Why is it okay to discriminate on the basis of intelligence?

Meh. If you can't show your intelligence, what's the point?

The difference between those two is not intelligence; it is environment. To become a surgeon, like with any job, it is not so much about intelligence as it is the drive to do all the hard work necessary, and have the opportunity to do so. How many people on JK do you think grew up near a school where academia is encouraged?

Also you know nothing about either of these (albeit hypothetical) people. The guy on Jeremy Kyle who got his neighbour's wife pregnant could be a natural with a wrench; can fix anything with moving parts, be able to do life like drawings and never been in any sort of financial woe. The surgeon could be a massive tool-go to work, do surgery, go home. Put the wrench in the hand of the surgeon he wont be able to do anything, give the JK guy an open wound and you get a corpse.

I do believe you hold a rather uncommon view on what is intelligence. There's little use debating it here as you're gonna be arguing with people, both of you using the same word but meaning different things.

I have to say though, I don't believe everyone is equally intelligent, but my definition of intelligence differs from yours so arguing with you over this is not going to lead anywhere productive.

Okay then, what is your definition of intelligence?

x

I'd say I have fairly similar views about this topic to you (so, of course, I think you've made some great posts ). Intelligence, going by the dictionary, is vaguely defined as: the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills. However, people acquire and apply in different ways, and people acquire and apply different types of knowledge and skill with a different level of efficiency, so your point is valid so far.

What I will say is this: when people say 'X is more intelligent than Y', I believe it's based on the societal value of the type of knowledge and skills one has and can apply rather than any objective measure. It's impossible to quantify intelligence which is why IQ tests and the like are so ridiculously flawed. And since societal values change, I'd be inclined to say that the perception of intelligence changes over time.

What I will say is this: when people say 'X is more intelligent than Y', I believe it's based on the societal value of the type of knowledge and skills one has and can apply rather than any objective measure. It's impossible to quantify intelligence which is why IQ tests and the like are so ridiculously flawed. And since societal values change, I'd be inclined to say that the perception of intelligence changes over time.

Well that societal definition is one I would love to see changed.

Testing is the key thing here, and why the logical side of thinking is so readily put above all others as it is so easily tested (badly) in academia to the point where everyone thinks they are intelligent compared to the average person because they got a few A's.

I would contend that logic is very closely tied to intelligence. I've had a little think, and I've come to the idea that intelligence involves the processing of information and applying concepts to it, not a definitive definition (haha), but a general idea. This lends itself to logic very well, but also to other fields.

Reminded of this:

I know what you mean, logic is the way to think properly. But it does not quite cover all the bases (or as many) as you might think.

Give this a read, it might help

I think of intelligence as the ability to do things quickly, for example in the definition for the first type of intelligence Naturalist, you could look at a leaf and think about it for a few seconds and go (logically thinking) 'this leaf is a deep green colour, has pointy spikes and is quite thick, it must be from a holly bush'. After some practice and research, you'll be able to identify lots of leaves. However, what makes a person intelligent in this way would be to learn to do this very quickly, to be able to identify what makes this leaf different from the other and why. Mathematical logic would only take you as far as 'this is a leaf, not a branch'!

Superiority complex basically, to feel that you are above/better than them... Atleast for the vast majority who do it.

EDIT:
Thumbing down? Sorry but this is what everyone is like, they want to feel superior and this is one aspect of discrimiation that fulfills that human need in the 21st century.

On the other hand, if I'm hiring actors for a film, and I tell someone "sorry, you can't play the character of Harry Potter, you're black", that would be seen as perfectly acceptable.

It's not about feeling superior to people, it's about what people are suited to do. Would you want somebody of low intelligence teaching you or performing surgery? The quality of the work would be low and the person probably wouldn't understand what is going on or what to do.

You're simply conflating knowledge with intelligence. You could possess the knowledge to perform tasks such as surgery or teaching through extensive practice and training. Intelligence simply denotes how fast one can learn or perform tasks in unknown situations. If you became accustomed to all types of surgery, mishaps and such, nothing would be surprising for you thus, intelligence doesn't factor into the equation. However, I understand that less intelligent individuals may struggle to grasp teaching practices, the intricacies of the human body for surgery, etc. Do not underestimate human intelligence though; anyone with enough patience and perseverance can achieve incredible feats.