[xlr8r]

That's because if I laid out every step, you'd be here for hours and the words would start to blur together(because I'd just be saying things we both already know).

No problem for me, thanks for the concern. If something requires hours, it is not wise trying cut the corners. Feel free to lay every step. Actually, it is the best way to avoid misunderstandings.

I'm asking you what argument you are making and why. You seem to just be randomly criticizing things, and I don't see their reason. That's all...

Your words.
"in the majority of situations, this person will have the highest understanding," and that depends on the wider situation, the culture, basically whatever is emphasized as intelligent by you or the social traits you subscribe to.

I do not see how they can be true. Your successive explanation has not relation with these, furthermore you dismissed my synthesys as trolling. You just could refuse to explain.

 

[Purrfessor]

@tangosthenes
Well I've always had trust issues... lol
edit: And I like your software/hardware analogy.

 

[tangosthenes]

No problem for me, thanks for the concern. If something requires hours, it is not wise trying cut the corners. Feel free to lay every step. Actually, it is the best way to avoid misunderstandings.


Your words.
"in the majority of situations, this person will have the highest understanding," and that depends on the wider situation, the culture, basically whatever is emphasized as intelligent by you or the social traits you subscribe to.

I do not see how they can be true. Your successive explanation has not relation with these, furthermore you dismissed my synthesys as trolling. You just could refuse to explain.

Hence my question of potential vs actuality.

If Jim wears a hat because it's rainy, but he lives in a country that kills people who wear hats, is that intelligent? Or is it intelligent that Jim thinks in his head that he knows that he will be killed, but fuck it, I'm going to wear a hat anyway.

Now, in order to figure out whether Jim was smart, we have to know his goal. We cannot project a goal onto him, because who knows what the hell Jim values?

If we don't have a preference, we can't make a decision.

So how could we measure intelligence without knowing that Jim does or doesn't want to die?

 

[Kingpin]

What about the least Intelligent MBTI types (Again please be honest and don't be politically correct)

 

[saksham]

its intp.......well they are really born briliant....and then comes me....entp...

 

[mushr00m]

This thread is ricidulous.

 

[xlr8r]

Hence my question of potential vs actuality.

If Jim wears a hat because it's rainy, but he lives in a country that kills people who wear hats, is that intelligent? Or is it intelligent that Jim thinks in his head that he knows that he will be killed, but fuck it, I'm going to wear a hat anyway.

Now, in order to figure out whether Jim was smart, we have to know his goal. We cannot project a goal onto him, because who knows what the hell Jim values?

If we don't have a preference, we can't make a decision.

So how could we measure intelligence without knowing that Jim does or doesn't want to die?

I know we communicate in a different way, so I will not repeat always the phrase "if I well understood what you are saying", just you make as if I say it every time.

I think a lot of factors here are totally unrelated with intelligence. I go for intelligence as known as capability to understand situations and solving problems. What you are asking is to know "motivations", but they do not count.

Maybe Jim is ill and can not get wet, and he has an important task to go, like going to bank to pay mortgage or he will be foreclosed.

So. Jim needs money and he decides to rob a bank, knowing he will be chased and probably arrested. Is he intelligent to do so? Well what an absurd question is such? Do you really believe intelligence can be measured in such a way?

Of course a good heist, like those of the movies with planning electronics and masks is a good sign of intelligence, but I doubt you wanted say that.

 

[Flipit]

This thread is ricidulous.

Definitely. Self-praise and unquenchable desire to debate results in ridiculous threads spanning pages.

 

[StElmosDream]

This thread is ricidulous.

Considering how many never even get officially tested unless they present possible learning difficulties or actually pay for the test with a certified professional, when intelligence becomes questionable.

I prefer the notion of reading 5-10+ books on a subject knowing more than the average person as a consequence of learning or the idea that something becomes more masterable after 10,000 hours (that and maintaining current knowledges).

 

[mushr00m]

Considering how many never even get officially tested unless they present possible learning difficulties or actually pay for the test with a certified professional, when intelligence becomes questionable.

I prefer the notion of reading 5-10+ books on a subject knowing more than the average person as a consequence of learning or the idea that something becomes more masterable after 10,000 hours (that and maintaining current knowledges).

Indeed. One has to be careful when making such an assertion of lack of intelligence in another considering all the types of intelligences that exist, people's learning styles etc and then there is the bias of someone on an online forum stating a whole group who falls under a set of cognitive preferences are less capable of intelligence. It's all based on speculation and their limited subjective worldview based on whatever contributing factors that weigh in. I wasn't quite sure what you meant in your second paragraph Elmos, would you mind re-explaining, doh, see, that's also another example of different ways of taking in information, haha! xD

Definitely. Self-praise and unquenchable desire to debate results in ridiculous threads spanning pages.

It's all ego masturbation, the need to hold others down to feel better is surely a sign of some undeveloped intelligence on their behalf or just naivety.

 

[StElmosDream]

I wasn't quite sure what you meant in your second paragraph Elmos, would you mind re-explaining, doh, see, that's also another example of different ways of taking in information, haha! xD

So you have not heard the theory that after 10,000 hours of learning or training in one discipline a person becomes 'an expert' at something i.e. how the best athletes are often the ones that train for 10 years + before entering a world level competition? Or the idea that knowledge to a point can be gained from studying a specific topic for long periods, compared to peers that may 'know a subject' but never research its theoretical basis.

 

[mushr00m]

So you have not heard the theory that after 10,000 hours of learning or training in one discipline a person becomes 'an expert' at something i.e. how the best athletes are often the ones that train for 10 years + before entering a world level competition? Or the idea that knowledge to a point can be gained from studying a specific topic for long periods, compared to peers that may 'know a subject' but never research its theoretical basis.

I have now, haha!
A great example. Experience and commitment to a topic, a big factor weighing in to the learning process, to be able to master a subject, to grasp it's disciplines on a much deeper level. There is an integrity that comes with handling knowledge for sure.

 

[tangosthenes]

Indeed. One has to be careful when making such an assertion of lack of intelligence in another considering all the types of intelligences that exist, people's learning styles etc and then there is the bias of someone on an online forum stating a whole group who falls under a set of cognitive preferences are less capable of intelligence. It's all based on speculation and their limited subjective worldview based on whatever contributing factors that weigh in. I wasn't quite sure what you meant in your second paragraph Elmos, would you mind re-explaining, doh, see, that's also another example of different ways of taking in information, haha! xD






It's all ego masturbation, the need to hold others down to feel better is surely a sign of some undeveloped intelligence on their behalf or just naivety.

No u

Anyway, I'm not sure where you got that idea.

 

[xlr8r]

How many moralistic comments were added here.

I guess they have a nice pat-on-the-back self esteem function.

All this contempt towards intelligence... reminds me "who has a nice car has a small penis". Why that is usually said by who can not afford a nice car, it remains a mystery.

 

[mushr00m]

^^There is no contempt, just overration and lots of confusion :kitteh:

Ill be off on my merry way, tra la la...

 

[Tharwen]

none. intelligence comes from determination to be intelligent. anyone can fail at this. however, i certainly thing istj's and esfp's are more liabe of going wrong at the idea of intelligence. but i think its more about instincts than type. i think these instincts have the kind of intelligence i value more: so sx(they as the wisest of all), sp so's(they see what is the most obvious thing, while im too in my head to notice the obvious stuff), sx so's(they seem to know the purpose of life) sx sp's(they see into people like no other) sp sx(they usually know things, despite the fact that they recklessly ignore negative consequences even when they know about it. i cant understand that mindset at all.) so sp's(good at manipulating people, and hiding their true motives.)

so yess.. i do think everyone has the potential for intelligence, but i think many forms of these intelligences are stupid, despite being a form of intelligence.

in my book, the most intelligent types in descending order: entp, intp, infj, enfp, enfj (the rest are liable to intellectual faults i cant see myself succumbing to.)

on enneagram: 1w9's, 5s, 4w5's, 6w5's and 9w1's are the ones i see most intelligent. but theres a one major flaw i see in 1w9's: ok, we strive to do everything perfeclty.. make everything the most efficient, do everything as best as it can possibly be done. GREAT. oh, except i forgot to question the necessity of the task im doing perfectly, thus wasting time being perfect in something i shouldnt even do. like there was this one 1w9 who was perfectionistic about baking. hed intensely pay attention that everything is perfect. OH, except the fact, that these things are to be eaten, NOT for the eyecandy. im always fascinated when i see a 1w9 randomly doing something damn trivial, but somehting which must be done, in the best way possible in this existence. like today i saw a female striding nose high in a shop, just getting to the point, just getting what she needs, not wasting time for anything else. much like i, except i hate my chores so much that i usually get lost in my head instead of doing them, while im "doing" them.

How many moralistic comments were added here.

I guess they have a nice pat-on-the-back self esteem function.

All this contempt towards intelligence... reminds me "who has a nice car has a small penis". Why that is usually said by who can not afford a nice car, it remains a mystery.

its certainly true that people often compensate one lack with something else. thats irrational. (i do it myself too. what i deprive in intelligence, i know im intelligent but i dont allow myself to use it due irrational emotions about the subject. mostly im so certain that unhealthy things such as car gases, fireplace smoke, wheath and alcohol has damaged my brains, since people in my country dont tell me about those unhealthy affects, and a child cannot really deviate from the society's effects like that.. so im intensely demotivated from using my intelligence, cause i want all or nothing. oh, the area i compensate in, is beauty and charm. it just pisses me so badly that people in my country are so ignorant about things that damage brains, the thing i consider dearest, and ive already had a whole childhood of exposure to these poisons that are common in my country. hell, i know people for are pro-finns, and they support the mindset of finnish recklessness so badly, that they try to force me into abandoning my health concerns!! >=( )
but there are also people who are genuine car enthusiast's, and those who are generally obsessed with imaginary statuses, and if an expensive car gives that, they get it.

 

[Flipit]

How many moralistic comments were added here.

I guess they have a nice pat-on-the-back self esteem function.

All this contempt towards intelligence... reminds me "who has a nice car has a small penis". Why that is usually said by who can not afford a nice car, it remains a mystery.

At the same time it's quite ironic that once a person in position to state an opinion (i.e. one with high intelligence in this case) does so, he must be onto something. It doesn't take intellect to criticize a highly biased discussion.

 

[xlr8r]

At the same time it's quite ironic that once a person in position to state an opinion (i.e. one with high intelligence in this case) does so, he must be onto something. It doesn't take intellect to criticize a highly biased discussion.

So, where was the bias here?

 

[Flipit]

So, where was the bias here?

The original poster asks for subjective opinions on the most intelligent type. I don't see how that isn't biased.

 

[xlr8r]

The original poster asks for subjective opinions on the most intelligent type. I don't see how that isn't biased.

Well, maybe he just wanted some statistics... but anyway, why this derogatory behavior towards intelligence? A bias in this opinion does not mean that opinion can not be corrected, or that the object of that opinion can not be measured.