I've heard of eight of those types, but existential was new to me. There are so many factors that can easily make someone seem smarter or less smart than they really are. Being less smart just means it will take more time and effort to accomplish something, which means a less smart person potentially has more to gain.
It does!! I was in a facade that this was some 1 million views video, and was eager to enter comment section and see some diverse set of arguements/discussions lol
Awesome video, subbed. It’s frustrating seeing someone get ridiculed for something they don’t understand(or have any experience trying to understand) by someone who is very experienced in that area. I have a friend who can tear down and rebuild car engines and knows how to do anything farm related, but is not linguistically intelligent.
I really hope that doesn't bother your friend, I know it's hard to be smart but not being good at expressing yourself using words (i was a kid recently soooo yeahhh)
As a 30 year old who has a degree in both computer science and physics from a large state college, and works as a software developer, and has been called smart my entire life, I think it really is shallow thinking to consider people like that unintelligent. I had a pretty big ego going into college since I breezed through high school, being drum major in band, the ace pitcher on the baseball team, a great social life, and came out of that high school with the highest ACT score they ever had, not getting validictorian because I refused to do homework for things I already knew. I worked at Sonic when I was in college to pay rent, and it humbled me that I found people there who I considered just as intelligent as me, if not more, but they were 40 and working to afford to feed their children. I went into it thinking I was above those people and continuously found they had more insight into the world, far better emotional intelligence, and could problem-solve under pressure far better than me. After doing that I would find when I was working in an observatory later, my fellow researchers would know theory through and through, but couldn't do anything practically, people who I considered far smarter than me in the traditional sense. I think the truly intelligent people (I worked under some professors that stressed this to me) realize that the traditional idea of "being smart" is BS, like Einstein (supposedly) said, “Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
I entered the comment section to expect atleast a thousand comments and then saw at subscriber count... and views. This is some really well researched science here and well put information, I wish this blows up soon. And he really roast iq tests lol (i closed my eyes to listen after 30 secs into the video, sorry but the images distract me 😭)
BRUHHH I watched the whole video, came to like it and I am amazed to see you've just began your youtube journey. This video was empic bro keep doin this'
The multiple types of intelligence are not accurate. They were described as types of intelligence to gain more attention for the theory, but it is actually just an idea of what kind of talents a person can have. IQ tests are accurate to some extent. Research shows that high test results are linked to high performance in different school subjects and work. You can interpret IQ test questions differently however, making it less accurate but absolutely not as innacurate as you claim it to be. You are not a psychologist or an expert on this field in any way.
mfw i just realized im more of an intra/inter-personal guy than logical. Probably why I've always been the class' comfort guy. They didn't teach this at school. W vid
I'd argue that these types aren't completely independent. Having great spacial skills is going to make it easier to visualize logical problems, understand the position of your body in 3d space etc. I think it would very difficult to be a great linguist if you suck at absolutely everything related to feelings and logic. Making or appreciating good music is going to be enhanced by understanding feelings, pattern recognition, awareness of your body etc. I'm pretty sure logical, spatial and linguistic questions are on IQ tests because these have the highest correlation to other forms of intelligence plus it's hard to assess kinesthetic and musical ability via a written test. There are certainly issues with IQ tests but IMO they do as good a job as you could reasonably expect from a written test of that length. I think it would have been worth touching on things that improve or damage cognitive health too. Keeping mentally active challenging yourself in different ways, healthy diet and sleep etc, avoiding things like lead exposure, treating epilepsy, avoiding head trauma etc, these will all help maintain a healthy brain and their effects will show themselves in IQ tests too.
348 subs damn, i'm really early Although I think that genes decide your potential intelligence, not actually how smart you will be, that was a good video! You got a sub
For how many subscribers you have, this is really impressive. Like seriously, this is quality over quantity right here (if only the algorithm would see it that way though). Great video, I think I might have a lot of existential intelligence and logical as well. I'm glad I got to stumble on this video, thanks for making it! (also I think this is comment number 69, so that's noice.)
These 9 forms don’t exist tho? It was a theory made by Howard Gardner and has been criticised for lacking empirical evidence. On top of that these views are subjective and rely heavily on experience. For example, you said that there could be 2 people with different strengths and weaknesses, like writing and math. Then the question remains why that is. To assert that this result in their vastly different skill set comes from an inherent difference in intellect means that you also somehow deduced that this couldn’t have been an environmental factor. Or maybe a personality trait. What if one person just likes writing more than math and vice versa? Is intelligence merely a means of saying that someone is good at something? To say that someone has a high intelligence in writing and a lower one in let’s say math means that their potential in the areas of math is lower and not that they aren’t as good in math as in writing. Is there any proof in that regard as to whether someone’s skill is correlated with intelligence? Then there’s the problem of experience vs intellect. Being street smart isn’t actual intelligence as it is defined. For example, no one wakes up and just knows how to get around the streets. It’s a learned behaviour and therefore not the same as intelligence. Intelligence is something that in inherently in you without the need of outside interference. Someone who is smart is going to have high potential, that doesn’t mean they will definitely exceed at something. Also there is a clear correlation between being good at for example math and languages. That is where IQ comes from. It started as a study of students’ academic performance and if being good at one subject meant that you could infer if good grades in one subject meant good grades in others as well. And there was a clear correlation that there was indeed a correlation. The more widely accepted view on intelligence is that there is some kind of general intelligence G factor that determines your overall smartness if you could call it that
Honestly a lot of this is cope. No, iq does not tell the whole story, and there are exceptions as to when we would call someone smart or not who could score highly on an iq test (albeit rarely, but examples like "idiot" savants who do not have many of the qualities associated with being smart). There is such a huge overlap with iq and the rest of these nine types of intelligence that it honestly is fair enough to quantify it into a single number. A person who can score high on an iq test is many times more likely to be intellectually superior compared to one who cannot in all these nine fields.
the question "what is the meaning to life" is inherently flawed. its more of "what are the meanings to life" because there isn't just 1 meaning of life and it the answers are different for everyone. for example, i'd never game end myself because even if i lose everything and eveyone waking up to see the sunset is nice enough for me to want to live the next day.
If you actually have a very high level of intelligence, you will be smart enough to realize just how smart you are. And it means that often, you will be the smartest person in the room while growing up. But the moment you encounter someone that is smarter than you, on that rare encounter, it might be a lawyer or someone, it will fill you with sheer terror. Utter and complete terror. Because you have based all of your defensive mechanisms on being smarter than the person across from you. When you encounter someone smarter than you, you realize there is nothing you can do, you can't stop them from manipulating you and you can't outsmart them. And because you don't know how to deal with this situation, it sends you into a complete panic.
1:02 oh btw Language is way harder than science. Im serious. Language s rules are seperated, you cant do language by... no, sign language doesnt count. There are no verb tellers on your hand. But there are 10 fingers. And thats a lot. Idk tho.
amazing video, you channels is gonna a blow up. my channel is similar to yours and i am looking forward to working with you in future. thank you from the nerds club!
A flaw is that we don't know the thinking process. Also I think creativity and ability to create art is a huge part of intelligence because you need to understand a lot of concepts.
i have an offer for you you receive a sub, we receive more videos like this, with interesting topic presented in simple way with a bit of humor keep doing what you doing bro
