A New Book On Intelligence

[Ten thumbs]

There are cases of high musical intelligence arising where there is no history of music in the family and the child is given active discouragement in this field. Here the intelligence seems to be derived neither from a genetic nor an environmental source.

[Superhorn]

  I'm not sure about the claim that those with greater intelligence necessarily earn more than those with less. You can be highly intelligent and not be able to get a high-paying job. I'm this this is true of many people. A highly trained musician in a symphony orchestra doesn't earn anywhere near as much as a Rock star,for example.

[Renfield]

I knew I had forgotten at least one thread I was due to respond in, a few weeks ago...

Hi Renfield,

[...]

Well I thought this was a good one:

http://www.psych.utoronto.ca/users/reingold/courses/intelligence/cache/1198gottfred.html

It is indeed: Gottfredson is an important researcher in the field.

By the way, do you think the upper limit of a person's intellectual ability is set by nature or is environment really a powerful factor ?

By virtue of my professional and personal choices, at least where psychology is concerned, I do not 'think' (in that sense): I examine evidence.

However, if I were to 'think', I would first ask where this concept of such a 'limit' comes from, before opining on its possible origin.

And I would also insist on clarifying that you are (or must be) referring to measurable mental capacity; not overall 'coping skills in life'.


Now, I will still opine that most of what is discussed in the present thread that purports not to be 'opinion' (and might thus be potentially useful for something other than curiosity over others' views) is not new.

More so, it is not particularly exciting, either, in so far as it does not give any particularly useful answers or food for thought beyond providing grounds for casting off-topic political aspersions on views that (at least in so far as the scientific sources are concerned) are intended to understand how something works, viz. human intelligence differences, rather than what they imply for society and its values. Arguing over elitism stemming from research that is not complete is reminiscent of arguing over the problem of taxation of intergalactic trade routes, and its implications for social equality: it assumes too much. What if there aren't any such routes, and people use wormholes, instead?

What if the sociopolitical issue is a conjunct to the results from the study of intelligence, in this discussion, rather than their implication? Of course, I am not saying this discussion is prohibited: but I would want there to be some thought on why it's taking place.



That having been said, my woefully presumptuous pontification over, here is an extremely important source for anyone interested in intelligence:


Neisser, U. (ed.), 1996. Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns. American Psychologist, Vol. 51, 2, 77-101.

(Report of a Task Force Established by the American Psychological Association.)


Without exaggeration, this is the single most authoritative document published on human intelligence, from a scientific source.

[karlhenning]

There are cases of high musical intelligence arising where there is no history of music in the family . . .

(* raises hand *)

[karlhenning]

  I'm not sure about the claim that those with greater intelligence necessarily earn more than those with less. You can be highly intelligent and not be able to get a high-paying job.

Quoted for Truth.

[drogulus]

There are cases of high musical intelligence arising where there is no history of music in the family and the child is given active discouragement in this field. Here the intelligence seems to be derived neither from a genetic nor an environmental source.

     There may be no history of physics in the family in the case of physicists. I don't think that means there is no genetic cause. What disguises the genetic input is that the more deviation from the mean you get the more likely is the regression from that peak. The children of geniuses are not often geniuses themselves. High intelligence does run in families, at least for a while, but very high intelligence doesn't. It skips around, probably because several genes located in different places have to turn up simultaneously, like a straight flush.

[lisa needs braces]

Eric's threads could use e/n tags.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=e%2Fn

[Ten thumbs]

     There may be no history of physics in the family in the case of physicists. I don't think that means there is no genetic cause. What disguises the genetic input is that the more deviation from the mean you get the more likely is the regression from that peak. The children of geniuses are not often geniuses themselves. High intelligence does run in families, at least for a while, but very high intelligence doesn't. It skips around, probably because several genes located in different places have to turn up simultaneously, like a straight flush.

I'm inclined to agree. That is why I qualified my statement with the word 'seems'. In any case in historical cases it is generally difficult to trace an extended family tree. All that can be said is that there are no known antecedents.

[drogulus]

I'm inclined to agree. That is why I qualified my statement with the word 'seems'. In any case in historical cases it is generally difficult to trace an extended family tree. All that can be said is that there are no known antecedents.

     Yes, and also we should be a little bit careful about assigning "musical" and "mathematical" to variants of genius as though these were types of intelligence. What I think is likely is that there are components of intelligence which in some permutations almost demand that a particular use be put to the resulting aptitudes (math and/or chess), and more commonly there are mixes that would accommodate many possibilities, which might produce a super-generalist like a Da Vinci (a different rare permutation). Since geniuses are IMO just like us but more they will have characteristics that are familiar in the rest of us.