NationStates Jolt Archive

When did you realize the you are smarter than your peers? What event/situation cause you to know that you were way smarter than everyone you know?

The day I started playing NS! :p

When my jokes get beyond what they have learned about.




MY JOKES.


JESUS!

Eh, when I notice that on Friday nights, half of my college-mates like to get drunk, and the other half likes to go to dance clubs and bars.

Eh, when I notice that on Friday nights, half of my college-mates like to get drunk, and the other half likes to go to dance clubs and bars.


So half just gets drunk, and the other half dances, fails to get laid, and gets drunk?

So half just gets drunk, and the other half dances, fails to get laid, and gets drunk?

Yea that's basically it.

When did you realize the you are smarter than your peers? What event/situation cause you to know that you were way smarter than everyone you know?

I think it was when i was on the bus home from work and i thought to myself "without language there can be no such thing as rational thought because primal urges don't convey the concepts that words such as 'love', 'honour', 'being' and 'meaning' portray. Yet language is born of our ability to produce rational thought, and all creatures on the earth who don't have a language are severely lacking in philosophers - monkeys for instance, monkeys will never have a philosopher until they develop language because the urges they live by will never allow them to develop abstract concepts. Thus you could say language is both the mother, and the daughter of rational thought. Oh, it's my stop, and there's a guy drawing a picture of a penis on the bus-stop. Joy"

When did you realize the you are smarter than your peers? What event/situation cause you to know that you were way smarter than everyone you know?

When I had no friends.

I think it was when i was on the bus home from work and i thought to myself "without language there can be no such thing as rational thought because primal urges don't convey the concepts that words such as 'love', 'honour', 'being' and 'meaning' portray. Yet language is born of our ability to produce rational thought, and all creatures on the earth who don't have a language are severely lacking in philosophers - monkeys for instance, monkeys will never have a philosopher until they develop language because the urges they live by will never allow them to develop abstract concepts. Thus you could say language is both the mother, and the daughter of rational thought. Oh, it's my stop, and there's a guy drawing a picture of a penis on the bus-stop. Joy"

LOL :D

:D The day I started posting on General. Its taught me so much about human nature, that people love to bitch and bitch the same arguements, knowing they'll get the same bitchy arguement back. Just to go get drunk, sleep and do it over. In all seriousness the threads have -inspired- me to research more then I would have usually, and turned me away from Wikipedia.

I think it was when i was on the bus home from work and i thought to myself "without language there can be no such thing as rational thought because primal urges don't convey the concepts that words such as 'love', 'honour', 'being' and 'meaning' portray. Yet language is born of our ability to produce rational thought, and all creatures on the earth who don't have a language are severely lacking in philosophers - monkeys for instance, monkeys will never have a philosopher until they develop language because the urges they live by will never allow them to develop abstract concepts. Thus you could say language is both the mother, and the daughter of rational thought. Oh, it's my stop, and there's a guy drawing a picture of a penis on the bus-stop. Joy"

ROFL:D

When my jokes get beyond what they have learned about.




MY JOKES.


JESUS!

*snickers* It's a sad shot of reality, isn't it?

When you spelled smart wrong. :p

j/k

I think it must have been my first day at nursery school, when the other children were unable to discuss astronomy with me. I was deeply disappointed. Also, I was horrified when some of them didn't understand the word "particularly".

never happened. there are always smarter people about. i'm mr. average :(

When did you realize the you are smarter than your peers? i did not I am thick

What event/situation cause you to know that you were way smarter than everyone you know? only general knowledge quizes

When did you realize the you are smarter than your peers? What event/situation cause you to know that you were way smarter than everyone you know?

It was the day that I realized that I really didn't give a crap how smart I was. :)

Hehe, oh the delicious irony of making a spelling error in a thread about your own intelligence :p :D

When did you realize the you are smarter than your peers? What event/situation cause you to know that you were way smarter than everyone you know?
I never think that.
Pride comes before the Fall.

... I love the sense of irony here. People think it's ironic that the topic creator spelt smrt like he did, completely missing the reference in such a way that their irony is itself ironic. ^__^

I also realise that in at least one case, that statement is itself ironic!

Beautiful.

... I love the sense of irony here. People think it's ironic that the topic creator spelt smrt like he did, completely missing the reference in such a way that their irony is itself ironic.

That's good. We don't want to have an irony deficiency. :)

It was the day that I realized that I really didn't give a crap how smart I was. :)Paradox! Nooo!

Meh, I'm pretty smart. I hate the word smart it sounds so arrogant... Anyway, I'm smart but lazy. I normally do best in situtations where you're given very little time to prepare, if at all. So I can normally lead a seminar, but my essay marks are pretty crap because I just can't get the motivation together.

In other words. I tend to fancy people who can best me in an arguement. I met my friend's girlfriend's flatmate the other day. Woohoo, she's got a pair the size of melons. *lusts after those cerebral lobes* Oh, and she was quite attractive too. And the quality of her insults... :fluffle:

*giggles* ... oh dear god, I didn't realise it was that bad.

Hey, look at that. I didn't even respond to anything in LG's post. Meh.

I realised i was smarter than my peers when the history teacher said "Who started WW1?"

"Black hand miss." (Not true i suppose)

Who agrees (everyone puts hands up.)

What was the black hand.... tom!

"...i dunno miss."

"Why did you put your hand up?"

"Because Dave said itwas true."

[Plagarise Socrates]I'm smarter than you because I realise that I know nothing at all.[/Plagarise Socrates]

That's good. We don't want to have an irony deficiency. :)ROFLMFAO!!!

There's less smrt people, and lots of dmb folks in this world. :)

... I love the sense of irony here. People think it's ironic that the topic creator spelt smrt like he did, completely missing the reference in such a way that their irony is itself ironic. ^__^

I also realise that in at least one case, that statement is itself ironic!

Beautiful.

Wha?:confused: You've completely lost me there.

I knew how smart I was, when I found out about people who actually have to tell people they are smart. The real smart ones never actually say anything.

When did you realize the you are smarter than your peers? What event/situation cause you to know that you were way smarter than everyone you know?

Well, I could be qualified of "smarter" by some. I was two years early in school (I had my "baccalauréat" at 16 while the average french as it at 18), without working much, I won a programming competition at 18, I went to a prestigious class, I did some IQ tests for the fun, and I've between 125 and 130...

But I don't really feel myself any smarter... I don't feel any proud of it, nor do I consider others to be "inferior" to me in any way. So you could say I never realised it ;)

In fact, I don't think you can really say someone is "smarter". People are different, have different skills, are good at different things. Also, I think being the best is pointless, and feeling yourself better than others is not very sane. If you're really "smarter", then use this gift for the best of all, and don't cover yourself with pride.

When did you realize the you are smarter than your peers? What event/situation cause you to know that you were way smarter than everyone you know?

When people in my class come to me for help instead of the tutor (although that may be due to the fact that one of our tutors is pretty useless)

Wha?:confused: You've completely lost me there.
The thread spelt it SMRT, in reference to Homer Simpson's song "I am so smart! I am so smart! S M R T... I mean S M A R T..."

One guy missed the reference, thus pointed out the misspelling of the title thread. He said it was Ironic. I noted that missing the reference and claiming the Author's mistake and laughing at the lack of intelligence was itself ironic in the circumstances.

Another guy got the reference, but said it anyway as a joke. Saying that his statement of Irony was Ironic was therefore, in itself, Ironic, since the poster knew fine and well of the intention of the thread title.

Thus, Triple-layer Irony. Which's fantastic. :D

The thread spelt it SMRT, in reference to Homer Simpson's song "I am so smart! I am so smart! S M R T... I mean S M A R T..."

One guy missed the reference, thus pointed out the misspelling of the title thread. He said it was Ironic. I noted that missing the reference and claiming the Author's mistake and laughing at the lack of intelligence was itself ironic in the circumstances.

Another guy got the reference, but said it anyway as a joke. Saying that his statement of Irony was Ironic was therefore, in itself, Ironic, since the poster knew fine and well of the intention of the thread title.

Thus, Triple-layer Irony. Which's fantastic. :D

Ooooooh! I gotcha now! *understanding dawns* And I also recall that song :D

Wow - that's a whole heap of irony there. *Ponders a way to increase the level of irony... fails. Oh well* :D It's the weekend - I can't think on the weekend, there's practically a law against it.

10 years old.......playground at school.......classmate picks up a little stone intending to throw it........I say "that's heavy artillery!" in a sarcastic tone.......a look of befuddledment decends upon other classmates' faces.......realisation that I'll never be happy in rural Mid-Ulster

Also, mentioned apartheid to my friends the other week and nobody knew what I was talking about! Not that they didn't understand the word, but that they weren't aware there used to be a system of racial segregation and stratification in South Africa:headbang:

When I got really angry when people went to someone who's not particularly computer savvy for computer advice at school.

It isn't that I am smart, everyone is just so goddamn stupid.
Exhibit A: In December, I tried to put out a grease fire by dousing it with water. The result was what anyone who had paid even minor attention in their high school chemistry class could have predicted, yet I was surprised by the burst of flame.
Exhibit B: About a week later, I ended up in a disagreement with a drunk man who was, quite obviously, armed. Would a smart man have escalated the situation? No, but I still almost got my ass capped.

Are those the actions of a smart man? No. They are the actions of someone who lives by blind luck, and if I can ace a Philosophy midterm on a shot of Vick's 44 (cough syrup, if I were smart, I'd have managed not to catch the Mongolian Death Cold), 3 hours of sleep, and no studying, then other people should be able to manage not acting like total morons for the few hours that they might be in my presence.

When did you realize the you are smarter than your peers? What event/situation cause you to know that you were way smarter than everyone you know?

Actually, puberty.

Then, by the grace of age, I came to realise that I'm not really smarter than everyone else. Some folks, sure, most folks, no. I am a smart man, but have reached the point where I realise I'm not as smart as I think I am.

Age ... the great equaliser.

When did you realize the you are smarter than your peers? What event/situation cause you to know that you were way smarter than everyone you know?
When I was about 7 and attending my grandparents ultra-conservative church. They talked about saving the heathens in other countries. I thought, "Who are we to say that one lifestyle is better or worse than another?" It was then that I began to think in a worldview rather than from a small town perspective. Then when I received my Ph.D. everyone else thought I must be really smart. Little did they realize I just knew how to play the game.

In kindergarten, when I compared the nature of PlayDough to the existentialist outlook on universal binding.

In kindergarten, when I compared the nature of PlayDough to the existentialist outlook on universal binding.
You too?!? :eek:

Of course I moved on to include Duct Tape. :D

You too?!? :eek:

Of course I moved on to include Duct Tape. :D
Damn you!

Someone mentioned Apartheid before, I can't be arsed quoting them. But for the record, as a courtesy to me we don't use it in jokes. I have family friends who died at the hands of the Broederbond.

In kindergarten, when I compared the nature of PlayDough to the existentialist outlook on universal binding.
I was more of a clay person, myself.

I was more of a clay person, myself.
You were not. They wouldn't let you near the clay without safety mittens.

When did you realize the you are smarter than your peers? What event/situation cause you to know that you were way smarter than everyone you know?
Uh ... how about when things with which my peers had to struggle came so easily to me that I wondered WTF was going on? :D

3rd day of Kindergarten I got suspended for reading Huck Finn.......okay, I actually got suspended for being a smart ass, but reading Huck Finn is what started the conversation.

What was really scary is when I figured out I was smarter than my teachers, that happened about 3rd grade, I actually did have a teacher in the 7th grade who was smarter than me, but overall they were pretty dumb, like the US history teacher I had highschool who thought there were 52 states in the US and that Texas belonged to Mexico:rolleyes:

My 4 year old figured out she was smarter than her peers in August and that she was smarter than her teacher in September, she still thinks I am smarter than her, but I figure that won't last much longer:(

3rd day of Kindergarten I got suspended for reading Huck Finn.......okay, I actually got suspended for being a smart ass, but reading Huck Finn is what started the conversation.

What was really scary is when I figured out I was smarter than my teachers, that happened about 3rd grade, I actually did have a teacher in the 7th grade who was smarter than me, but overall they were pretty dumb, like the US history teacher I had highschool who thought there were 52 states in the US and that Texas belonged to Mexico:rolleyes:

My 4 year old figured out she was smarter than her peers in August and that she was smarter than her teacher in September, she still thinks I am smarter than her, but I figure that won't last much longer:(
If you repeatedly hit her around the head, she'll fall behind....

Assuming you -to- were born without a conscience

Oh, That's Easy. WHEN I STARTED MIDDLE SCHOOL. Oh My God. I Wouldn't Be Able To LIST The Amount Of Stupidity In Middle School. Unfortuantetly, I'm Still In It. I Do My Math Homework In 1/10th Of The Time It Takes Them To.

3rd day of Kindergarten I got suspended for reading Huck Finn.......okay, I actually got suspended for being a smart ass, but reading Huck Finn is what started the conversation.

What was really scary is when I figured out I was smarter than my teachers, that happened about 3rd grade, I actually did have a teacher in the 7th grade who was smarter than me, but overall they were pretty dumb, like the US history teacher I had highschool who thought there were 52 states in the US and that Texas belonged to Mexico:rolleyes:

My 4 year old figured out she was smarter than her peers in August and that she was smarter than her teacher in September, she still thinks I am smarter than her, but I figure that won't last much longer:(
Wow, The Only Problem I Have In My Schools Are The Students. But Then Again, It's Probably MUCH More Of A Problem Then Your Student Intelligence Rate. But Then Again, You Have To Deal With Teachers Who Probably Never Went To School Themselves...

Oh, That's Easy. WHEN I STARTED MIDDLE SCHOOL. Oh My God. I Wouldn't Be Able To LIST The Amount Of Stupidity In Middle School. Unfortuantetly, I'm Still In It. I Do My Math Homework In 1/10th Of The Time It Takes Them To.
you should ask your teacher for upcoming assignments and then spend a weekend doing all of it, I did that in junior high and got an entire semester of algebra, history, grammar, and geography done, and then spent my time in class catching up on my reading, it was great. :)

When did you realize the you are smarter than your peers? What event/situation cause you to know that you were way smarter than everyone you know?
I'm not way smarter than my peers. Every time I think I am one of them will end up surprising me by explaining something to me that I was unable to understand before.

you should ask your teacher for upcoming assignments and then spend a weekend doing all of it, I did that in junior high and got an entire semester of algebra, history, grammar, and geography done, and then spent my time in class catching up on my reading, it was great. :)
Really Now. Unfortuantely, I Do Have GATE Classes, Which Are Advanced. So I Can Only Get The Math Assignments Done. I Do Have Art As An Elective, But, Its Art. And Don't Think There Are Assignments In P.E. Seriously, I'm Usually Having At Least, At LEAST, 1 Project In Each Of My Gate Classes At A Time. I'd Rather Just Take Those As They Come. But Math Is Pretty Easy, Concerning The Fact That I Got A C In Algebra Last Year (Only Because I "Didn't Show My Work". IN MY HEAD, IDIOT!) But I Have A New Teacher This Year, And She Doesn't Make Me Show My Work. And I've Taken The Class Once, So It's Incredibly Easy.

I'm not way smarter than my peers. Every time I think I am one of them will end up surprising me by explaining something to me that I was unable to understand before.
Really Now, This Is Coming From Drunk Commies Deleted? I Usually Think Your Smarter Than Me! And Considering The Fact That I'm Smarter Than 90% Of My School Population, Well, That Makes You Smart In My Eyes.

Really Now. Unfortuantely, I Do Have GATE Classes, Which Are Advanced. So I Can Only Get The Math Assignments Done. I Do Have Art As An Elective, But, Its Art. And Don't Think There Are Assignments In P.E. Seriously, I'm Usually Having At Least, At LEAST, 1 Project In Each Of My Gate Classes At A Time. I'd Rather Just Take Those As They Come. But Math Is Pretty Easy, Concerning The Fact That I Got A C In Algebra Last Year (Only Because I "Didn't Show My Work". IN MY HEAD, IDIOT!) But I Have A New Teacher This Year, And She Doesn't Make Me Show My Work. And I've Taken The Class Once, So It's Incredibly Easy.
oh, I didn't take electives in junior high, I got all my core classes out of the way and then started taking highschool stuff for credits, so that my first 3 years in highschool I only had to take electives so that I could work.

I never had a realization, but more of a vague awareness. It was more obvious in elementary school and somewhat in middle school, but now in high school many more of my peers seem to be on par or better than me. I don't deny that I am intelligent, but what I see around me plus my sense of humility leads me to believe that I am simply one of many such people.

ya ya ya we're all so bright we have to wear shades.

you have to remember that being smart doesnt mean being RIGHT. and that even the most stupid person can be right on certain things.

smart is only as good as what you do with it.

dont diss those who arent as "smart" as you are. it only gets you into trouble. start messing with the mechanic's head and your car will never run smoothly again. he might not have a college degree but he knows when he's being made fun of and he'll take it out on you.

for example, my brother in law jim gave the local director of the BLM a ration of shit one day. the result? we had to pay a few hundred dollars in fees to the BLM for the right to drive over 50 feet of "their" land. the only reason we werent barred from our normal property access was that the woman knew my husband's parents and relented even though she was pissed at jim.

now jim is smarter than any of us. he was paid to be a "big thinker" at one of the national labs here in new mexico. he holds the nations nuclear secrets in his head. but he sure was stupid when he let that woman know that he thought she was stupid.

there is a whole lot more to smart than getting a great score on your SATs

oh, I didn't take electives in junior high, I got all my core classes out of the way and then started taking highschool stuff for credits, so that my first 3 years in highschool I only had to take electives so that I could work.
Ok Smunkee, Stop It. Your Making Me Feel Stupid. I'm Not THAT Smart As To Finish All My Primary Classes In One Month! But, I Guess You DO Have A Big Advantage, Concerning The Fact That All You Had To Take Were Electives In The Majority Of Your High School Life. I Would Like To Have An Entire Class Where I Can Just Read Though....

Ok Smunkee, Stop It. Your Making Me Feel Stupid. I'm Not THAT Smart As To Finish All My Primary Classes In One Month! But, I Guess You DO Have A Big Advantage, Concerning The Fact That All You Had To Take Were Electives In The Majority Of Your High School Life. I Would Like To Have An Entire Class Where I Can Just Read Though....
I wasn't smart, I was desperate, I HAD to work, if I was smart I wouldn't have gotten kicked out of my parent's house. Believe me it's better to be in school when you can, working 80+ hours a week at a fast food restraunt while trying to keep a balance of actually attending school so you don't get in trouble for truancy isn't fun.....

When did you realize the you are smarter than your peers? What event/situation cause you to know that you were way smarter than everyone you know?
The second you thought that.

I personally don't think I can be "smarter" than my peers. Sure, I'm more "well-rounded" than they are and have more "life-expierences" thus giving me more "insight" and a better capability to make "wise" decisions, but I must face it. That guy squatting 500 pounds can kick my ass, and that kid that has no social life is going the be the next Bill Gates.

I'll just be happy as a nomad, thanks.

Oh, That's Easy. WHEN I STARTED MIDDLE SCHOOL. Oh My God. I Wouldn't Be Able To LIST The Amount Of Stupidity In Middle School. Unfortuantetly, I'm Still In It. I Do My Math Homework In 1/10th Of The Time It Takes Them To.
The fact you start every word with a capital suggest your not as smart a Yogi claims.

When I walked into my kindergarten class and realized that, outside of the teacher, I was the only one who knew how to read and how to use a dictionary, encyclopedia and library. It was several years later when I realized that, while I would be miserable if I were not intelligent, I was no more successful than they were and, in some cases, I was considerably less successful.

When did you realize the you are smarter than your peers? What event/situation cause you to know that you were way smarter than everyone you know?
Wow, you sure suffer from an inferiority complex.

When did you realize the you are smarter than your peers? What event/situation cause you to know that you were way smarter than everyone you know?

I wouldn't say everyone I know. However, the answer is probably "sometime during secondary school".

When they started to teach us to read in the first grade. We all sat in a circle and our teacher gave us our "Janet and Mark" readers. We opened to the first page and she said she was going to go around the circle and give all of us a chance to read a bit. She started with the kid to her left, I was sitting on her right. I read the first page while that kid was trying to sound out the first word. So, knowing it'd be a while before she got to me, I turned the page and continued. I read the whole book and looked up to see where the class was.


She was still working with that first kid...

Well.....when I realized how remedial my classes were once I left my Montesorri school, and that everyone else was perfectly suited for these classes.

Really Now. Unfortuantely, I Do Have GATE Classes, Which Are Advanced. So I Can Only Get The Math Assignments Done. I Do Have Art As An Elective, But, Its Art. And Don't Think There Are Assignments In P.E. Seriously, I'm Usually Having At Least, At LEAST, 1 Project In Each Of My Gate Classes At A Time. I'd Rather Just Take Those As They Come. But Math Is Pretty Easy, Concerning The Fact That I Got A C In Algebra Last Year (Only Because I "Didn't Show My Work". IN MY HEAD, IDIOT!) But I Have A New Teacher This Year, And She Doesn't Make Me Show My Work. And I've Taken The Class Once, So It's Incredibly Easy.

And yet you don't seem to grasp the fact that Every Word Doesn't Need To Be Capitalised.

I think it was when i was on the bus home from work and i thought to myself "without language there can be no such thing as rational thought because primal urges don't convey the concepts that words such as 'love', 'honour', 'being' and 'meaning' portray. Yet language is born of our ability to produce rational thought, and all creatures on the earth who don't have a language are severely lacking in philosophers - monkeys for instance, monkeys will never have a philosopher until they develop language because the urges they live by will never allow them to develop abstract concepts. Thus you could say language is both the mother, and the daughter of rational thought. Oh, it's my stop, and there's a guy drawing a picture of a penis on the bus-stop. Joy"



(And more reasons in this post)

Whoever said they haven't developed language? Chimps are advanced enough to learn english, though they don't have the correct voicebox and mouth to speak it.

I feel pretty strongly that most animals have well defined languages, though they are so alien compared to our own spoken language that we can't tell they are speaking to eachother. For example, we'd never consider various movements combined with clicks, yaps, or facial expressions to be a language, but whatever animal was doing those things would know exactly what they were trying to convey.

Y'know what I mean?

(And more reasons in this post)

Whoever said they haven't developed language? Chimps are advanced enough to learn english, though they don't have the correct voicebox and mouth to speak it.

I feel pretty strongly that most animals have well defined languages, though they are so alien compared to our own spoken language that we can't tell they are speaking to eachother. For example, we'd never consider various movements combined with clicks, yaps, or facial expressions to be a language, but whatever animal was doing those things would know exactly what they were trying to convey.

Y'know what I mean?
Accually, I heard a story on the discovery channel were a woman who worked in the chimp facillity of some zoo was able to tell what the chimps were being fed by the sounds they made.

EDIT: I suppose you want to know when knew I was smarter than the average bear. Well, that happened in Grade 5. My teacher would hand back the test with the highest scores first and the lowest scores last. My test were usually first.

Wahl, I'll tell ya one thang.... If brains was dynamite.... I wouldn't have much.

Wow, you sure suffer from an inferiority complex.
You say that like it's a bad thing.

You say that like it's a bad thing.


And it really isn't. Most "smart" people suffer from inferiority complexes. Even the cocky ones.

And it really isn't. Most "smart" people suffer from inferiority complexes. Even the cocky ones.
Perhaps it is the inferiority complex that causes the person to try to compensate with cockiness?

I first realised I was smarter than everyone else, when I got the top scolarship into one of the best schools in the country. Then I got 6 6 5 in my sats, then finally when I had to take a IQ test and got 140, I knew. And to be frank, the fact that in class I'm the one chatting to the teacher about post-uni stuff is a clue.

I would agree with the idea that a number of smart people have inferiority complexes. I have one that expresses itself in someways, but in others I feel that I will oviously be the best. Extreme cockiness I know, but that is just how my mind works.

When did you realize the you are smarter than your peers? What event/situation cause you to know that you were way smarter than everyone you know?

Most certainly when a girl in World Civ(back in the day, you understand) turned to me with a black map of Europe as part of an assignment and asked "Which one is Spain?"

That's when I knew I was smarter than the average American.

I've never thought I was smarter than anyone else. I just had different skills. Sure, I could read by age three, but the kid beside me who couldn't read his name already knew how engines worked. In primary school, half the kids from Samoa, Tonga, and the Cook Islands had never actually been to school til they got to Australia, but they could speak 2 or more languages. Later on, there were kids who were running illicit betting agencies, calculating odds on everything, while I was in the author-in-residence program, and doing high school English, science, and SOSE in grade 7. In high school, there were kids who couldn't read or write who I got to fix my parents' cars, install my lights and build various things around our house. They failed every subject, and left school at 15. I was accelerated in two subjects and was usually in the top 10% of my classes. Didn't make me smarter than any of the above kids. It just meant that my mother taught me how to write essays instead of how to wire a light, how to use a library catalogue instead of how to place a bet and read a form guide, how to skim read a text instead of how to build an engine.

I find it incredibly arrogant and egotistical to claim that you are smarter than anyone else, because you get a higher test score than they do. Out in the real world, test scores mean shit. Get over yourselves, and realise that you aren't smarter than anyone else. You just have the kind of knowledge that is valued by the dominant elite of society and thus can be translated into cultural capital.

ya ya ya we're all so bright we have to wear shades.

you have to remember that being smart doesnt mean being RIGHT. and that even the most stupid person can be right on certain things.

smart is only as good as what you do with it.

dont diss those who arent as "smart" as you are. it only gets you into trouble. start messing with the mechanic's head and your car will never run smoothly again. he might not have a college degree but he knows when he's being made fun of and he'll take it out on you.

for example, my brother in law jim gave the local director of the BLM a ration of shit one day. the result? we had to pay a few hundred dollars in fees to the BLM for the right to drive over 50 feet of "their" land. the only reason we werent barred from our normal property access was that the woman knew my husband's parents and relented even though she was pissed at jim.

now jim is smarter than any of us. he was paid to be a "big thinker" at one of the national labs here in new mexico. he holds the nations nuclear secrets in his head. but he sure was stupid when he let that woman know that he thought she was stupid.

there is a whole lot more to smart than getting a great score on your SATs

And then I saw Ashmoria post this...

exactly. *applauds*

(And more reasons in this post)

Whoever said they haven't developed language? Chimps are advanced enough to learn english, though they don't have the correct voicebox and mouth to speak it.

I feel pretty strongly that most animals have well defined languages, though they are so alien compared to our own spoken language that we can't tell they are speaking to eachother. For example, we'd never consider various movements combined with clicks, yaps, or facial expressions to be a language, but whatever animal was doing those things would know exactly what they were trying to convey.

Y'know what I mean?

Nah. By language i mean more than that - chimps are advanced enough to communicate in an extremely basic childlike english. But essentially, whatever "language" - as with all animals - is limited,extremely limited. It's basic concepts "food", "eat", "kill", "mate". Perhaps i should have said, therefore, that a large language base is the mother and daughter of *abstract* thought. It's probably the same reason that those tribes that occasionally turned up in the 40s and 50s still living in Stone Age conditions never had a Socrates or Marx, because their language was close to the same level and without the accreted language base to articulate abstract concepts, they were never likely to develop one.

I never had a realization, but more of a vague awareness. It was more obvious in elementary school and somewhat in middle school, but now in high school many more of my peers seem to be on par or better than me. I don't deny that I am intelligent, but what I see around me plus my sense of humility leads me to believe that I am simply one of many such people.
Oh, we share the samenessnessness,

At my highschool, god, I am in the "smart class" (well, there is another but the fact that most of them are only good at sport kinda tkes away the title, one guy from that class said to me "HAHA Joseph, you've got AIDs" nad I sarcastically said "Yes I have AIDs and he said "HAHA you have little thing crawling around your bum." Anyways) I am amazed that people don't know what contradict means. Jezz:(

Oh, That's Easy. WHEN I STARTED MIDDLE SCHOOL. Oh My God. I Wouldn't Be Able To LIST The Amount Of Stupidity In Middle School. Unfortuantetly, I'm Still In It. I Do My Math Homework In 1/10th Of The Time It Takes Them To.


Hmmm. That's interesting. I realised I was bright when I got given English reading homework and couldn't do it. I used to sit there crying every night :( It use to bore me to fucking tears. I was four and I'd learned to read some time earlier (before school).

I still remember the homework now ...

Dick has a ball.
The ball is red.
Dick throws the ball.
Jane catches the ball.

GGGGGaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaghhhhhhhhh!

I swear, if I wasn't (a) four years old (b) living in England and therefore unarmed, I would have gone totally postal :mp5:

I don't deny that I am intelligent, but what I see around me plus my sense of humility leads me to believe that I am simply one of many such people.



I sense the smell off *sniff sniff* false modesty. "My sense of humility," my arse :D

"I am simply one of many such people"
Let's look at IQ (assuming that's any indicator of intelligence) and the bell curve.

It works something like this ...
http://www.ap.buffalo.edu/idea/udny/Sec1images/1-12.jpg

Thickos queue up on the left. Bright sparks on the right. Everyone else is at some point inbetween. There are far fewer thick people in society than 'normal' people. There are far fewer bright people in society than 'normal' people.

So, if you are intelligent, then you're not one of many.

(Incidentally, that image is unrelated to intelligence in itself, it's just the first image I came across to illustrate the concept. Secondly, there is a theory called 'the bell curve' which prescribes a set of racial policies based on IQ. I don't endorse that theory).

I find it incredibly arrogant and egotistical to claim that you are smarter than anyone else, because you get a higher test score than they do. Out in the real world, test scores mean shit. Get over yourselves, and realise that you aren't smarter than anyone else. You just have the kind of knowledge that is valued by the dominant elite of society and thus can be translated into cultural capital.



You make some very valid points. Test scores do mean bugger all in the real world.

"Kind of knowledge valued by the dominant elite" etc - again very true.

Issue implied from the 'kind of knowledge point' with ref to your experiences with other kids. I will try to tread carefully here because I sense you have strong feelings on this. Those kids were able to do a number of things owing largely to their background learnings. They could have been bright in a certain, given way not measured by traditional schooling. Or they may not - they may have a particular aptitude for a given skill. I know a few people from my martial arts class who are on the lower side of normal intelligence yet they are very good martial arts because they have trained and trained and trained.

"Realise that you aren't smarter than anyone else" - not true. In terms of raw intelligence - however you chose to measure it (a hot topic, worthy of a thread all of it's own for sure) there are some people who are basically brighter than others.

Is it arrogant and egotistical to say so? Depends on the individual and the context. Some people are basically brighter than others and should feel no shame in saying so.

You make some very valid points. Test scores do mean bugger all in the real world.

"Kind of knowledge valued by the dominant elite" etc - again very true.

Issue implied from the 'kind of knowledge point' with ref to your experiences with other kids. I will try to tread carefully here because I sense you have strong feelings on this. Those kids were able to do a number of things owing largely to their background learnings. They could have been bright in a certain, given way not measured by traditional schooling. Or they may not - they may have a particular aptitude for a given skill. I know a few people from my martial arts class who are on the lower side of normal intelligence yet they are very good martial arts because they have trained and trained and trained.

"Realise that you aren't smarter than anyone else" - not true. In terms of raw intelligence - however you chose to measure it (a hot topic, worthy of a thread all of it's own for sure) there are some people who are basically brighter than others.

Is it arrogant and egotistical to say so? Depends on the individual and the context. Some people are basically brighter than others and should feel no shame in saying so.

OK, I agree with most of your points. I think the problem is coming up with an accurate test that actually measures a person's intelligence in a valid way. I.e. someone who is a bodily-kinaesthetic learner is not going to exhibit high levels of intelligence asking them to do a sit-down test that is predominately written language oriented. However, that is not to say that they are unintelligent. They may in fact be a genius. A person who is a visual-spatial learner is not going to do well on a language or mathematics oriented test of intelligence. However, they may be exceptionally intelligent. The problem with schooling is that it caters totally to auditory and linguistic learners to the exclusion of all others, except in subjects like manual arts and HPE.

Furthermore, the point about kids being able to do things as a result of their background learnings. It is a proven fact in educational research that children who come from homes with literature-rich environments (print materials, not Literature) do far better in school than students from non-print rich backgrounds, owing to their more extensive literacy experiences. Most students from middle- to upper middle-class homes have a far greater experience with the printed word than their lower-middle and lower-class classmates. Often they arrive at school unable to read or write, a HUGE disadvantage.

All student knowledge is derived from the social and cultural background of the student. It's just the culture that they're derived from that determines their value in the traditional school environment.

I think the problem is coming up with an accurate test that actually measures a person's intelligence in a valid way. I.e. someone who is a bodily-kinaesthetic learner is not going to exhibit high levels of intelligence asking them to do a sit-down test that is predominately written language oriented. However, that is not to say that they are unintelligent. They may in fact be a genius. A person who is a visual-spatial learner is not going to do well on a language or mathematics oriented test of intelligence. However, they may be exceptionally intelligent. The problem with schooling is that it caters totally to auditory and linguistic learners to the exclusion of all others, except in subjects like manual arts and HPE.

Totally agree. Incidentally, have you ever studied NLP? They talk a lot about these kinds of things.

when i make everything i write and say a wordplay and NO ONE picks up on it

Totally agree. Incidentally, have you ever studied NLP? They talk a lot about these kinds of things.

NLP?

When did you realize the you are smarter than your peers? What event/situation cause you to know that you were way smarter than everyone you know?
When I realized that there are people who can't even spell "smart" properly :D

:D The day I started posting on General. Its taught me so much about human nature, that people love to bitch and bitch the same arguements, knowing they'll get the same bitchy arguement back. Just to go get drunk, sleep and do it over. In all seriousness the threads have -inspired- me to research more then I would have usually, and turned me away from Wikipedia.
So true, so true... :D

When I realised how inutterably transparent, predictable and accordingly useable they all were. Oh, and my being informed not to participate in class discussion because it confuses other class members who evidently cannot deal with a Marxist critique of "The Tempest".

OK, I agree with most of your points. I think the problem is coming up with an accurate test that actually measures a person's intelligence in a valid way. I.e. someone who is a bodily-kinaesthetic learner is not going to exhibit high levels of intelligence asking them to do a sit-down test that is predominately written language oriented. However, that is not to say that they are unintelligent. They may in fact be a genius. A person who is a visual-spatial learner is not going to do well on a language or mathematics oriented test of intelligence. However, they may be exceptionally intelligent. The problem with schooling is that it caters totally to auditory and linguistic learners to the exclusion of all others, except in subjects like manual arts and HPE.

Furthermore, the point about kids being able to do things as a result of their background learnings. It is a proven fact in educational research that children who come from homes with literature-rich environments (print materials, not Literature) do far better in school than students from non-print rich backgrounds, owing to their more extensive literacy experiences. Most students from middle- to upper middle-class homes have a far greater experience with the printed word than their lower-middle and lower-class classmates. Often they arrive at school unable to read or write, a HUGE disadvantage.

All student knowledge is derived from the social and cultural background of the student. It's just the culture that they're derived from that determines their value in the traditional school environment.

Accordingly the fact that certain studentsd are simply considerably better than their peers by natrure being an irrelevancy therefore, since we are all born "mentally equal"?

Accordingly the fact that certain studentsd are simply considerably better than their peers by natrure being an irrelevancy therefore, since we are all born "mentally equal"?

Barring intellectual impairment or a learning disability, yeah, pretty much.

Where is the evidence that they are simply better than their peers, completely removed from any influence from the home environment? When you show me a kid from a home environment without books or magazines or print materials of any kind (believe me, they are out there) who does better than a kid who was taught to read by his mummy at age 3 or 4 (you don't just learn to read by osmosis), then I'll accept the "it's completely natural" argument. Until then, I'll continue to believe in the statistics that point to a kid's environment and social and cultural background as the biggest indicator and influence in his/her school success.

When did you realize the you are smarter than your peers? What event/situation cause you to know that you were way smarter than everyone you know?
When I came to the conclusion that life is pointless, and that the purpose of all life is to end, and my friends didn't agree. So second grade or so.

I'm a very sad person.

Also when I realized that I had finished pretty much all of my workbooks for fourth grade in the first term, and most didn't finish them at all. Then they called me cheater and started throwing balls at my head every day for three years.

Barring intellectual impairment or a learning disability, yeah, pretty much.

Where is the evidence that they are simply better than their peers, completely removed from any influence from the home environment? When you show me a kid from a home environment without books or magazines or print materials of any kind (believe me, they are out there) who does better than a kid who was taught to read by his mummy at age 3 or 4 (you don't just learn to read by osmosis), then I'll accept the "it's completely natural" argument. Until then, I'll continue to believe in the statistics that point to a kid's environment and social and cultural background as the biggest indicator and influence in his/her school success.

It has an influence, granted, however I would contend most vehemently that nurture is signally unable to act as a subsitute for ability. It is individuals akin to yourself, who make those raised in an academic household, and have an IQ of 139, feel thoroughly guilty for such an auspicious provenance.

I therefore assume that you would assert that anyone can ascend to be a pre-eminent academic irrespective of ability, or a noted politiocian, if only we were all raised in white cocoons.

When I realised how inutterably transparent, predictable and accordingly useable they all were. Oh, and my being informed not to participate in class discussion because it confuses other class members who evidently cannot deal with a Marxist critique of "The Tempest".

Do you know how to wire a light? How about install a turbo on your engine? How about build a car from the ground up? Could you work as a bookmaker at age 10? Could you tell me the entire history of a football team, including average points scored per match for every player, and give me a complete and in-depth analysis of their performance for a given season? What about determine the exact area (to within a few centimetres) of a given room simply by looking at it? What about determining the safest places on a beach to swim just by watching the waves?

All of the above require high levels of intelligence. It's just not the kind that society or you values.

NLP?


Neuro Linguistic Programming. A highly controversial subject. Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuro-linguistic_programming They've got a major flame war going :D The discussion page on wikipedia is highly illuminating.

As for myself, I'm a believer and a practitioner.

Cheers

CDA

Do you know how to wire a light? How about install a turbo on your engine? How about build a car from the ground up? Could you work as a bookmaker at age 10? Could you tell me the entire history of a football team, including average points scored per match for every player, and give me a complete and in-depth analysis of their performance for a given season? What about determine the exact area (to within a few centimetres) of a given room simply by looking at it? What about determining the safest places on a beach to swim just by watching the waves?

All of the above require high levels of intelligence. It's just not the kind that society or you values.

Actually, I have proven to be remarkably malleable and could probably do so within a few weeks or through the application of common sense.

As for football, why yes, I rather believe I can as it happens. I am a remarkably devoted ManUtd, and could recite a myriad of irrelevant facts for you.

I do implore you to merely accept that, irrespective your entirely deplorable adherence to post-modern, wester relativism, intelligence does differ and fluctuate, since the human race, entirely concurrent to animals, are not born equal in any manner.

Barring intellectual impairment or a learning disability, yeah, pretty much.

Where is the evidence that they are simply better than their peers, completely removed from any influence from the home environment? When you show me a kid from a home environment without books or magazines or print materials of any kind (believe me, they are out there) who does better than a kid who was taught to read by his mummy at age 3 or 4 (you don't just learn to read by osmosis), then I'll accept the "it's completely natural" argument. Until then, I'll continue to believe in the statistics that point to a kid's environment and social and cultural background as the biggest indicator and influence in his/her school success.


Which all may well be true and, given that you're a teacher, I'm prepared to take your word for it. But the point of this thread is 'when did you first realise you were basically bright?'


Secondly,

When you show me a kid from a home environment without books or magazines or print materials of any kind (believe me, they are out there) who does better than a kid who was taught to read by his mummy at age 3 or 4 (you don't just learn to read by osmosis), then I'll accept the "it's completely natural" argument.


The point of the thread is not about how much does intelligence inform success. It's quite clear that raw intelligence alone will not get you anywhere. In any event, you're comparing apples with oranges.

Are there any case studies involving two children, neither with acccess to any books/mags/printed matter one of whom was more 'intelligent' than the other? I'd be interested to hear the result.

But at the moment, I'm just not convinced by what you seem to be implying - that there is no such thing as 'intelligence' rather just a set of learned attitudes and behaviours that may or may not be useful in a given circumstance. I suspect, but don't know for sure, that it's a whole lot more complicated than that.

It has an influence, granted, however I would contend most vehemently that nurture is signally unable to act as a subsitute for ability. It is individuals akin to yourself, who make those raised in an academic household, and have an IQ of 139, feel thoroughly guilty for such an auspicious provenance.

I therefore assume that you would assert that anyone can ascend to be a pre-eminent academic irrespective of ability, or a noted politiocian, if only we were all raised in white cocoons.

Equally as I say that if you were raised in a working-class home you would be just as able to become an electrician. I'll bet those raised in an academic household couldn't.

And trust me, there is no unbiased measure of ability. For information on the topic of bias in ability tests observe the following:

http://www.wilderdom.com/personality/intelligenceCulturalBias.html

http://www.psychpage.com/learning/library/intell/biased.html

http://www.hamilton.edu/academic/Government/government_375/sp97.html

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/05/000529093413.htm

Do you know how to wire a light? How about install a turbo on your engine? How about build a car from the ground up? Could you work as a bookmaker at age 10? Could you tell me the entire history of a football team, including average points scored per match for every player, and give me a complete and in-depth analysis of their performance for a given season? What about determine the exact area (to within a few centimetres) of a given room simply by looking at it? What about determining the safest places on a beach to swim just by watching the waves?

All of the above require high levels of intelligence. It's just not the kind that society or you values.

No they don't. They require at best moderate levels of intelligence and both a desire and ability to learn about those subjects. Over time, anyone with moderate and upwards levels of intelligence would be able to do those things. Perhaps the true test of intelligence should be thought of as, all other things being equal, the tendency for an individual to have the ability to learn a wide range of skills across a range of disciplines involving differing sensory inputs at a faster rate than those of less intelligence.

But at the moment, I'm just not convinced by what you seem to be implying - that there is no such thing as 'intelligence' rather just a set of learned attitudes and behaviours that may or may not be useful in a given circumstance. I suspect, but don't know for sure, that it's a whole lot more complicated than that.

Actually that is the issue that cognitive psychologists are having right now. There is significant controversy in the field over the nature of intelligence; i.e. is there such a thing as general (g) intelligence, or is intelligence a multi-faceted concept? Most psychologists in the area tend towards a multiple view of intelligence, though again this is controversial. Some view intelligence as both of a general nature, and as a multiple thing. I tend towards the exreme end, and deny the existence of a general intelligence, simply because the evidence I have seen tends to promote the view of intelligence as multiple, but transferrable. I.E. mathematically intelligent students can transfer those skills to their studies in history and English.

No they don't. They require at best moderate levels of intelligence and both a desire and ability to learn about those subjects. Over time, anyone with moderate and upwards levels of intelligence would be able to do those things. Perhaps the true test of intelligence should be thought of as, all other things being equal, the tendency for an individual to have the ability to learn a wide range of skills across a range of disciplines involving differing sensory inputs at a faster rate than those of less intelligence.

Actually, if you take the multiple view of intelligence that I and many other more learned people take, then it does require high levels of intelligence in particular areas to be able to do each of the things I've listed.

EDIT: and there are some cognitive psychologists who claim that a major component of intelligence is motivation.

Actually that is the issue that cognitive psychologists are having right now. There is significant controversy in the field over the nature of intelligence; i.e. is there such a thing as general (g) intelligence, or is intelligence a multi-faceted concept? Most psychologists in the area tend towards a multiple view of intelligence, though again this is controversial. Some view intelligence as both of a general nature, and as a multiple thing. I tend towards the exreme end, and deny the existence of a general intelligence, simply because the evidence I have seen tends to promote the view of intelligence as multiple, but transferrable. I.E. mathematically intelligent students can transfer those skills to their studies in history and English.

Dear lord, we really are advocating fundamental equality today no?

Actually, if you take the multiple view of intelligence that I and many other more learned people take, then it does require high levels of intelligence in particular areas to be able to do each of the things I've listed.

Once more, an irrefutable no, since one may be teached at infinatum to wire a plug, memory is disengenuous to intelligence, and, frankly, the academic community is the most intelligent, since it harbours the most refined minds.

Equally as I say that if you were raised in a working-class home you would be just as able to become an electrician. I'll bet those raised in an academic household couldn't.

I was raised in a very, manual, hands on working-class home. Went to a working class school and was expected to be a very manual working-class type person.

But I wasn't interested in metal bashing or wood-working. I was always more interested in books. Granted, I was taught to read at an early time in my life by 'mummy' (God, she'd kill me if she ever knew I'd called her 'mummy' :D )

But that point is that all through my home and school upbringing I was being churned out to be a manual labourer.

As far as those raised in academic households becoming labourers/electricians whatever, there is an awful lot of that going on right now in the UK. The education system is churning out many hundreds of thousands of graduates more than is needed. There are no graduate level jobs available for them. Every week you see yet another documentary about a 'middle-class' kid, raised by a good family, taking up the hammer or the spanner and a trade, much to the gnashing and wailing of middle-class teeth (did we spend all those expensive school fees on you to become a plumber? but little jonny, we wanted you to be a doctor/lawyer/banker etc etc). A good mate of mine who went to private school and has a masters in economics is now training to be a plumber. Apparently he's learnt to whistle through his teeth and say 'that'll cost you'.

Equally as I say that if you were raised in a working-class home you would be just as able to become an electrician. I'll bet those raised in an academic household couldn't.

I'll take you up on that bet.

the evidence I have seen tends to promote the view of intelligence as multiple, but transferrable. I.E. mathematically intelligent students can transfer those skills to their studies in history and English.


Ehhhh, I can't count to save my life but excel at history and English. I'm reasonably sure that your tendency to the extreme end is just that: extreme.

Dear lord, we really are advocating fundamental equality today no?

An in-depth understanding of "the Tempest" requires as much cognitive capacity as an in-depth understanding of Tupac Shakur's lyrics. To understand them on the same level, one requires an in-depth understanding of the culture out of which either text is born, the symbolism in either text, and the socio-historical context of the body of work. It requires an understanding of the intertextual references, and metaphor and simile. It requires an understanding of the conventions of the genre, and an ability to compare and contrast the text as an example of these conventions.

Actually, if you take the multiple view of intelligence that I and many other more learned people take


Ooooo! Miaow! That's a snotty little dig, isn't it? *reaches for handbag* ooooOOOOoooo :D

Once more, an irrefutable no, since one may be teached at infinatum to wire a plug, memory is disengenuous to intelligence, and, frankly, the academic community is the most intelligent, since it harbours the most refined minds.

And I say that is elitist bullshit.

Ooooo! Miaow! That's a snotty little dig, isn't it? *reaches for handbag* ooooOOOOoooo :D

I'm tired. and I have to get up in 6 hours. :D

I also can't stand intellectual elitism.

An in-depth understanding of "the Tempest" requires as much cognitive capacity as an in-depth understanding of Tupac Shakur's lyrics. To understand them on the same level, one requires an in-depth understanding of the culture out of which either text is born, the symbolism in either text, and the socio-historical context of the body of work. It requires an understanding of the intertextual references, and metaphor and simile. It requires an understanding of the conventions of the genre, and an ability to compare and contrast the text as an example of these conventions.

Once more, no. Tupac Shakur is not music, it is bilge. Literature and poetry is entirely different to contemporary music since one experiancing the conditions that the"great" Tupac experianced merely identifies with the music, a syndrome most of the lower orders will no doubt identify with. However, to ingratiate oneself in an entirely fictional environment, discern its thematic idiosyncrasies, and formulate one's personal theories is an entirely different, more complex task.

And I say that is elitist bullshit.

In which case I apologise profusely for being better than most of the lower orders in all facets of life.

Once more, no. Tupac Shakur is not music, it is bilge. Literature and poetry is entirely different to contemporary music since one experiancing the conditions that the"great" Tupac experianced merely identifies with the music, a syndrome most of the lower orders will no doubt identify with. However, to ingratiate oneself in an entirely fictional environment, discern its thematic idiosyncrasies, and formulate one's personal theories is an entirely different, more complex task.

So says you. Cognitive psychologists say different. And I'm gonna take their word for it.

And I'm going to bed, since you are clearly too caught up in your snobbery to actually engage and learn something.

P.S. I dare you to repeat some of those things at the mechanics, or to your electrician the next time they have to fix something at your house. Particularly the bit about the academic community harbouring the most refined minds, anyone can be taught to wire a plug, and apologising for being better than the lower orders. See how well your car or lights work when they're through with you.

So says you. Cognitive psychologists say different. And I'm gonna take their word for it.

However, since that is an entirely superflouos vocation, personally, I would trust in the quality of the greatest and most enduring community on earth, academia.

However, since that is an entirely superflouos vocation, personally, I would trust in the quality of the greatest and most enduring community on earth, academia.

Funny, I always was under the impression that they were part of academia. Having PHd's and tenure and doing research and all that. My mistake.

Funny, I always was under the impression that they were part of academia. Having PHd's and tenure and doing research and all that. My mistake.

Cognitive psycholgy cross references to entirely transparent vocation, and, upon the assertion that they are academics, I daresay I could find an equally notable psychologist to contend my assertion.

when i make everything i write and say a wordplay and NO ONE picks up on it
my 4 year old does that, she gets so mad when people don't get it, I think that's the point where she started to realize that she was smarter than her teacher, you know when she had to explain it

K: Mrs. Hollars, your wedding ring is on the wrong hand
T: No, it's not, I am not married
K: oh, then it's on the right hand........

her teacher just looked at her like she was stupid

(I thought the joke was funny, esp. for a 4 year old's joke)

P.S. I dare you to repeat some of those things at the mechanics, or to your electrician the next time they have to fix something at your house. Particularly the bit about the academic community harbouring the most refined minds, anyone can be taught to wire a plug, and apologising for being better than the lower orders. See how well your car or lights work when they're through with you.

you do realize that there is a difference between intelligence, knowledge and wisdom right?

Someone can be intelligent, but not have knowledge, have knowledge and no wisdom, ect. Being intelligent isn't about knowing 'everything' as much as it's being able to 'think better'. I am more intelligent than most of the people I interact with day to day, but I don't necessarily have more knowledge than they do, and I certainly lack some of thier wisdom. A smart person knows the difference and realizes thier own limitations.

I can teach my child physics, my friend can teach her woodworking, does that make me more intelligent than my friend? no, it means that we have a different knowledge base, just because I don't know how to use a skill saw doesn't not make me stupid, niether does his lack of knowledge about how to use a formula to figure out density.

You claim to believe in this ...


I also can't stand intellectual elitism.

and this ...

And I say that is elitist bullshit.

but you say this ...

Actually, if you take the multiple view of intelligence that I and many other more learned people take

and this ...

So says you. Cognitive psychologists say different. And I'm gonna take their word for it.

Sounds hypocritical

you do realize that there is a difference between intelligence, knowledge and wisdom right?

Someone can be intelligent, but not have knowledge, have knowledge and no wisdom, ect. Being intelligent isn't about knowing 'everything' as much as it's being able to 'think better'.

I think you've hit the nail on the head here.

I suspect, but obviously can't know for sure, that Saint J is confusing these three owing to her background experience and her current work with rug-rats.

Who said I'm smart or anyone here for that matter. Who is to say everything we think we know is wrong or right? I stick by my firm belife that I know nothing.

you do realize that there is a difference between intelligence, knowledge and wisdom right?

Someone can be intelligent, but not have knowledge, have knowledge and no wisdom, ect. Being intelligent isn't about knowing 'everything' as much as it's being able to 'think better'. I am more intelligent than most of the people I interact with day to day, but I don't necessarily have more knowledge than they do, and I certainly lack some of thier wisdom. A smart person knows the difference and realizes thier own limitations.

I can teach my child physics, my friend can teach her woodworking, does that make me more intelligent than my friend? no, it means that we have a different knowledge base, just because I don't know how to use a skill saw doesn't not make me stupid, niether does his lack of knowledge about how to use a formula to figure out density.

which is the point I am making. School results don't tell you jack about your intelligence level.

I think you've hit the nail on the head here.

I suspect, but obviously can't know for sure, that Saint J is confusing these three owing to her background experience and her current work with rug-rats.

Actually, yeah, I'm not using lay-person terminology.

And I don't work with rugrats. I work with the big kids. :D

The day Man in Black Started playing NS.:D

which is the point I am making. School results don't tell you jack about your intelligence level.
Well, I seriously doubt that an unintelligent person would be able to get >95% in a subject. It doesn't indicate precicely how intelligent a person is, but it does give a rough idea.

Well, I seriously doubt that an unintelligent person would be able to get >95% in a subject. It doesn't indicate precicely how intelligent a person is, but it does give a rough idea.

And there is significant evidence that lower class children, members of cultural and ethnic minorities, girls or boys (depending on the subject and method of testing) will not either. Which leaves white upper middle class kids who will be the only ones getting those marks.

And there is significant evidence that lower class children, members of cultural and ethnic minorities, girls or boys (depending on the subject and method of testing) will not either. Which leaves white upper middle class kids who will be the only ones getting those marks.
I get those marks, I am white, but I am not upper middle class. More lower middle class, and from a non-academic family.

And there is significant evidence that lower class children, members of cultural and ethnic minorities, girls or boys (depending on the subject and method of testing) will not either. Which leaves white upper middle class kids who will be the only ones getting those marks.
And Asians. And Nordic folk.

And Asians. And Nordic folk.

Again depends on the subject. Asians do not do well in history or English, because of the difference in cultural expectations regarding essays etc.

I realized I was smarter than my pee-er right around the time I drew my first breath.:D

Really: very early on. I was reading before I began going to school, correcting teachers from day one, and most recently scored 149 on an IQ test I took while dead drunk.

In first grade.

The school system wanted to place me in Gifted Child classes, and then, probably another school entirely.
Mom said no.

As it was, everytime there was a weekend seminar for the smart kids in the area, I always had to go.
Sometimes they were fun, and sometimes bored me stupid.

In fourth grade, there was a state test that everyone had to take, one of those standardised ones that are supposed to determine how well kids are doing, in wich particular areas, and wich particular school districts.

Unfortuntatly for me, I scored quite well on the damn thing.
So well in fact, that the results were higher than anyone at that particular school had scored.
It earned me a nice letter from the Govenors office, wich was promptly placed on the school wall, so the Principal could impress other parents, and school board staff.
"Hey...look what WE did!".

Thus, everytime my results in class didnt measure up to the teahcers expectations of me, I was sent down to the afformentioned Principals office,
and shown the test results, and shown "what I was capable of".

This impressed a bit of a rebellious streak, ya might say.

I do agree that there are intelligent people in all jobs though, not just acedemic carreers, my father for instance was very intelligent, possibly a genius but deffinatly above average, he chose to be a plumber. Why? He liked helping people, making $125 an hour, and not having to pay malpractice insurance, sounded like a smart choice to me, until I figured out that he had to wade through crap (literally) 1/2 the time, and that he had no money management skills at all. Really what's the point of making $125 an hour if you are going to have the lifestyle of someone making minimum wage? (sorry, that's a whole other topic)

And there is significant evidence that lower class children, members of cultural and ethnic minorities, girls or boys (depending on the subject and method of testing) will not either. Which leaves white upper middle class kids who will be the only ones getting those marks.


Now, this is interesting.

Lets look at the upper white middle-class class kids as a group because they should be relatively homogenous - roughly same backgrounds cultural influence etc. Now presuming we can strip out motivation, we should be able to find some discernable effect of intelligence (assuming you subscribe to the 'g' theory).

What're your thoughts St J?


(And you're better off sticking with the rug-rats - they're cuter, they're more fun to play with and you get to eat lots of sweeties :D )

I believe (along with many other, not trying to claim this is my invention :p) that there are several kinds of intelligence, and being 'booksmart' (which unfortunately I am) is the most useless kind... :(