NationStates Jolt Archive

Well, let me start off by saying there's two kinds of smartness.

1. Intelligence. The more intelligent you are, the faster you can do a calculus problem, and the better you can memorize stuff from a textbook.

2. Wisdom. The more wise you are, the better you understand the world around you, and the better you understand other beings.

So which kind of smartness do you consider more important, either on the larger scale of society or in the smaller scale of the life of an individual.

And in case you're wondering why I ask this, it's because it seems my school seems to value students who can memorize stuff from a textbook more than someone who can actually understand what's in the textbook, and in the case of history class, what lesson is trying to be taught. Needless to say I think the latter is much more important than the former, so I want to see other people's ideas on the matter.

Poll incoming.

intelligence duznt matter/exist, it's just a way that humans can discriminate freely whilst convincing themselves it's justified

I voted intelligence, but firmly believe you need a good combination of both....Without wisdom one would be lost..

Well, let me start off by saying there's two kinds of smartness.

1. Intelligence. The more intelligent you are, the faster you can do a calculus problem, and the better you can memorize stuff from a textbook.

2. Wisdom. The more wise you are, the better you understand the world around you, and the better you understand other beings.

So which kind of smartness do you consider more important, either on the larger scale of society or in the smaller scale of the life of an individual.

And in case you're wondering why I ask this, it's because it seems my school seems to value students who can memorize stuff from a textbook more than someone who can actually understand what's in the textbook, and in the case of history class, what lesson is trying to be taught. Needless to say I think the latter is much more important than the former, so I want to see other people's ideas on the matter.

Poll incoming.

they value it more because it gets them money.

you are wrong about intelligence, it's not "knowing stuff" it's being able to think, you are also wrong about wisdom, but I am late for church

intelligence duznt matter/exist, it's just a way that humans can discriminate freely whilst convincing themselves it's justified

Would you want to be operated on by a 'doctor' who didn't know basic human biology? Who has no idea of 'spatial relationships'?

Intelligence is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad.

Neither's more important. Unsuprisingly, if you have a healthy dose of both you'll go further than if you're very intelligent but not particularly wise, or vice versa.

With sufficient intelligence, you could acquire the required materials and build a working fission device.

With sufficient wisdom, you can tell that it's generally a bad idea.

they value it more because it gets them money.

you are wrong about intelligence, it's not "knowing stuff" it's being able to think, you are also wrong about wisdom, but I am late for church

I think what Smunkee was going to say is that:

Intelligence is problem-solving, Wisdom is the ability to use knowledge.

Knowledge is just the 'data' that intelligence computes, and wisdom is based around. 'Knowledge' is what the schools set their sights on.

(ANd schools set their sights on knowledge, because you can measure it... and because intelligence and wisdom both need it as a raw material).

Would you want to be operated on by a 'doctor' who didn't know basic human biology? Who has no idea of 'spatial relationships'?

well i'm not afraid of death, so i say "BRING IT ON!!!!"

well i'm not afraid of death, so i say "BRING IT ON!!!!"

Death isn't the only bad that comes out of this situation. There are parts of me that I quite like being where they are...

Well, let me start off by saying there's two kinds of smartness.

1. Intelligence. The more intelligent you are, the faster you can do a calculus problem, and the better you can memorize stuff from a textbook.

2. Wisdom. The more wise you are, the better you understand the world around you, and the better you understand other beings.

Those don't strike me as "two kinds of smartness". Wisdom is a type of knowledge. And intelligence is not merely memorization ability or speed of thought.

Intelligence is how well you learn. Wisdom is what you have learned.

Wisdom

1. the quality or state of being wise; knowledge of what is true or right coupled with just judgment as to action; sagacity, discernment, or insight.

Intelligence

1. capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc.

That is essentially what I said, just in a more sensical and clear fashion.

Death isn't the only bad that comes out of this situation. There are parts of me that I quite like being where they are...

penis being torn off and put on face/in mouth?
being raped?


i assume you mean something on this level when people aren't "intelligent" enough to perform their duties, well once again BRING IT ON!!!!
im not afraid of pain!!! (maybe a little)

Wisdom

1. the quality or state of being wise; knowledge of what is true or right coupled with just judgment as to action; sagacity, discernment, or insight.

Intelligence

1. capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc.

That is essentially what I said, just in a more sensical and clear fashion.

No - that isn't anything like what you said.

The wisdom definition demands knowledge, and judgement of how to use it.

The intelligence definition describes capacity for acquiring knowledge, and manipulating knowledge to gain results.

And for those who say "Intelligence and Wisdom are equally important", remember this quote, please.

"He who is proficient in learning, but deficient in morals, is more deficient than proficient."

Intelligence is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad.

I like that comparison.

Both, wisdom and intelligence, would be great to have. Overall, wisdom is ultimately my #1 choice to have. While intelligence would be nice to have, it would be best to have wisdom. Wisdom is like the instruction manual on how to use your intelligence. Without it you would be lost in this world.

I think that the general consensus here is that intelligence is the ability to gather knowledge while wisdom is the ability to put it to use, therefore there isn't one that is more useful than the other, you need both.

You need both, and it depends on the situation, which of it is more important.

You want to construct a new machine? You need intelligence.

You want to sell it? You need wisdom.

And there are different kinds of "intelligence". Logical intelligence, verbal intelligence, social intelligence, overall knowledge, etc.

Any extreme isn't good. So there some autists, which have a extremly high logical intelligence, but they lack totally social intelligence.

Wisdom isn't just the ability to put knowledge to use. It's the ability to know whether or not you should put it to use.
Intelligence is the ability to gather knowledge and the ability to put it to use to get the wished for results.
Wisdom is knowing whether or not putting it to use is a good thing to do. Wisdom is connected to perception and morality, knowledge is not. I don't believe you can be wise and without care for your fellow beings.
I do believe you can be intelligent and totally amoral. Just my take on it. The difference may mean something different to others.

Wisdom isn't just the ability to put knowledge to use. It's the ability to know whether or not you should put it to use.
Intelligence is the ability to gather knowledge and the ability to put it to use to get the wished for results.
Wisdom is knowing whether or not putting it to use is a good thing to do. Wisdom is connected to perception and morality, knowledge is not. I don't believe you can be wise and without care for your fellow beings.
I do believe you can be intelligent and totally amoral. Just my take on it. The difference may mean something different to others.

I agree completely.

Also, in my experience, schools generally grade based on knowledge, which is neither intelligence nor wisdom.

An intelligent person can aquire wisdom. A wise person cannot aquire intelligence.

An intelligent person can aquire wisdom. A wise person cannot aquire intelligence.
So true. I was blessed with intelligence to start with. I have very slowly acquired some modicum of wisdom.

So perhaps wisdom should be more highly valued. Intelligence is something you were either born with or weren't. Wisdom has to be worked for and nurtured.

You´re wrong: a wise person can mimick inteligence. Basicaly, a wise person is one with a huge array of experiences, meaning he can deal with a lot of situation in a properly way. Also, a wise person is one who can analyse the memories he has and find paterns and create generalizations and aply them to the curent situation.

A smart person can become wiser faster, but he still needs the practical experiences to become wise.

In my opinion, the most important is practical inteligence. Streetwise if you want. The necessary knowledge and the tools to deal with every day life.

A guy who is extremely smart but without wisdom is the bizarre genius who stays 24/7 in his lab creating technologies and theories, and the extremely wise but without inteligence would be the kid who grew up in the streets and managed to get a job and house.

Intelligence and Wisdom are two different things.

think about Richard Nixon and Edith Bunker.

Richard Nixon. Intelligent, but foolish.

Edith Bunker (All in the Family): not bright... but very Wise.

people can consider both important, or both not important as well as either or.

Isaac Asimov once said something like "I'm intelligent because the people making the tests define me as intelligent. If my mechanic made the test, I'd probably be considered an idiot."

Intelligence is the capacity to figure things out and address new situations integrating already known concepts.

Wisdom is pattern recognition gained through experience.

Memorizing crap in a textbook is neither.

There are more kinds of smartness than that. My personal favourite is creative smartness. The kind where you actual think up new and interesting interpertations to things, instead of just regurgitating what textbooks tell you.

If you had not pointed out that there are more then 2 forms of awareness i would have, nice to see not everyone has there heads in the sand.

Ive always thought of intelligence as divided into the 'Practical' (IE: Math) and the 'Creative' (IE: Writing fiction). And I've alwasy thought of them as being closely related, with neither being particularly superior to the other.

The creative side makes us human, the practical gives us ways to do it better.

Ive always thought of intelligence as divided into the 'Practical' (IE: Math) and the 'Creative' (IE: Writing fiction). And I've alwasy thought of them as being closely related, with neither being particularly superior to the other.

The creative side makes us human, the practical gives us ways to do it better.

And there is social intelligence, too. And practical and creative can be further divided.

Well, let me start off by saying there's two kinds of smartness.

1. Intelligence. The more intelligent you are, the faster you can do a calculus problem, and the better you can memorize stuff from a textbook.

2. Wisdom. The more wise you are, the better you understand the world around you, and the better you understand other beings.

So which kind of smartness do you consider more important, either on the larger scale of society or in the smaller scale of the life of an individual.

And in case you're wondering why I ask this, it's because it seems my school seems to value students who can memorize stuff from a textbook more than someone who can actually understand what's in the textbook, and in the case of history class, what lesson is trying to be taught. Needless to say I think the latter is much more important than the former, so I want to see other people's ideas on the matter.

Poll incoming.

Wisdom, without a doubt.

I like the red smarties the best.

I like the red smarties the best.

They look kinda pink to me.

Choosing between all of the wisdom and all of the intelligence for a static human being(no changes in capability), I would have to go with wisdom as without some level of wisdom one is incapable of living due to that foolishness.

If we claim that people are dynamic, I would then have to value intelligence more highly as people tend to become wiser due to experience but IQ and therefore intelligence remains relatively constant.

Finally, given the average man, and with the capability to add more to a certain ability over another, I would add intelligence.

So, pretty much, I side with intelligence as the world can use the ability to process information a lot and because intelligence is constant, while wisdom can be learned but only so through life experience. I don't think that schools can really teach wisdom so much as indoctrinate morality and axioms.

Isn't "wisdom" in a different category?

You can be wise, but need intelligence to achieve that wisdom.

You can be smart intelligentwise, but not have wisdom (aquired yet, maybe).

Just a hunch. Intelligence as a prerequisite for wisdom.

An intelligent person can aquire wisdom. A wise person cannot aquire intelligence.

wrong, A wise person can aquire intelligence!

Isn't "wisdom" in a different category?

You can be wise, but need intelligence to achieve that wisdom.

You can be smart intelligentwise, but not have wisdom (aquired yet, maybe).

Just a hunch. Intelligence as a prerequisite for wisdom.

you can be Wise and also stupid
you can be Smart and also foolish

Wisdom does not require Intelligence, and Intelligence does not require Wisdom.

wrong, A wise person can aquire intelligence!
That is interesting, I thought that IQ, a measurement of what typically passes as intelligence as given by the OP was relatively constant throughout life. While common sense is something that people acquire. A child is often unwise but can be very intelligent, this lacking wisdom tends to decline as time goes on but the intelligence and aptness to gain intelligence of this child seem to be constant. At the very least that I how I thought the world worked, perhaps you would like to show a different model?

you can be Wise and also stupid
you can be Smart and also foolish

Wisdom does not require Intelligence, and Intelligence does not require Wisdom.
That is true, however, an intelligent person can get common sense through experience, a wise person cannot become much smarter though as for most people intelligence remains relatively constant.

Without intelligence wisdom could not even exist so I guess my vote is pretty clear. Not that the latter was less important in everyday affairs.

Joona

That is true, however, an intelligent person can get common sense through experience, a wise person cannot become much smarter though as for most people intelligence remains relatively constant.
wrong, a wise person can gain intelligence by increasing his knowledge just as a smart person can gain wisdom with experience.


and just getting experience does not necessarily mean an increase in Wisdom, just like increasing Knowledge means more intelligence.

That is interesting, I thought that IQ, a measurement of what typically passes as intelligence as given by the OP was relatively constant throughout life. While common sense is something that people acquire. A child is often unwise but can be very intelligent, this lacking wisdom tends to decline as time goes on but the intelligence and aptness to gain intelligence of this child seem to be constant. At the very least that I how I thought the world worked, perhaps you would like to show a different model?

one never stops learning if they want to keep learning.

and the OP rationalized intelligence as solving math problems and memorizing text books. not IQ rankings.

wrong, a wise person can gain intelligence by increasing his knowledge just as a smart person can gain wisdom with experience. Knowledge != Intelligence so therefore that must be wrong. Intelligence is the ability to quickly gain and process information.


and just getting experience does not necessarily mean an increase in Wisdom, just like increasing Knowledge means more intelligence.
I didn't say that getting experience necessarily meant getting more wisdom, however, most people get more experience and become somewhat wiser for doing so. If you screw up on something once, then you are less likely to do so again. Essentially speaking, most people of ability can learn from their mistakes and become better judges with time by identifying truths about the world.

one never stops learning if they want to keep learning.
That means nothing, learning is independent of intelligence. A person who is completely ignorant can be smart as a whip. Intelligence represents the aptness towards acquiring knowledge given exposure. Intelligence != Knowledge.

Knowledge != Intelligence so therefore that must be wrong. Intelligence is the ability to quickly gain and process information. I never said it was, I said they could increase their knowledge and thus increase their intelligence. Knowing alot does not make one intelligent. just like experiencing alot does not make one wiser.

I didn't say that getting experience necessarily meant getting more wisdom, however, most people get more experience and become somewhat wiser for doing so. If you screw up on something once, then you are less likely to do so again. Essentially speaking, most people of ability can learn from their mistakes and become better judges with time by identifying truths about the world.
ah, but what does learning from one's mistake fall under?
people can learn from their mistakes but that doesn't mean they are wiser.

a person mixes two wrong chemicals together, resulting in a small, painful but not fatal explosion doen't necessarily gain wisdom, but the knowledge that one should not mix those two chemicals again. that would fall under intelligence. but if that person learns to read the instructions more carefully and double check everything, THEN he gains Wisdom.

a person ties someone's shoe laces together, that person trips and cracks his skull on the table. the prankster may have learned that playing such jokes can cause an injury... he gains wisdom. if instead the prankser learns that playing such jokes should only be done when one cannot crack his head on a table, then he doesn't gain wisdom.

That means nothing, learning is independent of intelligence. A person who is completely ignorant can be smart as a whip. Intelligence represents the aptness towards acquiring knowledge given exposure. Intelligence != Knowledge.

and if a person is Foolish, he won't learn wisdom from his experiences.

Wisdom |= experiences.

A person who is completely ignorant can be smart as a whip. Intelligence represents the aptness towards acquiring knowledge given exposure. Intelligence != Knowledge.

Um... Wrong. You just described yourself intelligence as APTNESS to acquire knowledge. What in my book is required to seek knowledge. Thus, more or less: Intelligence = a curious and inquisitive mind.

Oh well, I guess it's just a clash of terminology here. Or semantics. Or WHATEVA!

Joona

I never said it was, I said they could increase their knowledge and thus increase their intelligence. Knowing alot does not make one intelligent. just like experiencing alot does not make one wiser. However, like I said earlier intelligence is constant through an individual's life. Learning more also does not make one necessarily more intelligent. The relationship between experience and wisdom is more complex since nobody is naturally wise, nor has natural common sense.


ah, but what does learning from one's mistake fall under?
people can learn from their mistakes but that doesn't mean they are wiser. Learning from mistakes is an improvement upon judgment and usually allows for greater understanding, hence, wisdom.

a person mixes two wrong chemicals together, resulting in a small, painful but not fatal explosion doen't necessarily gain wisdom, but the knowledge that one should not mix those two chemicals again. that would fall under intelligence. but if that person learns to read the instructions more carefully and double check everything, THEN he gains Wisdom. I can accept that, but still that reflects an ability to gain wisdom, while I do not accept the ability to improve processing speed as being naturally accessible.

a person ties someone's shoe laces together, that person trips and cracks his skull on the table. the prankster may have learned that playing such jokes can cause an injury... he gains wisdom. if instead the prankser learns that playing such jokes should only be done when one cannot crack his head on a table, then he doesn't gain wisdom.
Still, you show a path to wisdom being possible. The only thing is that getting knowledge does not make one a faster processor or memorizer in most circumstances. One may become better at processes they have done over and over, but this does not represent intelligence so much as training.

and if a person is Foolish, he won't learn wisdom from his experiences.

Wisdom |= experiences.
Wisdom is defined as the following: 1. Understanding of what is true, right, or lasting; insight: (Dorothy McCall). 2. Common sense; good judgment:

---------------------------------------------------------
Excerpted from American Heritage Talking Dictionary
Copyright © 1997 The Learning Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

As you can see, nothing is there about the aptness to learn but instead, wisdom focuses on existing understanding. We either need to talk of a different word such as the aptness to wisdom or something else as wisdom does not cut it.

Um... Wrong. You just described yourself intelligence as APTNESS to acquire knowledge. What in my book is required to seek knowledge. Thus, more or less: Intelligence = a curious and inquisitive mind.

Oh well, I guess it's just a clash of terminology here. Or semantics. Or WHATEVA!

Joona
No, not true at all. The aptness I speak of is the ease and ability not the desire. You simply misinterpreted my statement. Intelligence = a mind capable of achieving more knowledge more quickly than other minds, which in my book is aptness.

Let's put it this way:

Being sentient enough even to think of yakking on nitty gritty details about the semantic difference between intelligence and wisdom = Intelligence.

Being smart enough not to start an unnecessary argument over that (not that I mean you or any here would) = wisdom.

Thus, in my opinion, wisdom is intelligence tempered with experience. But that is MY opinion. If you don't like it, I have others.

Joona

wrong, a wise person can gain intelligence by increasing his knowledge just as a smart person can gain wisdom with experience.


That isn't gaining intelligence, my friend - just knowledge.

That isn't gaining intelligence, my friend - just knowledge.

and isn't knowledge the same as experience when dealing with Wisdom?

and isn't knowledge the same as experience when dealing with Wisdom?

Fuel for the process?

Experience doesn't 'make' wisdom, it just gives you what you need to 'be' wise. Because it is the acquisition of different types of knowledge - the raw data, and the observation of that raw data in the real world.

Gaining knowledge doesn't make one intelligent - it is what you burn in the intelligence.

Wisdom is defined as the following: 1. Understanding of what is true, right, or lasting; insight: (Dorothy McCall). 2. Common sense; good judgment:

---------------------------------------------------------
Excerpted from American Heritage Talking Dictionary
Copyright © 1997 The Learning Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

As you can see, nothing is there about the aptness to learn but instead, wisdom focuses on existing understanding. We either need to talk of a different word such as the aptness to wisdom or something else as wisdom does not cut it.

while I agree with most that you say, it doesn't show how Wisdom is easier to gain than Intelligence.

just because you experience it, you still need the Understanding. that is true for both wisdom and intelligence.

However, like I said earlier intelligence is constant through an individual's life. Learning more also does not make one necessarily more intelligent. The relationship between experience and wisdom is more complex since nobody is naturally wise, nor has natural common sense.
capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc. gaining Knowldege is a sign of Intelligence. Understanding that knowledge is also a sign on Intelligence.

Learning from mistakes is an improvement upon judgment and usually allows for greater understanding, hence, wisdom.
I can accept that, but still that reflects an ability to gain wisdom, while I do not accept the ability to improve processing speed as being naturally accessible.Learning from Mistakes. that does not mean that Wisdom is not easily gained. just like Intelligence, You have to have a level of Understanding. you can experience the world, but not gain a whit of wisdom if you fail to understand your experiences.

Still, you show a path to wisdom being possible. The only thing is that getting knowledge does not make one a faster processor or memorizer in most circumstances. One may become better at processes they have done over and over, but this does not represent intelligence so much as training.you gain the Knowledge, by studing that knowledge you excercise your mind to process the information faster. How one applies that knowledge is the basis for both Intelligence and Wisdom.

Fuel for the process?

Experience doesn't 'make' wisdom, it just gives you what you need to 'be' wise. Because it is the acquisition of different types of knowledge - the raw data, and the observation of that raw data in the real world.

Gaining knowledge doesn't make one intelligent - it is what you burn in the intelligence.
and that's the point I was making from the start. Wisdom and Intelligence are two seperate things. Some here say intelligence is needed for wisdom. that's not true. others say you cannot gain intelligence. that's also not true.

as long as you're willing to work at it, you will gain intelligence as well as wisdom. the point is you have to work at it.

while I agree with most that you say, it doesn't show how Wisdom is easier to gain than Intelligence.

just because you experience it, you still need the Understanding. that is true for both wisdom and intelligence.
Yes, it does. Intelligence is a quality that is relatively constant throughout one's life. Wisdom is a creation of the interaction between self and life experiences and it changes throughout life. The "understanding" is a creation of the interaction. One does not innately understand reality but rather gains this understanding through observation, a child has no common sense but gains it through age, a child however can innately have a keen mind and ability to retain massive amounts of data.
gaining Knowldege is a sign of Intelligence. Understanding that knowledge is also a sign on Intelligence. It is a sign, but it is not the same. I admit to a correlation, but you suggest that knowledge causes intelligence.
Learning from Mistakes. that does not mean that Wisdom is not easily gained. just like Intelligence, You have to have a level of Understanding. you can experience the world, but not gain a whit of wisdom if you fail to understand your experiences. Understanding is not an innate trait, and to understand requires experience which one gains over time. Common sense is also not innate, as Albert Einstein claimed(or as was mis-ascribed to him) "Common sense is nothing more than a deposit of prejudices laid down by the mind before you reach eighteen.".
you gain the Knowledge, by studing that knowledge you excercise your mind to process the information faster. How one applies that knowledge is the basis for both Intelligence and Wisdom. However, you do not become more intelligent, you simply become trained as intelligence applies to all processes, not just a certain equation or technique used. You do not gain any more ability beyond that which is why it is completely invalid for viewing this. How one applies knowledge IS NOT the basis for intelligence, intelligence requires no knowledge to have and is rather the ability to obtain knowledge. Intelligence leads to knowledge not the other way around as you mistakenly try to pawn off.

Wizdom.

Yes, it does. Intelligence is a quality that is relatively constant throughout one's life. please back this up.
Wisdom is a creation of the interaction between self and life experiences and it changes throughout life. agreed, now show that this is not true for Intelligence, that one's experiences through life does not affect one's intelligence.
The "understanding" is a creation of the interaction. One does not innately understand reality but rather gains this understanding through observation, a child has no common sense but gains it through age, a child however can innately have a keen mind and ability to retain massive amounts of data.retaining Massive amounts of data is Memory, people's memory can be improved upon no matter how old, barring medical conditions such as amesia or alzimers.
It is a sign, but it is not the same. I admit to a correlation, but you suggest that knowledge causes intelligence.I never suggested that Knowledge causes Intelligence. I was trying to point out that a sign of intelligence is the Gathering of knowledge.

Understanding is not an innate trait, and to understand requires experience which one gains over time. Common sense is also not innate, as Albert Einstein claimed(or as was mis-ascribed to him) "Common sense is nothing more than a deposit of prejudices laid down by the mind before you reach eighteen."."common sense isn't comon"

Also common sense does NOT cease to be learned or gained after 18 years. Common Sense is (IMHO) a combination of both Wisdom and Intelligence.
Understanding is an innate trait. to a child, the understanding is "if I can grab it, then it will go to my mouth." a wrong understanding but a basic one that is obtained. then through the gaining of data, corrections are made. "Bugs tasty, but mom doesn't like me eating them." Now is that intelligence or wisdom?

No where does the learning stop. as long as the child keeps on learning, the child, now man, is "at least" maintaining their intelligence. as he continues to learn, he can (not necessarily does) improve on his ability to understand facts, data and analytical abilities. all that is intelligence.

However, you do not become more intelligent, you simply become trained as intelligence applies to all processes, not just a certain equation or technique used. You do not gain any more ability beyond that which is why it is completely invalid for viewing this. How one applies knowledge IS NOT the basis for intelligence, intelligence requires no knowledge to have and is rather the ability to obtain knowledge. Intelligence leads to knowledge not the other way around as you mistakenly try to pawn off.The same can be applied to wisdom. all the experiences one gains through life doesn't mean anything if one cannot understand it wisely as well as intellectually. if Knowledge is just the measurment of Intelligence, the same is for experience and Wisdom as everyone else says they will gain wisdom with age. Understanding is the key point to both. you make a foolish choice. does the knowledge you gain from that choice mean you are now wiser? not if you don't understand what happened.

The real question is. what is YOUR definition of Intelligence and Wisdom.
1. Intelligence. The more intelligent you are, the faster you can do a calculus problem, and the better you can memorize stuff from a textbook.

2. Wisdom. The more wise you are, the better you understand the world around you, and the better you understand other beings.
the OP has just defined Intelligence as the ability to gather Knowledge.

by what most say, that is not intelligence.

the OP has also defined Wisdom as understanding the world about you and understanding others.
Nothing about Experiences.

so what is your definition of Intelligence and Wisdom?

please back this up.http://www.bebettercpa.net/ First place I came across but it still backs it up but I know I've heard it many other places as well. It essentially states, that IQ(intelligence) stays constant, while EQ(which relates more to wisdom) will change over an individual's life time.

agreed, now show that this is not true for Intelligence, that one's experiences through life does not affect one's intelligence. The fact of the matter is that intelligence is not driven by experience, a significant portion of it is genetic and after a certain age certain processes are basically set.

retaining Massive amounts of data is Memory, people's memory can be improved upon no matter how old, barring medical conditions such as amesia or alzimers. Do you mean mnemonics or do you mean that the person's memory gets better? I recognize that people can develop better methods of memorization but these are techniques and not really matters of intelligence as intelligence refers more to natural ability to comprehend.

I never suggested that Knowledge causes Intelligence. I was trying to point out that a sign of intelligence is the Gathering of knowledge. Gathering of knowledge does not have to be capitalized. Everyone knows that intelligent people tend to be more knowledgeable.


Also common sense does NOT cease to be learned or gained after 18 years. Common Sense is (IMHO) a combination of both Wisdom and Intelligence.
Understanding is an innate trait. to a child, the understanding is "if I can grab it, then it will go to my mouth." a wrong understanding but a basic one that is obtained. then through the gaining of data, corrections are made. "Bugs tasty, but mom doesn't like me eating them." Now is that intelligence or wisdom? I never claimed it did, I referenced a quote by Einstein but a lot of "common sense" is bias. Such as the split between optimism and pessimism and other things. No objective conclusion can really be reached on either but both have their wisdom and their view of common sense.

No where does the learning stop. as long as the child keeps on learning, the child, now man, is "at least" maintaining their intelligence. as he continues to learn, he can (not necessarily does) improve on his ability to understand facts, data and analytical abilities. all that is intelligence. The big question is whether or not his ability is increasing or whether he is just learning new methods. Learning a statistical method of variance is knowledge but relates to processing, a person who knows it is not necessarily smarter though. The improvements though are largely issues of training and technique rather than of intelligence.

The same can be applied to wisdom. all the experiences one gains through life doesn't mean anything if one cannot understand it wisely as well as intellectually. if Knowledge is just the measurment of Intelligence, the same is for experience and Wisdom as everyone else says they will gain wisdom with age. Understanding is the key point to both. you make a foolish choice. does the knowledge you gain from that choice mean you are now wiser? not if you don't understand what happened.
The only thing is that individuals given time will learn more on these matters and become wiser on this. Knowledge IS NOT the measure of intelligence. That is pure BS. Knowledge is a measure of knowledge. There can be some correlation but other factors come so far in to play in this that to say that one always relates perfectly to another is blindly foolish. Wisdom is only measured by the experiences understood though so understanding really plays very little part in this unless experience is also present, most people have enough understanding and gain enough experience so that they will progressively get wiser. Intelligence though is a raw ability to comprehend. One will get wiser as time goes on but one does not usually get smarter, they might learn some tricks but they do not gain raw ability to learn new ideas.

Well, let me start off by saying there's two kinds of smartness.

1. Intelligence. The more intelligent you are, the faster you can do a calculus problem, and the better you can memorize stuff from a textbook.

2. Wisdom. The more wise you are, the better you understand the world around you, and the better you understand other beings.

So which kind of smartness do you consider more important, either on the larger scale of society or in the smaller scale of the life of an individual.

And in case you're wondering why I ask this, it's because it seems my school seems to value students who can memorize stuff from a textbook more than someone who can actually understand what's in the textbook, and in the case of history class, what lesson is trying to be taught. Needless to say I think the latter is much more important than the former, so I want to see other people's ideas on the matter.

Poll incoming.

Umm, I disagree with your definitions, but even with them, I would go with wisdom.

http://www.bebettercpa.net/ First place I came across but it still backs it up but I know I've heard it many other places as well. It essentially states, that IQ(intelligence) stays constant, while EQ(which relates more to wisdom) will change over an individual's life time.
The fact of the matter is that intelligence is not driven by experience, a significant portion of it is genetic and after a certain age certain processes are basically set.
Do you mean mnemonics or do you mean that the person's memory gets better? I recognize that people can develop better methods of memorization but these are techniques and not really matters of intelligence as intelligence refers more to natural ability to comprehend.
Gathering of knowledge does not have to be capitalized. Everyone knows that intelligent people tend to be more knowledgeable.

I never claimed it did, I referenced a quote by Einstein but a lot of "common sense" is bias. Such as the split between optimism and pessimism and other things. No objective conclusion can really be reached on either but both have their wisdom and their view of common sense.
The big question is whether or not his ability is increasing or whether he is just learning new methods. Learning a statistical method of variance is knowledge but relates to processing, a person who knows it is not necessarily smarter though. The improvements though are largely issues of training and technique rather than of intelligence.

The only thing is that individuals given time will learn more on these matters and become wiser on this. Knowledge IS NOT the measure of intelligence. That is pure BS. Knowledge is a measure of knowledge. There can be some correlation but other factors come so far in to play in this that to say that one always relates perfectly to another is blindly foolish. Wisdom is only measured by the experiences understood though so understanding really plays very little part in this unless experience is also present, most people have enough understanding and gain enough experience so that they will progressively get wiser. Intelligence though is a raw ability to comprehend. One will get wiser as time goes on but one does not usually get smarter, they might learn some tricks but they do not gain raw ability to learn new ideas.

Define intelligence and how you measure it?

oh and Intelligence is 1) not mostly genetics, but 50% genetics and 50% environmental.
http://www.scq.ubc.ca/?p=292
http://iq-test.learninginfo.org/iq03.htm

and as for not increasing Intelligence...
http://library.thinkquest.org/C005704/content_la_intel_increasing.php3
Many studies have focused on one particular question: can IQs be increased? Several studies have shown that children in preschool who are exposed to environments that stimulate mental activity score higher on IQ tests than their peers who were not exposed to similar environments. The average increase was approximately 5 IQ points, but the increase was found to be temporary, completely disappearing by the time the children had finished elementary school. However, despite the increase's temporary nature, these children were found to perform better in secondary school, were less likely to need special education, and were more likely to finish school and pursue post-secondary education. It is believed that some cognitive functions were improved in these children, and although this did not have a permanent effect on their IQ scores, that stimulation was a key factor in increasing their overall cognitive performance.

So could continued exposure to enriched environments prolong an increase in intelligence, or even make it permanent? Many researchers and psychologists believe that it is a possibility. Neurological studies have shown that when exposed to a stimulating environment, neurons continue to grow, expand, and synapse, whereas without the stimulating environment they do not develop as fully since they receive only minimal stimulation. Furthermore, synapses are believed to be stronger if they are stimulated more frequently, suggesting that environments rich in variety and activity may help cognitive function throughout someone's lifetime.

also... http://www.audiblox.com/iq_scores.htm

Measures of intelligence may be valuable — although the value is often overrated — but much harm can be done by persons who try to classify individuals strictly on the basis of such measures alone. No one should be either alarmed or discouraged if he finds that his IQ is not as high as he might have hoped. Remember that many elements besides IQ contribute to success and happiness. Also note that IQ is not a fixed quantity, but can be increased by means of education. This was demonstrated by the Milwaukee project as well as numerous other research studies.

and
http://www.brainbasedbusiness.com/2006/06/if_iq_is_not_fixedwhat_then.html

Semantics aside, I believe that understanding is more important than memorising. It's just easier to test students on their memorisation and ability to regurgitate facts than it is to write a question that requires some thought and more than two or three word answers.

Even your own sources indicate that IQ gains from such things are temporary. Not only that but children's IQs are going to be more malleable than that of adults. As well, the genetic correlation for IQ is known to get higher as one ages rather than lower and the correlation between genetics and IQ is between .4 to .8 and I simply choose the greater side of that noting that twin IQ comparison would be the best method.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inheritance_of_intelligence

Really though, the ability for people to gain wisdom is very acknowledged, however, the ability to markedly change IQ is not noted quite so much. Unfortunately there is no objective measure for wisdom to state that, however, given the marked change in wisdom over age, it would seem that such is true. While with IQ usually individuals stay around similar levels. The bright young usually becomes the bright old man(barring disease) however, a foolish young can end up getting old and wise. The heart of my argument is that changes in wisdom are going to be something more doable than changes in intelligence. I have never seen nor met anyone make a massive IQ leap, I have definitely seen people get significantly better at the use of common sense, and I think that if we had wisdom statistics, such would be noted as well.

Three, I do tend to distrust the final site because it seems to be run by somebody trying to sell something. People trying to sell IQ enhancing things is something as old as marketing. Not only that but still I would argue that the ability for wisdom to change more rapidly and dramatically than IQ, not only that but if everyone is having an increase in IQ, as the blog seems to argue, then no net IQ change is actually occurring, which means that no increase in IQ points is occurring, making the argument questionable from the start as IQ as everyone knows is supposed to be centered at 100. That aside, even if we do take the argument that work makes steady increases, it does not change the argument that rapid changes in wisdom can occur and do occur more often than those of IQ.

Even your own sources indicate that IQ gains from such things are temporary. Not only that but children's IQs are going to be more malleable than that of adults. As well, the genetic correlation for IQ is known to get higher as one ages rather than lower and the correlation between genetics and IQ is between .4 to .8 and I simply choose the greater side of that noting that twin IQ comparison would be the best method.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inheritance_of_intelligenceKeep reading. they say that the scores are temporary, the effect isn't. and I provided two more links that say IQ is changable.

oh and from your wiki article
It is reasonable to expect that genetic influences on traits like IQ should become less important as one gains experiences with age. Surprisingly, the opposite occurs. Heritability measured in infancy are as low as 20%, around 40% in middle childhood, and as high as 80% in adulthood. Plomin et al. (2001, 2003); although this could also suggest that genetic influences have an effect on a persons predisposition to learn and develop IQ. so even they are not sure if the Genetics is affecting the IQ or the predisposition to LEARN AND DEVELOP IQ. develop... build up... change!

Really though, the ability for people to gain wisdom is very acknowledged, however, the ability to markedly change IQ is not noted quite so much. Unfortunately there is no objective measure for wisdom to state that, however, given the marked change in wisdom over age, it would seem that such is true. While with IQ usually individuals stay around similar levels. The bright young usually becomes the bright old man(barring disease) however, a foolish young can end up getting old and wise. The heart of my argument is that changes in wisdom are going to be something more doable than changes in intelligence. I have never seen nor met anyone make a massive IQ leap, I have definitely seen people get significantly better at the use of common sense, and I think that if we had wisdom statistics, such would be noted as well.you can have Foolish Old Men.

I Agree, there is no way to mark wisdom growth. but that doesn't mean Age automatically brings about Wisdom.

and define Massive IQ leap?

Three, I do tend to distrust the final site because it seems to be run by somebody trying to sell something. People trying to sell IQ enhancing things is something as old as marketing. Not only that but still I would argue that the ability for wisdom to change more rapidly and dramatically than IQ, not only that but if everyone is having an increase in IQ, as the blog seems to argue, then no net IQ change is actually occurring, which means that no increase in IQ points is occurring, making the argument questionable from the start as IQ as everyone knows is supposed to be centered at 100. That aside, even if we do take the argument that work makes steady increases, it does not change the argument that rapid changes in wisdom can occur and do occur more often than those of IQ.
meanwhile your ONE source only mentions it once while concentrating on what they term EI and how they can help increase that. it doesn't back it up with studies either.

again, Define Intelligence and how do YOU measure it.

and more from WIKI (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient)
It is well known that it is possible to increase one's IQ score by training, for example by regularly playing puzzle games. Recent studies have shown that training in ones using working memory may increase IQ. (Klingberg et al., 2002)

Keep reading. they say that the scores are temporary, the effect isn't. and I provided two more links that say IQ is changable. A few of your sources are marketers and the long term effects seem like they would be temporary given the long run.

oh and from your wiki article
so even they are not sure if the Genetics is affecting the IQ or the predisposition to LEARN AND DEVELOP IQ. develop... build up... change!Did you note that my argument changed from my last post?? I argued the speed of wisdom change vs the speed in intellect change. Not only that but such a predisposition being innate really does not challenge the idea that intellect ends up being determined more by innate qualities.

you can have Foolish Old Men.I never said that such was impossible, I argued that changes in wisdom are more likely to occur and are larger.

I Agree, there is no way to mark wisdom growth. but that doesn't mean Age automatically brings about Wisdom. I never stated that. I stated that age is likely to increase wisdom but age is not likely to increase IQ.

and define Massive IQ leap?Isn't the term massive relatively self-evident. I mean a self-stimulated massive IQ increase.

meanwhile your ONE source only mentions it once while concentrating on what they term EI and how they can help increase that. it doesn't back it up with studies either. And your sources are run by marketers as well. However, once again, I did redefine my position a little bit and you are ignoring that completely. Have you ever met or seen any single individual who changed their IQ significantly, as I never have but I have noted that individuals do change in wisdom markedly if only noted from the shift between teenaged communists(this isn't to argue that communists are unwise so much as the teenaged ones are) to functioning members of society.

again, Define Intelligence and how do YOU measure it.
I stated it multiple times if you have read my previous posts on this matter. I probably stated that the best measure was IQ tests but that they were imperfect due to the differences between training and legitimate increases in IQ. One can study up for an IQ test, but that does not mean that one is smarter.

A few of your sources are marketers and the long term effects seem like they would be temporary given the long run.and your one post is also from a Marketing firm... your point?

Did you note that my argument changed from my last post?? I argued the speed of wisdom change vs the speed in intellect change. Not only that but such a predisposition being innate really does not challenge the idea that intellect ends up being determined more by innate qualities.I noticed, but our debate wasn't about the Speed of change but your stance was that Intelligence couldn't change... period.

I never said that such was impossible, I argued that changes in wisdom are more likely to occur and are larger.but if one cannot track wisdom and you cannot trust IQ tests, how can you say that.
I never stated that. I stated that age is likely to increase wisdom but age is not likely to increase IQ.and I never said that Age increases IQ.
Isn't the term massive relatively self-evident. I mean a self-stimulated massive IQ increase. and what is massive... 2 pts... 5 pts... 10 pts... what? and now self-stimulated? adults can go back to college with the support of their children and spouses, so you really cannot limit it to self-stimulation.
And your sources are run by marketers as well. However, once again, I did redefine my position a little bit and you are ignoring that completely. Have you ever met or seen any single individual who changed their IQ significantly, as I never have but I have noted that individuals do change in wisdom markedly if only noted from the shift between teenaged communists(this isn't to argue that communists are unwise so much as the teenaged ones are) to functioning members of society.I never said wisdom was hard or easy to gain. I said one had to work on it, it's not readily available just because you experience something or you aged.

I stated it multiple times if you have read my previous posts on this matter. I probably stated that the best measure was IQ tests but that they were imperfect due to the differences between training and legitimate increases in IQ. One can study up for an IQ test, but that does not mean that one is smarter. but you've also stated that Knowledge |= Intelligence and that increasing one's knowledge does not mean an increase in Intelligence. the Dictionary defines it as Learning and applying that knowledge, so gaining knowledge is a sign of increasing intelligence.

from your last post.
Even your own sources indicate that IQ gains from such things are temporary. Not only that but children's IQs are going to be more malleable than that of adults. As well, the genetic correlation for IQ is known to get higher as one ages rather than lower and the correlation between genetics and IQ is between .4 to .8 and I simply choose the greater side of that noting that twin IQ comparison would be the best method.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inherit...f_intelligence

Really though, the ability for people to gain wisdom is very acknowledged, however, the ability to markedly change IQ is not noted quite so much. Unfortunately there is no objective measure for wisdom to state that, however, given the marked change in wisdom over age, it would seem that such is true. While with IQ usually individuals stay around similar levels. The bright young usually becomes the bright old man(barring disease) however, a foolish young can end up getting old and wise. The heart of my argument is that changes in wisdom are going to be something more doable than changes in intelligence. I have never seen nor met anyone make a massive IQ leap, I have definitely seen people get significantly better at the use of common sense, and I think that if we had wisdom statistics, such would be noted as well.

Three, I do tend to distrust the final site because it seems to be run by somebody trying to sell something. People trying to sell IQ enhancing things is something as old as marketing. Not only that but still I would argue that the ability for wisdom to change more rapidly and dramatically than IQ, not only that but if everyone is having an increase in IQ, as the blog seems to argue, then no net IQ change is actually occurring , which means that no increase in IQ points is occurring, making the argument questionable from the start as IQ as everyone knows is supposed to be centered at 100. That aside, even if we do take the argument that work makes steady increases, it does not change the argument that rapid changes in wisdom can occur and do occur more often than those of IQ. your main point, besides the attempt to turn it into what does one learn faster, is that IQ doesn't change because the median line for that generation increases. each generation that enters Schooling is slightly higher than the last. if your IQ doesn't change when using the new median level (which the Flynn Effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect)shows peaked in the 1990's) that means you're holding your place. ergo, you raised your IQ.

How can you say IQ cannot change or even cannot change significantly if you don't trust the tests designed to measure IQ?

as to which one will learn faster, that's up to the individual person, which is why I didn't persue it.

and your one post is also from a Marketing firm... your point? Neither can be that trusted I suppose.

I noticed, but our debate wasn't about the Speed of change but your stance was that Intelligence couldn't change... period. Actually the debate was centered originally around the idea of which one was more important and for one to change faster than the other means that all else equal it would be more desirable to have the slower changing one already and let the faster one grow.

but if one cannot track wisdom and you cannot trust IQ tests, how can you say that. Induction? Considering that one of the variables cannot be tracked at all, it just falls down to induction.

and I never said that Age increases IQ. I never said you did, however, it was argued that as age increases the wisdom of a person increases due to experience.

and what is massive... 2 pts... 5 pts... 10 pts... what? and now self-stimulated? adults can go back to college with the support of their children and spouses, so you really cannot limit it to self-stimulation.
I never said wisdom was hard or easy to gain. I said one had to work on it, it's not readily available just because you experience something or you aged. 2 and 5 are not that massive, and could simply be fluctuation, 10 pts might be up there but a standard deviation would be significant and note worthy. I tend to doubt that college actually increases one's IQ.

but you've also stated that Knowledge |= Intelligence and that increasing one's knowledge does not mean an increase in Intelligence. the Dictionary defines it as Learning and applying that knowledge, so gaining knowledge is a sign of increasing intelligence. No, the dictionary defines it as an ability to apply one's knowledge. Having the ability to use knowledge does not presuppose actually having knowledge but rather simply states that if a being is given knowledge he can process it and use it.


your main point, besides the attempt to turn it into what does one learn faster, is that IQ doesn't change because the median line for that generation increases. each generation that enters Schooling is slightly higher than the last. if your IQ doesn't change when using the new median level (which the Flynn Effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect)shows peaked in the 1990's) that means you're holding your place. ergo, you raised your IQ. It means that your IQ is not raised because of the new median, which means that no change has occurred. The author claimed the IQ was increasing, which could not happen with the change in median. The claim is an attack on the author's logic not anything else.

How can you say IQ cannot change or even cannot change significantly if you don't trust the tests designed to measure IQ? And you claim that in order to make any judgment I must accept that IQ tests work perfectly even if particular effort is made to study the puzzles on those things? I can easily claim it, and I can state that flaws in the IQ test lead to erroneous conclusions.

as to which one will learn faster, that's up to the individual person, which is why I didn't persue it.However, can you really deny that changes in wisdom happen more drastically than anything else? A change in wisdom is a paradigm shift and those happen almost all of the time. A change in intelligence is relatively unheard of though, and such claims are usually made by marketers.