cease to matter once understood because uinderstanding will Always generate new and more complete iterations, is of any interest to me except as symptomatic.

[TheSpoon]

The way you write is extremely inefficient and has way more potential for abuse or 'duplicity' than the conditioned simplified and mainstream way we vocalize our opinions. Does it make us less 'intelligent' to be used to interpreting and responding in a more simple more efficient way, yea sure. It also extinguishes many fires, with anything the more you complicate the larger room for error there is and in turn the more you would analyze to interpret and respond correctly. The more you analyze the more you question, the more you question the more you analyze. All of this is extremely harmful to our worldwide industrial complex and blind lust for fiat currency.

On the other end though, the way you write was also conditioned at one time. Cynical people have used the misdirection of a over complicated and vague way of speaking throughout history. Not sure what the goal was and I am not sure if I understood you correctly because I did not whip google out, Ha HA! Interesting read though was fun trying to decipher, had a mental image of myself in a spy agency crypto room deciphering code 100 years ago.

[kreleroll129]

Intelligence does NOT meant knowing something. It is not measured by a knowledge like knowing definitions or something.

Intelligence is learning from a past experiences and using THAT kind of knowledge for solving future problems. Obviously, some have more life experience than others. But that doesn't mean that they are more intelligent. Kid can be more intelligent than a kid, theoretically. So, you can have a lot of life experiences but if you don't learn from those, you are "dumb". But, if you learn a lot, and I mean a lot from past experiences than you are intelligent above average so Really Intelligent.

[Frank Merton]

An "intelligent" kid is one who plays a good violin or learns another language or is a whiz at solving math problems. Is he so smart? All that gets him is more hours practicing or reciting irregular verb conjugations or solving harder math problems rather than playing baseball.

[behavioralist]

Intelligence is the awarenes of the scope intelligence most grasp Before it has ceased to serve the unscrupulous. A violin or baseball is very coached, very "yes boss".

How do you encourage a miniscule scope, saying that applyingt oneself to it is intelligent? Do you say that economic and political advancement are earned by scrupulously monitoring integrity and suitability? Do you say that understanding how people interact is a normal human faculty, and all social disparity is consummately functional so that all minds should be at rest; no one's complacency is misplaced?

[Flipping]

"I am so clever that sometimes I don't understand a single word of what I am saying"

Oscar Wilde

Is it a cheap shot to borrow a quote from google? Perhaps it is a certain miss to pretend to have an original idea.

Chess used to be a major passion for me and a teacher once asked who is smarter?

A) the person who has played 10,000 games of chess.

Or

the one who has played only 10 games.

Perhaps the rock is smarter as it is able to resist the temptation to engage n Aphoria.

Yes, has to look that one up the first time ...

[Flipping]

"I am so clever that sometimes I don't understand a single word of what I am saying"

Oscar Wilde

Is it a cheap shot to borrow a quote from google? Perhaps it is a certain miss to pretend to have an original idea.

Chess used to be a major passion for me and a teacher once asked who is smarter?

A) the person who has played 10,000 games of chess.

Or

the one who has played only 10 games.

Perhaps the rock is smarter as it is able to resist the temptation to engage n Aphoria.

Yes, has to look that one up the first time ...

[+joc]

Intelligence is what people access to figure stuff out. It's infinite.

[Frank Merton]

My father use to say, and I'm sure he got it somewhere, that it isn't what you know as what you are able to look up.

[White Crane Feather]

Intelligent is as intelligent does. Did I already say that ?

Anyway. Forest gump would be proud.

[SHaYap]

intelligence is only applicable when applied to a comparable level of intelligence around it ... otherwise it might just as well be madness or insanity ~

[thyra]

Intelligence cant be spotted by any of those which are less than that intelligence. If one is saying such and such is intelligent/has intelligence than that person has to possess at least as much intelligence as that has it or he is just repeating the idea of somebody else who had as much intelligence as the one who is identified as intelligent. Intelligence when in static form cant be noticed but it is seen through the product or presented idea. So actually intelligence is only production of a thing/presentation of an idea in a shorter or in a more efficient way than some other could think of in the first place. what somebody else would never be able to think of or invent or produce or present in art form is not in the scope of intelligence.

Edited January 11, 2014 by thyra

[Leonardo]

A solution has to be devoid of authority, or it will serve the one with authority better than anyone else.

I see no rational way to explore authority without exploring duplicity. The more to gain the more duplicity is "justified". If I am exceptional at duplicity, would I use it to sell oregano-joints in the park?

Nothing applies as much of the mind as submitting what one needs to explore together in a form devoid of authority. Do I want to suddenly believe with all my heart that the mother of Jesus was "assumed" bodily into heaven, because some old farts in the most pretentious garb on Earth have decided to declare it so?

I produce the most difficult text on Earth because I have absolutely no authority. Only the reader's own intelligence, where it matters nothing to him/her if I live or die as long as I left the Words, and where the Words cease to matter once understood because uinderstanding will Always generate new and more complete iterations, is of any interest to me except as symptomatic.

All of us crave authority, be that the exercise of or the submission to. It is intrinsic to us as part of our social nature.

You crave authority by the fact of proposing a "solution".

There can be no solution without authority, because such a solution would require us to not be.

Edited January 11, 2014 by Leonardo