Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

People who think being academic means intelligence watch

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Essayist)
    Oh, an ad hominem attack. How can you prove such a spurious assertion?
    Well you were continuously accusing me of implying something that was exactly the opposite of the argument I had very clearly put forward? I can't help but draw conclusions...

    So to be clear, you would claim that everybody that goes to a top university is particularly intelligent? Every person at a top 10 is more intelligent than every person at a mid-table? Can't help but think the emphasis would be on you to prove that, rather than me to prove the obvious.

    For what it's worth, I've worked in a professional environment with people from a wide variety of universities, which is probably far more experience on the matter than you have had (no offence, you're still a student right?). I have had varied views of different people from the same universities, let alone looking at different universities. However I've always noted that those from top universities tend to have a great work ethic.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1011)
    Well you were continuously accusing me of implying something that was exactly the opposite of the argument I had very clearly put forward? I can't help but draw conclusions...

    So to be clear, you would claim that everybody that goes to a top university is particularly intelligent? Every person at a top 10 is more intelligent than every person at a mid-table? Can't help but think the emphasis would be on you to prove that, rather than me to prove the obvious.

    For what it's worth, I've worked in a professional environment with people from a wide variety of universities, which is probably far more experience on the matter than you have had (no offence, you're still a student right?). I have had varied views of different people from the same universities, let alone looking at different universities. However I've always noted that those from top universities tend to have a great work ethic.
    The top 10? Do you mean the top 2? :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The ability to achieve high grades is a necessary but insufficient condition to being intelligent.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    being academically sound is only a small,highly centered and a self confined part of a much broader term "intelligence"The concept suggested by Howard Gardner regarding multiple intelligences supports this point..As a human with individual competencies and lackings ,it cant be possible for one to be intelligent in all terms suggested by Mr gardner..so being academically profound and remarkable is small step in climbing the ladder of becoming intelligent in all walks of life.dr goleman who suggested emotional intelligence also stands by this concept as he differentiates between iq and eq:cool:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Essayist)
    The top 10? Do you mean the top 2? :rolleyes:
    No, I meant the top 10. You can tell because I said 'top 10'. It was a subtle clue.

    If it helps you embrace the argument you can substitute 10 for 2.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1011)
    No, I meant the top 10. You can tell because I said 'top 10'. It was a subtle clue.

    If it helps you embrace the argument you can substitute 10 for 2.
    I am insinuating that the people at the other 8 are not that intelligent. I thought you would pick up on that. Guess not. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Essayist)
    I am insinuating that the people at the other 8 are not that intelligent. I thought you would pick up on that. Guess not. :rolleyes:
    Another eye opening comment from you. So in essence you have nothing further to say of note so have chosen to make a humourless statement instead, in the process insulting anyone that goes to a university outside of oxbridge? :clap2:

    Another clueless, self-entitled snob destined for graduate unemployment I suspect.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1011)
    Another eye opening comment from you. So in essence you have nothing further to say of note so have chosen to make a humourless statement instead, in the process insulting anyone that goes to a university outside of oxbridge? :clap2:

    Another clueless, self-entitled snob destined for graduate unemployment I suspect.
    :laugh:
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zenomorph)
    I simply stated a fact and you reacted like you were personally insulted - read over your own posts cause you seem to have a bad memory as well as being angry.

    I said most inventors did not go to UNIVERSITY, a poly is NOT a UNI,I doubt you know what it means otherwise you would not have made the same mistake twice. So you are wrong - he didn't go to uni he attended a polytechnic, dropped out. It then became a uni much later.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla

    I am using ' invent ' in the broad sense of the word:

    Ford invented the modern mass motor industry, Rockefeller did the same for Oil and banking.

    But how about:

    Wright brothers - aeroplane

    Pellegrino Turri - type writer

    Leonardo da Vinci - too many inventions to list

    László Széchenyi - submarine radios

    Thomas Newcomen - steam engine

    Wal Disney - animation and theme park design

    Also the inventors of gunpower, paper, printing, compass, stirrup, foundations of mathematics and most invention pre 1800.

    Fact that most people did not go to uni till recently actually supports my point.

    There it is - most of the most important inventions to mankind made by non university people. I think that proves my point and I don't think any further discussion is going to be meaningful.
    Hmm, no. I've read over my posts, and I've done nothing of the sort. Please quote me where I appear to be "angry"? You're the only one resorting to personal attacks here.

    He did go to a polytechnic, but that's essentially the same as a university education these days. Universities back then didn't really do technology, so if you were interested in that sort of thing, you went to a polytechnic instead.

    Entrepreneurs are not inventors in any sense of the word.

    The fact is that nearly all these inventors have been educated to a level that would be considered "university level" these days. It has nothing to do with not being academic, which was what you were using the statement to imply.

    What the fact that most people did not go to uni till recently proves is that your point is irrelevant, because going to uni didn't have much to do with academic ability.

    Depending on what you meant, your statement is either one of these two:

    (a) Incorrect.

    (b) Correct, but irrelevant.

    I will accept that you are right, if you accept that your statement bears no actual relevance to this thread.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by justinawe)
    Hmm, no. I've read over my posts, and I've done nothing of the sort. Please quote me where I appear to be "angry"? You're the only one resorting to personal attacks here.

    He did go to a polytechnic, but that's essentially the same as a university education these days. Universities back then didn't really do technology, so if you were interested in that sort of thing, you went to a polytechnic instead.

    Entrepreneurs are not inventors in any sense of the word.

    The fact is that nearly all these inventors have been educated to a level that would be considered "university level" these days. It has nothing to do with not being academic, which was what you were using the statement to imply.

    What the fact that most people did not go to uni till recently proves is that your point is irrelevant, because going to uni didn't have much to do with academic ability.

    Depending on what you meant, your statement is either one of these two:

    (a) Incorrect.

    (b) Correct, but irrelevant.

    I will accept that you are right, if you accept that your statement bears no actual relevance to this thread.
    No a polytechnic is not a university otherwise it would not have changed into a university. I mean every single poly in UK has converted into a university. If they were one and the same, it'd be stupid to change anything.

    Pure simple logic.

    What entrepreneurs ? You ignoring the hundreds maybe even thousands of totally significant invention made by non uni-people.

    You are still have trouble with your reading skills - I said I use innovation in the broad sense which includes concepts as well as physical inventions.
    Only a dumb person would not accept this, Enstein and Newton were essentially concepts people.

    And Disney did actually invent physical things like them parks and recognisable cartoons - he was the first one.

    Also these are facts whether you accept them or not I am not bothered either way.

    but I will tell you what I cannot accept is that people who don't read posts properly and then try to argue from mistaken perspectives. Thus I am calling it a day with you so I won't be relying anymore.

    Thank you and good bye.........
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zenomorph)
    No a polytechnic is not a university otherwise it would not have changed into a university. I mean every single poly in UK has converted into a university. If they were one and the same, it'd be stupid to change anything.

    Pure simple logic.

    What entrepreneurs ? You ignoring the hundreds maybe even thousands of totally significant invention made by non uni-people.

    You are still have trouble with your reading skills - I said I use innovation in the broad sense which includes concepts as well as physical inventions.
    Only a dumb person would not accept this, Enstein and Newton were essentially concepts people.

    And Disney did actually invent physical things like them parks and recognisable cartoons - he was the first one.

    Also these are facts whether you accept them or not I am not bothered either way.

    but I will tell you what I cannot accept is that people who don't read posts properly and then try to argue from mistaken perspectives. Thus I am calling it a day with you so I won't be relying anymore.

    Thank you and good bye.........

    Your first line shows that you didn't read my post properly, as I didn't say polytechnics are universities.

    In fact, that supports my point - what was a polytechnic back then would be considered a uni today.

    You do realise that an understanding of concepts is often needed to make physical inventions?

    Oh, he physically invented theme parks, did he? He was the one with the understanding of physics required to safely build those rides? A theme park is hardly an original idea (even back then), he was just the first to make it work. As said before, he was just the better entreprenuer.

    But unfortunately, all you seem to do is come up with ad homs, as well as ignore my queries about the relevance of your statement to this thread :rolleyes:
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    They mean nothing, I know really intelligent who have a good background in their chosen subject but universities tend to judge you on your GCSE/A-level/BTEC grades instead of your ability to do a subject.

    I study filmmaking which requires a lot of theory work which people aren't aware of, they just think its just holding a camera at someone. people are suppose to be less intelligent if they don't study a science/maths/politics type course which I feel is nonsense just snobbery. To do the course requires a lot of skill and creativity, I think good imagination is a sign of intelligence.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LonelyDemon)
    I think good imagination is a sign of intelligence.
    I do agree with this.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It's been said that back in the Ancient times intelligence was an abstract concept, broad philosophical debate difficult to shape and define. However, the debate ended at the time when you had the blade between your ribs. In the meantime, the current postmodern perception of intelligence is even more of an abstraction.

    For a consensus it has been established that there are "different kinds of intelligence(s)": such as a linguistic or a problem-solving one. I'm at LSE where we do LSE100: this is where academia ends, many argue, but I don't think that is the case.

    Speaking of academic-intelligent relationship: those might not be completely separate spheres. The brain capacity can be trained and accustomed to amazing activities that one would consider requiring 'intelligence' amongst all Homo Sapiens [and Cro Magnon too - giving they are still alive].
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    bad grades don't necessarily mean a person is stupid, but someone who really is stupid is not going to be a serious academic success.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by upthegunners)
    What do you think?
    There's definitely a correlation between high intelligence and academic success but it does not necessarily mean that high intelligence means academic success, nor does it mean that academic success means high intelligence.

    There are plenty of intelligent people who have not been successful academically, either because they have never desired academic success and have sought success in other fields, or because they simply did not agree with school at the time.

    I'm sure a lot of people on here think joiners, builders, plumbers etc aren't very clever and that we need more people doing rigorous academic subjects at school, but to be honest, it's hard work learning and perfecting a skilled trade.

    Just because you can write a 3,500 word essay on Nietschze doesn't mean you're intelligent. It is probably due to intelligence, but intelligence manifests itself in so many ways...
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SnoochToTheBooch)
    bad grades don't necessarily mean a person is stupid, but someone who really is stupid is not going to be a serious academic success.
    Broadly correct but with enough hard work, you can rote learn your way to success in a lot of things.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ilickbatteries)
    Broadly correct but with enough hard work, you can rote learn your way to success in a lot of things.
    you can in some subjects but we all know that not all subjects are created equal
 
 
 
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?
Useful resources
AtCTs

Ask the Community Team

Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

Welcome Lounge

Welcome Lounge

We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.