Fun Fact - if you've never noticed, at the end of the video when they review, you can click on any of the topics if you don't feel very solid on it - and it'll skip back to the precise part of the video where they taught you that. :-)
My sister works with mentally challenged people, and she was telling me one time that one of her clients didn't really know how to do stuff, like ride the bus and such, but could memorize full length pages of movie scripts, word for word. (Or something like that, I don't really remember the story to well) I honestly think it's amazing how intelligence can develop and show up in a person, one way or another.
@@kristianj.8798 It is kind of dumb, but to educate the kiddos in concise youtube summaries about academic topics, some feel that you have to stay hip to their jive to keep their attention (I agree that bbc sherlock is a really stupid show though, at least in the later parts)
People (especially in the education system) seem to believe that numerical thinking is what creates success, and anyone who is a brilliant numerical thinker is labeled as 'smart'. I'm a numerical thinker, but I don't think that makes me better than the creative/artsy students. I will never in my life be able to think of something off the top of my head and produce it on a canvas as well as some people I know, who can do so without batting an eyelash. Although some schools are recognising these different intelligences, I think it's sad that many schools only choose to acknowledge numerical intelligence, when there are so many people who have so much talent in different areas of thinking. The difficulties in these areas is debatable, but then again, it's a relative concept; different people are better than others at some things, and vice versa - that's why it's controversial, because there is no right or wrong answer.
"Numerical thinking is what creates success" just means "the economy rewards numerical thinkers". It doesn't imply anything about who's better than who, so talking about how you're not better than the arty people isn't really a sensible argument against policies that prefer numerical thinking. Also, "controversial" does not at all mean "there's no right or wrong answer". If it wasn't a factual question with one right answer and one wrong answer, it wouldn't matter enough for people to get angry enough that there'd be a controversy.
True. Although it may look it, I didn't write the post to show my side of the argument. I actually wrote it as a matter of opinion, so I didn't mean to start anything. In response to your comment on controversy, you do have a good point. I may have phrased my comment badly by implying that controversy is created by there being no right or wrong answer. What I mean to say here is, wherever there is a difference in opinion, regardless of whether or not there is an actual right or wrong answer, others will always argue about which opinion is right, because some people refuse to look past their own definition of 'right' and this is what creates 'controversy' in an opinionated argument. Luckily, though, this video has open-minded people in its comment section.
Stephanie Smith our world/School definitely only seems to want 1 type of intelligence But we need multiple intelligences to keep the world going and people happy. Sadly public schools seem mostly interested in numerical thinking
Stephanie Smith US schools/education actually valued oratory skills and language skills until the space race era, when the US government started prioritizing math and science in schools above subjects like English and history. I think it has a lot to do with the economy and global power. If the world could be dominated through art, you betcha schools would revolve around creativity.
Its shocking how backwards many schools are. I went to a gold school and the foret few days of every class each years started with "this part of the text book is wrong, but it's still on the test so try to remember it". Even basic things like Pluto as a planet, the tongue flavor map, large sections of history...
My Government teacher once asked us; "Who is smarter, a Scientist or an African Bush Man?" and when everyone answered the Scientists, he asked the second question: "How long do you think the Scientists would survive in the African bush?" Its a question I still ponder today.
Since the scientist is smart, he will not go near the African bush due to it not being a suitable habitat for him. Or if he did, he will bring the necessary food, shelter and supplies in order to survive.
Anthony Mogavero He was speaking in metaphor, not what he may or may not do. I understand where your coming from, but you are missing the point entirely.
Well, that's just pointing out the difference between knowledge/training/experience and intelligence. Also, physical ability: If you dropped Stephen Hawking in the African bush, and then were like "see, he's not really smarter than an African bush man!" when the lions got him, that wouldn't impress anyone.
That last question would depend on, what scientist that scientist is. :p Perhaps that scientist is a geologist that does regular trips to places with very hostile environments.
Everyone is intelligent to a certain extent, I think it all comes down to curiosity, interest, motivation and hard work. I dont deny the fact that genetics and outside factors play a role.
So, how many different kinds of intelligence are there? And what is the G-Factor? Eugenics? Have you ever taken an IQ Test? All of these things play into the fascinating and sometimes icky history of Intelligence Testing. In this episode of Crash Course Psychology, ***** talks us through some of the important aspects of that history... as well as Nazis. Hey, I said some of it was icky.
Swe3ets Welllll, since this comment section is spiralling into the weird part of youtube already... The tears (lizard people) are coming to herald the illuminated ones (illuminati) and free masons who are all working together jesus christ was crucified under a UFO on top of a pyramid and the earth is flat. All hail the coming of the tears, feeble minded humans! Your end will come soon.
On a less controversial note, thanks for covering this with some depth. I have taken several psych courses now and none of them really went into this much depth on the history of Intelligence Testing. I appreciate the additional knowledge :)
Yikes! Even fascists like Crash Course! I'm gonna hazard a guess that they're not regular viewers, but if they keep watching then it might do em some good. So in this case...feed the trolls, maybe.
My favorite quote is by Albert Einstein and it goes “everybody’s A genius but if you judge a fish on its ability to climb a tree it’s going to live its whole life thinking it’s stupid” or something along those lines. I think as a society we spend too much time pointing out others flaws and how they are inadequate instead of helping grow their talents and Encouraging them to learn more about what they’re good at.
Personally I am terrible at social and emotional intelligence. I have ASD and I’m not the best with communication but I’m really good at learning and researching new information and making sure it’s not from fake sources.
Yea, it's always amazed me how different kinds of intelligence can manifest. Take one of my best friends from college. I'd love to have long chats with her about developmental psychology- she would explain the interesting things she learned in class (my major was completely different but I enjoyed hearing about it). You'd hear her and think "smart woman." But this is also the person who went upstairs with our player guy friend who had had a few drinks and wanted to "show her his new mattress" and then was SHOCKED when he tried to make a move. That's just one example of her confounding lack of common sense and perceptiveness. Yet, if you asked me, "is she smart?" I would vehemently say yes. Odd.
+NovelsAreGay FuckImagination This miss here never said she was intellectual, mister smart ass. English is not my first language, and not even my second either, so you can't expect my English to be completely and entirely perfect. In fact, I am at my second year of the secondary school, and where I live, that would mean we have had three hours of English class a week, from september 2015 up untill now. Needless to say that my English is way better than most people of my class, since I'm fluent. If you're jealous at my reasoning, then go ahead, but keep it to yourself instead of bothering me with it. If you're a grammar Nazi, try to be less rude next time you correct someone. There are enough people in this world that aren't nice already, so make sure there's one rude person less on this planet. If you've read this far, I sincerely thank you for your attention.
I was expecting something intelligent to come out of Hanks mouth within the first few seconds and then suddenly the camera is zoomed in and Hanks cracked voice and he stutters and just says; "ah ah.. SMARTIEPANTS" ......... I legit just fell over on the floor laughing.
I have always been labeled a smart person, or even "the smart person". in high school that was pretty much my only identity, so it's no surprise that I have studied it myself, by observing my peers throughout our experience k-12. I went to a private K-12 school, so I had a prime place to make observations as I saw the changes in age and circumstance of people who I knew by acquaintance for at least 5 or more years. The school I went to is quite well ranked, and I can personally testify that all the teachers put in a lot of effort into their students. They make considerably less money working in the private school than they would in a public one, so they do it for the love of the job and take their jobs seriously. There is a hereditary factor in intelligence. I have seen that the people with the most natural intelligence most usually had one parent with equal or lesser intelligence in that same area. For example one of my peers, now studying for his degree in mechanical engineering, most likely got his natural ability there from his father who is a mechanical whiz himself, though not as well educated. By far though, I have seen evidence of intelligence in everyone. I have never met a dumb person or a stupid person in my life. I've only met people who make themselves stupid by the choices they made. I've not met any person with a mental disability who didn't make up for it in some other area of intelligence, for example my brother who has atypical autism, is near retarded in social intelligence but his numerical and mechanical intelligence is on genius level. He really likes robotics and wiring, as well as computers and I think he'll be a robotics engineer. I had a good friend who I often tutored in Biology and other science courses. Although I did give her extra help, she didn't need it because her brain was incapable of understanding, she only needed the information presented in a different way. Textbooks and lectures do nothing for her, while they are my specialty! So I was less of a tutor and more of a translator. If I were to say there is one measure of intelligence, I wouldn't say it was how good you were at math, or science, or music, or whatever kind of intelligence you're good at. I'd say it's your mental flexibility. How easily you can switch between different kinds of intelligence. There are many ways of learning and many ways of presenting information. I'd say that real intelligence lies in being able to learn through many different mediums well, instead of being really good at one of them. Basically, being very good at learning. That's one way I am supposedly "more intelligent" than some of my peers. I don't need much help understanding information no matter which way it is presented, through experience, lecture, tutoring, reading, experimentation, whatever. while some of my classmates need focus on one or two. Maybe that's what the G-factor is. How good you are at learning.
That's pretty good. I'm glad that you know you're good at other things instead of focusing on the things you're not good at. Most of the people I knew always got down on themselves because they weren't good at the stereo-typically smart areas like science or math, even though they way outpaced me in things like art or music. If you do find that you are ADD, I'd give you this advice: Never use it as an excuse not to live up to your potential. One of the choices that make people stupid is that one, that simply because they lack talent or have a disability, they can never do anything, or they can slip by achieving the average. Dare to defy the average.
Didn't really read the whole comment but , smart parents educate their children by simply being around their children and passing their knowledge in that way , another form of education , one that makes the child think in a different way (i'd maybe label it social xD) ) . I'd label inteligence as something that depends on your enviroment and not that much more , yea so thats my 2 cents (possibly xD ????)
Uh, no. First of all, your "observations" are probably completely and unintentionally biased, as our memories are never recalled accurately. Second of all, you are not adjusting for socioeconomic factors. Those friends who are working on their degrees and had a parent with "equal intelligence" (which I am assuming you mean educated) are more likely to go to college, because their families had the money to either send them to school or support them throughout college and they had good educational opportunities. That plays a HUGE role in future success that people like to ignore. Finally, your assertion that intelligence is hereditary and that it has "more to do with mental flexibility" is wrong and baseless without proper citation to back those claims. In fact, research has been conducted to explore inherited intelligence, and it's just not true.
@Renae Borzatti: i had to stop after he started talking about that mechanical engineering and his "observations". Wondering how he views things today though.
Renae Borzatti I’m sorry but I don’t think you have any idea what you are talking about. It is common knowledge that intelligence is largely hereditary. In fact, it is the most hereditary non-physical trait. I saw a study recently that showed a 0.7 correlation between children’s intelligence and that of their parents. Even anecdotally, this is almost always the case: a child’s intelligence will be close to that of one or both of his/her parents. I’d be glad to source anything I commented on here.
I love how Inspector Gadget was on the thumbnail for a video about intelligence. The irony is that intelligence is something Inspector Gadget severely lacks.
I seriously can not be the only one who screamed when Hank said Sherlock Holmes and the adorable graphic of Sherlock came up with his little scarf and everything :DD
I have a class with a woman who insists that I'm "the smart one" because I'm good with numbers, but she organizes the volunteers for an ENTIRE HOSPITAL! I'm not nearly that good with people; she has very high social intelligence.
It would be interesting to include studies or subjects around people with learning difficulties into this! I for one have read about dyslexia and other associated learning difficulties and how they are dealt with and theories of how they develop, and these books are often filled with statements about how dyslexics intuitively learn and specialise in skills without the use of language, and how dyslexics are more emotionally and creatively intelligent. I know that there is little on the subject cause we know very little about them, but it would be interesting to know what you could come up with!
serious question : are bodies intelligent? since our immune system processes information on bacteria and infection to solve issues on our body, are our bodies intelligent?
Dark words on a light background become the keywords, while light words on a darker background become the keywords. Love the graphics and the lessons just think that the words you want to emphasize mostly get lost. Thanks for making these videos. They are entertaining and informative, much like a talented teacher.
+jordan w I hope you know education is mostly about memory than intelligence. I went to medical school with a lot of "intelligent" people who couldn't solve simple puzzles we were presented with during some subjects.
TheVariableConstant Sorry, but biology, chemistry and maths are subjects relying mostly on inteligence not memmory. Though medicine trully is mostly a memorising game.
I find it interesting how genius and madness are two sides of the same coin. The most intelligent people always have a little crazy. I also usually see brilliance in "mentally ill" people.
The two things have no correlation. There are plenty of intelligent people with mental illnesses, and there are plenty of morons with mental illnesses, and there are plenty of mentally well people who are smart, and plenty who are dumb. This idea that the two are related is just something someone said once that people like repeating.
I think multiple intelligence theories have survived because people don't want to feel dumb, so instead of accepting that someone is simply smarter than them, they want to say that someone else is smarter than them on one subject but they can still be smarter in this different subject.
I think the host has all the types of intelligence Sherlock has plus the emotional or social intelligence. He is creative and has made a lot of money from his creativeness, he has gained a lot of experience and has a lot of information on all kinds of stuff and he is a great communicator.
I'm interested in the malleability of intelligence. I've never seen a study on the matter but I know empirically that my "intelligence" varies greatly depending on many short term variables like my mood, confidence, sleep cycles and even what I ingest. On the other hand when I was a student I was dubbed the "stupid kid" and even my teachers treated me as inferior (things were weird back there). That not only affects my confidence level to this day, it also, I would wager, affects my results in whatever intelligence tests I might take in my life.
I see a lot of people commenting that school is mostly about rote learning useless information rather than teaching us to problem solve and think creatively. What I always found is that things are marked to represent all of these. (this is just my experience) To get 40% or just pass one only needs to rote learn all of the necessary information, to get 60% or more one needs to be able to apply this information to problem solve and to get 80% or more one needs to use creative problem solving and analytical thinking. That's why question papers are structured to have questions like what is a hyperbole, then use a hyperbole in a sentence, then read this passage that has used persuasive language, has it been effective, why/why not? I've often felt like this is why some of my peers might feel that in class we were taught how to solve 1+1=? and then in the test it says add up all the numbers from 1 to 100. It's because we are, if you use creative problem solving and analytical thinking you can realise that if you add 1 and 100 and then 2 and 99 and 3 and 98 and so on you always get 100 so all you have to do is say 101 x 100 and divide by 2 and you get 5050. Or you can come up with some other way... there are plenty. Am I the only one who noticed this or am I just totally wrong? Or maybe my curriculum was just different from other countries? Also I may just be giving poor examples, it's been a couple years since school.
I recently joined mensa but I don't consider myself intelligent. The test was basically one kind of question 50 times over where you tried to find patterns which is something I'm particularly good at.
Well mensa tests in general focus on logic, critical thinking and problem solving, which are one of the main attributes of intelligence. Any dumb-ass can learn 10 rules. But to find loopholes/improvements/think of new rules/find connections in them, THAT is intelligence.
Fisho D Not entirely true. Mensa actually gives you two tests. One is the Stanford-Binet which is more widescale, the other is the Wonderlic. Stanford-Binet tends to lean more towards creative problem solving, vocabulary (and the ability to figure it out if you don't know the words), and spatial recognition, whereas Wonderlic tends to focus more on analytics and math.
I took the test in Turkey where there were 50 questions and all of them were this 3*3 9 box grid with the bottom right piece missing. You had to guess which square would fit that place. The challenging part is getting 50 question in 20 minutes imo. I am not sure if vocabulary is an indication of intelligence. Problem solving and creative thinking seem more relevant to me.
Letters from a Psychopath Nah. They're taking the Wonderlic, which is one of the tests that American Mensa administers. IMO it's the harder of the two. The questions get logarithmically harder as you go along. Getting all 50 q's is pretty much not happening.
I've known people who were brilliant academically, but their children had mediocre abilities and vice versa, so I've always thought that intelligence being chiefly inherited is overstated. Mozart, one of the greatest European musicians, had two sons who survived him; one was musical, but never achieved the greatness of his father, and the other had little musical ability at all.
I don't exactly know where I stand on IQ testing. I've done extensive research on both IQ and neuroplasticity. Most of what I read claimed that IQ tends to be mostly fixed and mainly hereditary, only fluctuating about 5-10 points in either direction throughout one's development. I will admit that environment does play a role in IQ, but I don't think it's a significant one. Most people don't believe me when I tell them I'm dyslexic. Mainly because I'm quite decent at reading and writing. Although, sadly, math is my Achilles Heel. However, I attribute my success with reading and writing to the program I was put in when I was in grade 2 (I'm in grade 12 now). The program helped me with my phonological awareness, which I scored in the 75th percentile when I was 15. So if I wasn't put in that program, I might have scored below average instead of average on the IQ test I took. Lastly, I have an average IQ overall. So I'll probably never be capable of a career in science like I've always wanted (specifically psychology). It was hard dealing with this at first, of course. But I've accepted the fact that I'm medicore. And I don't think there's really anything I can do about it. Even despite the "mindsets" Carol Dweck invented.
I like my way of thinking about it. Intelligence is the volume of information you have retained and Wisdom is the ability to apply what you have learned. People today care nothing about wisdom and you rarely hear anyone seeking it.
I like the way math competitions deal with creative answers. You can argue your point and then scorers look at your argument and accept your answer as an unique interpretation.
Interesting concept. I feel institutions have labelled intelligence as the ability to receive high scores on tests, overshadowing the numerous sides of intelligence. It's ludicrous to assume that intelligence comes in a single form, while emotional and creative intelligence take a back-seat to assumed intelligence.
The honors kids in the high school I went to thought they were better than anyone else because they got better grades. Then, they'd do stupid things like spend minutes on a trying to push a door open because they didn't read the sign that says "pull."
i got straight Cs in highscool. also have a vocabulary and reading speed beyond most teachers, a firm grasp of most natural sciences and a general knoweledge of most civilizations between now and 0 BCE, and a fractured knowledge of several civilizations going to 2000 bce. Im a fucking mess
what holds back the truly intelligent is the fear of physical confrontation. knowing that the loudest and or biggest usually wins is quit daunting and intimidating, so much so that the mater at hand is never really resolved
I love that this guy seems to see how absurd "measuring intelligence and creativity" is - while showing us how academics have tried - much appreciated!
IQ testing is one of my favorite things!! IQ testing is so complex with many factors that can be associated with various results. It definitely requires proper training. There are some people whose “intelligence quotient” cannot at all be defined with a single IQ score. That happens when a person’s abilities are not within a reasonably expected range of each other. I’m totally one of those people, lol
Sometimes I think knowing your IQ can be a bad thing. It's like knowing how you're gonna die, it affects how you would normally do things. I was tested as a youngster and I guarantee I didn't apply myself in school as much as I wish I had because I figured my high IQ meant I was entitled to not try as hard. I would have rather not ever been tested and had the "I'm fundamentally better" idea put in my mind in third grade. It is difficult to quantify anyway, I believe everyone has a set of strengths and weaknesses that make us all fit a niche, or make our own niche, and that can't be illustrated in a simple number.
The problem with “emotional intelligence” is that it, by its own definitions, is measured relative to a particular culture of values and norms. In fact, it sounds a _lot_ like what the Nazis were doing with their pseudo-IQ tests. Emotional intelligence is just a politically correct term for level of social indoctrination.
Intrafacial86 Interesting point. Similarly, I disagree with Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences, as it was not even measured at all; that is something to think about. I’d rather speak of the multiple intelligences as abilities, but definitions always shift, after all. But back to your point, it seems then that it really becomes a philosophical issue of ethics - of the question of what is good and what is bad, or whether there is a hierarchy of values independent of cultural social norms. Whether you truly believe in ethical relativism or a more objective type of morality, it dictates your worldview as well; the latter (belief in objective morality) points to a fact that there is indeed a standard of behavior that one can conduct one’s self emotionally that is “emotional intelligent,” as there is a proper way to conduct and manage one’s emotions (of course, the definition of “intelligence” in its use attached to “emotional intelligence” is also to be considered). Still, the presence of terms such as “maladaptive” psychological defense mechanisms and more point to a general agreement that there is an ideal and not so ideal behavior, showing that there is, in fact, a proper way to conduct one’s self, including emotionally.
I won't lie, I subbed a month ago off a suggestion but just now actually watched a video. For that I apologize, but it seemed it was about book reviews? Probably not, either way I found this highly informative and the whole reason to sub was to learn. This was accomplished. I Really like your format & plan to view from now on. So thanks Crash Course you guys do a great job. Now to watch the uploads I've missed
Its brilliant to watch these videos but I would love to see some sources, as I am currently studying psychology myself. Thanks for uploading these, guys! Brilliant work!
what is the relationship between intelligence and creativity? if creativity is a factor of intelligence can it be measured? or is intelligence a factor of creativity? does creativity make someone more intellectual as they see things in other ways?
This video is actually quite good, and is pretty much in line with a book that I am currently reading about the topic. There is only one thing that struck me : I agree that Eugenics is a pretty dumb idea and violates most of the rules on how we think our society should work. But all studies with monozygotic twins which were raised appart, suggest that the ominous g-factor is heritable to quite a large extend (about 75% correlation in most studies). You are not saying anything against that, but you are also not mentioning it at all. I wonder if you have other evidence that is questioning these findings, or if the implications are just too politically incorrect for you to mention it.
I hope it's alright for me to add to this, although yes some monozygotic twins do show a shared heritable g-factor it doesn't necessarily mean it overrides other research that says a person's intelligence/g-factors can increase/decrease as time goes by and enough effort/training has been done to improve/worsen said intelligence/g-factor. From what I can gather, it's that there are different routes to getting to a certain 'intelligence quotient' destination/result. One can surely be born with, let's say, a disposition for a higher IQ while another, through certain courses/lessons, can be taught to think at the same level of IQ and thus attain a score similar, if not more than, of the person born with the higher IQ. I think when we speak of biological/hereditary aspects, it is true to a certain extent - such as how brain damage or a family history of certain mental conditions can affect your predisposed intelligence. But the environment has a role too, which is why there is a nature vs nurture debate and most people can agree that it's both but to a certain extent. And I could go on further, but I think what I could recommend is looking up 'Fluid Intelligence' and 'Crystallized Intelligence' as a kind of first step into this kind of discussion, understand their respective definitions and delve into research papers in regards to them on sites such as ResearchGate. Hope I've helped!
Sherlock would actually have terrible expertise. He is extremely good at solving mysteries and such, but this is at the expense of his other knowledge. There is one moment where he didn’t know that earth rotated around the sun, because it was outside his area of expertise
I once did an IQ test and I scored a mediocre 115. After I've done that test I done this test again (new questions) and because I now understood what they meant I scored a 135. Reason was that in my work as an engineer I solve complex problems so when I get a number sequence lie: 9, 18, 27, ? we tend to look first if prime numbers fit, Fibonacci like sequences. The problem is that people are primed to think in a certain way, if a test doesn't undo that prime or doesn't take it into account you get skewed results. When after the test it becomes clear that (n*8)+n is the algorithm in this case you go like: "Ermmm okay.... whoever thought of this?! Well this is easy." I took the next test with that pattern in mind seeking simple math algorithms and 135. I took another test years later and again scored around 130-135 but that was very much focussed on trivia, linguistic questions and rhythmic patterns, which as a former musician is innate to me. It's trivial for me to see countries and tell you which country it is because I am fascinated with travelling and world affairs. But someone who has no interest in Austria would not recognize it's shape. I hope everybody recognizes Australia though (was also one), as well as Greenland which is a bit of bitch ass questions because they first prime you with 2 counties asking which county it is: Austria and Australia and then they asked: To which country does this belong. So you have to know the shape of Greenland and know a piece of daft trivia that it belongs to Denmark. And they put in Greenland as an answer, because you are primed with two former answers I can imagine people instinctively are led to select Greenland instead of Denmark. So I remain a bit sceptical about how well these tests are , I am sure they can give an indication but I can get that indication from talking to people too.
Ser Arthur average 115? nah the average is between 85 and 110, with 110 being high average anything above that is pretty high, 115 is a pretty high score not mediocre
Reflecting what interest was for me really bending my intelligence for something new...this came now that intelligence can speak in a matter of picking up art in factors that they see upfront. I was bent as always to get a to B but not b to a to b.
Your nervous system is a complicated electrical and chemical machine, and intelligence is just how well it runs. There are lots of opportunities for errors and inefficiencies even among perfectly functional people. IQ is basically like assigning a number to how well your car runs.
I think what should be studied/tested is the potential of each individual to become increasingly smarter. Observing how putting effort into understanding something changes the speed of the learning process for every person. Because I mean.. many people are or _could be_ reaaally good in some fields, but they are just too lazy to improve, hence their level of Intelligence is not what it could be. And some people are faster at learning than others. So how good could a person be if they actually put effort into it? Say Edward would have an intelligence 1.4 times higher than he currently does if he just studied a certain amount of time, whereas Anna would only be 1.2 times 'smarter' if she studied for the same amount of time. I think it's kinda hard but doable..
Are there any studies on a general intelligence factor? I ask because my intelligence is about as general as it gets. I've come to know myself as a jack of all trades, master of none. I haven't experienced any of that kind of genius inspiration it requires to create something new. I can make observational representations of things when I draw or paint, but abstract? surreal? I got nothin' :p. Anyone here also like this?
yea that really bumbs me out to. I admire people that got certain skills that are waay more pronounced then outhers. Cause that means you got your path layed out before you (if you don't know what you wanna do in life). Im getting my 3rd bachelor degree now and still got no clue what im good at or where i wanna be in life
I'm a lot like that, I'm pretty good at everything, and not great at anything. But I found when I decided on one thing I liked to do the most, I could turn that one good into a great. Is there anything you find particularly inspiring or interesting?
RainAngel111 This is how I feel precisely. I didn't have anything to latch onto for the longest time, but I've really gotten into studying languages, I guess that's my niche. I mostly know Spanish, but I have an idea for French, German and Arabic.
Ja, ich lerne Deutsch, aber es ist ganz anders die Sprachen was ich weiß. J'etudí un peu francais. Suffisant que je peux dire qui je veux dire. En espanol soy lo mejor, relativamente. Definitely much room to improve, though.
I'm no psychologist, but I feel like what we consider to be 'G' is the ability to assimilate new knowledge. For example, some high school students take higher-level math, like calculus, and others are still mastering simple algebraic concepts introduced in middle school. What I find interesting though, is that this assimilation doesn't always translate to social abilities. (I am careful to say 'doesn't always', as I feel the stereotype of socially awkward nerd is accepted as a universal truth.) If in theory, intelligence was based purely on the ability to assimilate knowledge, one would hypothesis that an intelligent person would also have assimilated social and emotional cues. I am not sure that this would entail that intelligence and emotional intelligence are acquired separately.
***** The main problem being that this selective breeding is or was being done without anyone's express consent under the guise of it being in their or humanities best interest.
Intelligence is what all your brain can hold in it. Cognition is your brain's ability to organize, prioritize, understand, and process the stuff that goes in. Emotions are your, well, emotions, your Joy, Fear, Anger, Sadness, Disgust, and, for some, there are others, but most people have the main five running their Control Panel in Headquarters (thank you, Pixar). Learning is the ability to take stuff into the brain. If someone has an intellectual disability, their brain has trouble holding stuff. If someone has a cognitive disability, like me, their brain has trouble organizing stuff. I'm actually intellectually advanced, but cognition? That's another thing again. It's like having the world's biggest filing cabinet in your office, but everything in it is written in horrible handwriting and tossed in there willy-nilly. Someone with a learning disability has trouble getting new stuff to go in correctly. For instance, someone with dyslexia has trouble reading stuff, and so written information is something that their brain struggles to put places. Someone with an emotional disability has trouble regulating their emotions.
One definition of intelligence or understanding, is the apperception of patterns as such. Which means creating new information based on previous experiance. Like Sherlock Holmes do.
I'm extremely curious, I feel like i catch on to patterns faster then most people, and I feel like I remember things much better than most people. But I never really did good in school at all :p Intelligence to me is so unique to the individual that we probably will never find a way to appropriately measure raw intellectual power. Einstein once said if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life thinking its stupid... That's something to think about before we judge people or right them off as intelligent or unintelligent because they passed or couldn't pass a stupid standardized test based off of rogue memorization.
+BasePuma4007 I have seen and hired many people like you. The old company I worked for were all college people (we call it tradeschool over here) and college is a higher degree like a bachelor -- in the US this distinction is not made. But it was us that solved the big problems for IBM, ING etc. Simply because we had unique people who were outcast because education only focusses on everything. These people were smart in one area and indeed great in seeing patterns in that area. All generalists in IT and electronics engineering with their own quirky way of thinking -- which can be challenging to link this up. And often one of them comes with a solution but implementation was a bit shotty because that was not their main focus but then an engineer with experience in that area would polish that up (when it came to software coding and electronics refactoring it was I) So I learned that you need to give people like you and me a playground where they play to their strengths. Who gives a fuck that some don't speak English or can't read German or are not politically correct or even get lost on a highway (seriously that happened!) They are a genius in their piece of knowledge. Laugh about the weaknesses and enjoy each other's strengths that was what made this company I worked for great. And now as a freelancer I have a similar collection of people I work together with. It's good because everybody learns but we are also agile unlike corporations that only hire based on certification and achievements.
Intelligence is just a mathematical construction which has to do with correlation and comparison. And it makes only sense to compare humans with nearly the same environment. If you want to create a more general definition of intelligence where you can include even animals and computers you have to better understand what the brain really is. Probably the hierarchy of mental constructs, the parallel processing and other things play major roles in a general construct of intelligence.
I have read somewhere that emotional intelligence is not at all the same as SOCIAL intelligence. And there's plenty of proof out there, i.e. many artists, philosophers, writers, etc, who were emotionally intelligent but socially awkward: Beethoven, Charlotte Brontë, Robert Schumann, Glenn Gould, Giacomo Leopardi, Petrarch, etc.; it's a long list
I'm a Gifted and Talented student, and I'm tired of being put on a pedestal as someone who is very smart. My Mom even wants me to go to this super smart high school. But, I've been at a special school since 3rd grade, and I'm tired of being alien and inferior. All that I want is to go to a regular high school, with regular teens and try to act, well, normal. The problem is, my mother seems to have a hard time seeing my feelings. My dad, who is just the opposite, is passive when it comes to my mom, so he's no help at all. What should I do?
i say to embrace it, but if it really hurts, talk to your parents (both, so they listen and understand) i have asian parents and they just call me dumb and stupid so you're very lucky ahah
How did it go? As a smart kid who went to an average or below average school, I can tell you it sucked. I was treated as an alien and subjected to extreme social exclusion. I had no friends until much later in life.
@@anonygent I didn't go to the school that my mom had suggested, but I did enter the AP program at the public high school I chose. It's going surprisingly well, actually. As a matter of fact, I just finished my last AP test for my sophomore year, and although the friendship thing is still hard, I did manage to find a couple of people who were like me and band together with them. I was worried for nothing, I guess.
About Holmes, does he really lack EQ? Allow me to raise a few instances: 1. In A Scandal in Bohemia, he disguised as a good Samaritan and organised a group of people to perform a hoax that fooled (for a moment) a top notch actress that is Irene. 2. In The Empty House, he played a grumpy book seller that fooled his best friend Watson. 3. He leads the Baker Street Irregulars, a group of street people supposedly difficult to work with. 4. He, in Charles Augustus Milverton, easily courted the Milverton's housekeeper (or maid? I didn't remember) within a short time. 5. In The Blue Carbuncle, he extracted info from a vendor by offering a bet, which Holmes knew his mark couldn't resist. And there are many occasions where Holmes shows traits of con artist and succeeds in communicating with clients and witness. So I don't really agree Holmes has poor EQ. He seems very good at dealing with people, at least when he wants to. That said, he IS a fictional character, and I think Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's idea of Sherlock Holmes changed somewhat over the decades in which the character was portrayed.
I've noticed that kids who read a lot of books at a very earlier age (5-10 years old) tend to be more intelligent than those kids who don't. I read the entire Harry Potter series by the age of 6 and many many more books that were supposedly too advanced for my age, and every person I know who did this ended being very smart adults too.
The last book in the Harry Potter series came out in 2007. You're either not an adult or you didn't read the entire Harry Potter series by the age of six.
Just a a thought, as I enjoy the rapid pace of your talky talky talky ness on vlog brothers and other places, here,you are throwing a lot of info without pause, hard to follow, so much...there is a lot of power in a pause every once in a while...
If only youtube let you pause videos... Or watch them more than once... What would be especially useful is if Hank made a list of the topics covered at the end with links to the relevant bits, so you could quickly jump to parts you didn't quite get.
If you're watching on a computer you can select the speed of the video by selecting the 'settings' button (aka the same button you click to chose the video quality)
As the fourth ranked one handed rubiks cube solver world wide in the world let me tell you, solving rubiks cubes fast barely correlates with intelligence as you've defined it. It does correlate with natural reaction times, finger dexterity, ability to mentally and visually track position and orientation of objects in 3d space fast and other weird stuff. Problem solving is only integral to one small part of the solution and you definitely get away with not being good at it if you're a master of everything else, a slow learning curve may also influence the beginning stages of cubing, where you're still learning new concepts, people who find that hard might feel discouraged to persue cubing further, but it barely factors into high level solving. Yes, this is just a very minor nitpick, ignore if you so wish.
