I'll take a break when every other group of people in society who are discrimnated against takes a break.

Since when did math = inteligence?

Always?

So a person with a mental disability and IQ of 80 who is is able to instantly tell you the Sqaure root of any number to 4 decimal places is smarter than the poet lauriet who doesn't know algebra?

No, they're equally smart, but in different ways.

They are?
the first guy I described is not functional without a person helping them in every task, and more often than not can't tell you the time of day or learn any new skills.

Another person with the same disability opens up the phone book every day, goes to the next person down the list, rides his bike to their house, and rides back.
Is he not as smart as the guy who does squareroots? They have the same IQ, same fuctional capacity. One is able to ride his bike, the other is able to recite squareroot tables. Another person could tell you who won jepordy on any given date in the past 20 years...

Yes, they are. If one person is particularly good at one thing, they are intelligent in that respect. An idiot-savant or however that's supposed to be spelt is indeed intelligent, whether their particular forte be playing a piano tune after one hearing with perfect accuracy, drawing a map of London after a one-time helicopter trip over it, or whatever else. A poet laureate isn't any more smart than said idiot-savant on the virtue of his forte being in a different area (read: an area that people find much easier to recognise as "intelligent", as his deficiencies, if any, are not related to and do not affect communication, for example). Then you just get people who are good at about anything. *shrug* It's just the way it works.

I think this argument is coming down to semantics around' intelligence'.

It is.

Then you would agree that one who is more inteligent is not going to solve the game puzzle faster than one who is less inteligent. And that math ablity does not equal inteligence.

Right.


I was just objecting to the doubt you expressed at that possibility in this post here. Your original point I agree with to some extent, although I find it dubious that someone would question themself in any serious manner about their intelligence simply from the result of such a puzzle. (I'm one of the ones that buys magazines full of logic problems and sits at them for hours at a time (not that I'm claiming that makes me smart) and my lateral thinking ability is ridiculously low when it comes to problem solving. But I don't take that as a measure of my intelligence, and I'm not sure other people would (which would indeed require this to be considered "harmful."))

If it is any help, there are different 'kinds' of intelligence.

I'm not sure if your aware of this term, but Harvard students recently made the term Heterocentric popular. Meaning, telling a group of students and adressing the women and saying 'Get yourself a good man' is a deragatory Heterocentric statement that insults the LGBA community.

I think thats a valid point.

Just as in the past the word 'negro' was deemed to not be used because it reminded people of a society where blacks were discriminated against, and that is wrong.

Just as movies and telivision shows that show the Mother as a person who does not have a job and who's only concern is taking care of the children is not good for our society because it makes women feel they have a place and should not go outside of that.

So to, statements said repeatedly about equating inteligence with math or logic skills, or puzzles or games, or using the term irrational as a deragatory word creats a sciencentric society which descriminates against people without such leaning by labeling them less intelgent. As if inteligence was any measure of a person's worth in the first place.

"Intelligence" - a measure of the ability to learn. The more intelligent one is, the more quickly one learns.

"Knowledge" - a measure of what an individual has learned.

"Wisdom" - a measure of an individual's ability to utilize knowledge.

Daganev... the intelligence thing was a joke the guy was making because it took him a year to solve. He was making a joke to excuse himself because he was embarrassed. No one's implying that you're stupid if you solve it quickly; in fact, it could very well mean that you just have above-average lateral thinking skills.

Give it a rest.

This is what was said.. "While some students would solve the problem right away, others would struggle all semester. It had taken Dr. Duke well over a year himself, and he would always explain that the smarter you were, the longer it took to figure it out."

Somehow that statement got ment to say, if you know math and logic really well, which means your smart, your not going to be able to figure it out quickly.

If cron wasn't so angry at me for stating its not a matter of brain fuction but rather a matter of experience with these types of games, I would not have felt the need to explain why such statements show a sciencentric bias.

I tried the donkey site, some I found increddibly easy, some I found fustrating and cheated by finding similar puzzles on the net. I realized, it had very little to do with what type of puzzle it was and much more to do with if I've seen that type of puzzle before. I.e I found the first Pun puzzle to be impossible and searched the net for the answer, but when I saw the second pun puzzle I got it immediatly.

Not true, as far as I know and in my opinion. Intelligence, insofar as it can be measured by standardised tests such as the Intelligence Quotient, is a measure of particular ways of thinking and even certain aspects of knowledge to some extent.

Intelligence is a very subjective term, actually, and a measure of it is hard to agree upon and is often not seen as valid by many professionals, anyway.

EDIT: EG. Dyslexia inhibits certain ways of learning but is not seen as inhibiting intelligence.

Dyslexia inhibity a Type of learning, but not your ability to learn.

For example, lets say there are 3 ways to learn, Visual, Audial, and Tactile.

Dyslexia will inhibit Visual learning, but not Audial.

someone who is intelegent will learn when all 3 methods are given, and the more inteligent they are the quicker they will learn with one or all of those methods.

However, someone who is not inteligent, even if all 3 methods are given, will not be able to understand what is being taught.

I'm dyslexic and a visual learner, ironically.

I know, I thought that's what I said. Sorry.

IQ tests generally suck because they test knowledge and wisdom, not intelligence

Knowing how to solve a given puzzle because one has experience solving said types of puzzles is wisdom, not intelligence. Solving a given puzzle that one has NO experience, whatsoever, with, is an expression of intelligence.