This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Lancashire man medicine
- Peter Symonds vs Queen Mary's college
- Uni of Leicester vs Uni of Kent
- A* business a-level tutorial EDEXCEL - How to get an A star
- Is King's College London good?
- Notthingham trent vs kent
- What does annual compensation mean?
- Best thing to do in year off to improve application for business course?
- Chances on pupillage, a bit of an unorthodox background
- Could someone grade my GCSE English Lit essay?
- Friend always acts as if she's smarter than me?
- Biologist Meike Stoverock proves female hypergamy
- Do UCL care about personal statements?
- Got into Oxford despite missing a grade. I feel like I don't deserve to be there
- GCSE Options (please read and help me)
- Is the University of Winchester good?
- UCL or HKU?
- How do you feel about the announced increases in undergraduate tuition fees?
- Dissertation issues - consequences of not submitting it?
- Oxford University applicants fall out rate
Scroll to see replies
Highly academic people would probably be knowledgeable in their chosen area.
Is that intelligence? Or expertise? I don't know!
I would class Prince as really intelligent, genius even. There aren't many true lyricists like him. Yes, I'm saying not many people are truly intelligent.
Is that intelligence? Or expertise? I don't know!
I would class Prince as really intelligent, genius even. There aren't many true lyricists like him. Yes, I'm saying not many people are truly intelligent.
I think someone who is highly academic is someone who does well and achieves a lot in school and university. The person is probably smart also, but it has a relationship to education and research.
Intelligence is such a subjective and unquantifiable thing.
If someone is academic, then that can just mean they have sat down and read and practiced everything they needed to know to achieve good grades. Obviously intelliegence comes into it, but to what extent..that depends.
There's also the intelligence where someone can enter an argument and take what information is on offer to structure a good argument and use their initiative..there's being knowledgeable...so many things.
Very good subject for debate though i'd say.
If someone is academic, then that can just mean they have sat down and read and practiced everything they needed to know to achieve good grades. Obviously intelliegence comes into it, but to what extent..that depends.
There's also the intelligence where someone can enter an argument and take what information is on offer to structure a good argument and use their initiative..there's being knowledgeable...so many things.
Very good subject for debate though i'd say.
Does it c*ck. I know people who got 9A* and ended up and terrible unis because they couldn't put together a personal statement.
My cleverest friends are pretty much total failures
My cleverest friends are pretty much total failures
Wonderboy Blue
Highly academic people would probably be knowledgeable in their chosen area.
Is that intelligence? Or expertise? I don't know!
I would class Prince as really intelligent, genius even. There aren't many true lyricists like him. Yes, I'm saying not many people are truly intelligent.
Is that intelligence? Or expertise? I don't know!
I would class Prince as really intelligent, genius even. There aren't many true lyricists like him. Yes, I'm saying not many people are truly intelligent.
Likewise, Ronnie O'Sullivan is probably a savant in his own right.
Person A is verbally precocious but mathematically unremarkable; Person B is mathematically precocious but verbally unremarkable; Person C is mediocre both verbally and mathematically, but exerts that intuitive grasp of trajectory commonly associated with a professional pool-player: all three have registered I.Q.s of 140.
Tell me; who is the more intelligent?
Intelligence is a notional abstract, and quintessentially intangible. Thus, we variously impute certain attributes quite arbitrarily to a hallmark conception of what constitutes intelligence, without ever truly encompassing it. Whether or not an emeritus professor in Renaissance Philosophy is more intelligent per se than the President of M.E.N.S.A. International, or even your perennial dustbin-man, is irrelevant: chances are that the professor will during his life-time accomplish more of lasting consequence, albeit only within the parameters of his field, than either of the latter. Unless, of course, you happen to be a member of M.E.N.S.A.; or inhabit a certain suburb. In fact, I would go on to assert that 'intelligence' doesn't exist per se, at all.
Tell me; who is the more intelligent?
Intelligence is a notional abstract, and quintessentially intangible. Thus, we variously impute certain attributes quite arbitrarily to a hallmark conception of what constitutes intelligence, without ever truly encompassing it. Whether or not an emeritus professor in Renaissance Philosophy is more intelligent per se than the President of M.E.N.S.A. International, or even your perennial dustbin-man, is irrelevant: chances are that the professor will during his life-time accomplish more of lasting consequence, albeit only within the parameters of his field, than either of the latter. Unless, of course, you happen to be a member of M.E.N.S.A.; or inhabit a certain suburb. In fact, I would go on to assert that 'intelligence' doesn't exist per se, at all.
Person A is verbally precocious but mathematically unremarkable; Person B is mathematically precocious but verbally unremarkable; Person C is mediocre both verbally and mathematically, but exerts that intuitive grasp of trajectory commonly associated with a professional pool-player: all three have registered I.Q.s of 140.
Tell me; who is the more intelligent?
Intelligence is a notional abstract, and quintessentially intangible. Thus, we variously impute certain attributes quite arbitrarily to a hallmark conception of what constitutes intelligence, without ever truly encompassing it. Whether or not an emeritus professor in Renaissance Philosophy is more intelligent per se than the President of M.E.N.S.A. International, or even your perennial dustbin-man, is irrelevant: chances are that the professor will during his life-time accomplish more of lasting consequence, albeit only within the parameters of his field, than either of the latter. Unless, of course, you happen to be a member of M.E.N.S.A.; or inhabit a certain suburb. In fact, I would go on to assert that 'intelligence' doesn't exist per se, at all.
Tell me; who is the more intelligent?
Intelligence is a notional abstract, and quintessentially intangible. Thus, we variously impute certain attributes quite arbitrarily to a hallmark conception of what constitutes intelligence, without ever truly encompassing it. Whether or not an emeritus professor in Renaissance Philosophy is more intelligent per se than the President of M.E.N.S.A. International, or even your perennial dustbin-man, is irrelevant: chances are that the professor will during his life-time accomplish more of lasting consequence, albeit only within the parameters of his field, than either of the latter. Unless, of course, you happen to be a member of M.E.N.S.A.; or inhabit a certain suburb. In fact, I would go on to assert that 'intelligence' doesn't exist per se, at all.
Bravo! My thoughts on the matter exactly, and put extremely eloquently. Person D (Profesh) can put forward an astoundingly well-structured argument..and is a member of the right hair-length society.
There's some rep coming your way mate as soon as i can.
No, obviously. "Academic" is a word used to express something as trivial, irrelevant or without any real life meaning as much as for intelligence. This should tell you something. My maths teacher is amazing and got a first class honours from Cardiff, but you could slap her in the face with a dead, wet fish and she wouldn't notice.
It is interesting to note that academic is now often used to desribe something that is irrelevant or not worth considering, ie 'the difference is academic'.
Profesh
Person A is verbally precocious but mathematically unremarkable; Person B is mathematically precocious but verbally unremarkable; Person C is mediocre both verbally and mathematically, but exerts that intuitive grasp of trajectory commonly associated with a professional pool-player: all three have registered I.Q.s of 140.
Tell me; who is the more intelligent?
Intelligence is a notional abstract, and quintessentially intangible. Thus, we variously impute certain attributes quite arbitrarily to a hallmark conception of what constitutes intelligence, without ever truly encompassing it. Whether or not an emeritus professor in Renaissance Philosophy is more intelligent per se than the President of M.E.N.S.A. International, or even your perennial dustbin-man, is irrelevant: chances are that the professor will during his life-time accomplish more of lasting consequence, albeit only within the parameters of his field, than either of the latter. Unless, of course, you happen to be a member of M.E.N.S.A.; or inhabit a certain suburb. In fact, I would go on to assert that 'intelligence' doesn't exist per se, at all.
Tell me; who is the more intelligent?
Intelligence is a notional abstract, and quintessentially intangible. Thus, we variously impute certain attributes quite arbitrarily to a hallmark conception of what constitutes intelligence, without ever truly encompassing it. Whether or not an emeritus professor in Renaissance Philosophy is more intelligent per se than the President of M.E.N.S.A. International, or even your perennial dustbin-man, is irrelevant: chances are that the professor will during his life-time accomplish more of lasting consequence, albeit only within the parameters of his field, than either of the latter. Unless, of course, you happen to be a member of M.E.N.S.A.; or inhabit a certain suburb. In fact, I would go on to assert that 'intelligence' doesn't exist per se, at all.
Arguably the only non-garbage post you have ever made.
Wonderboy Blue
Highly academic people would probably be knowledgeable in their chosen area.
Is that intelligence? Or expertise? I don't know!
I would class Prince as really intelligent, genius even. There aren't many true lyricists like him. Yes, I'm saying not many people are truly intelligent.
Is that intelligence? Or expertise? I don't know!
I would class Prince as really intelligent, genius even. There aren't many true lyricists like him. Yes, I'm saying not many people are truly intelligent.
in response to your sig.....i can only say the wish is mutual
for my post, however......i think most people who are highly academic are clever. i'm highly academic and most would say i'm quite clever.
though completely lacking in comman sense.
Profesh
Person A is verbally precocious but mathematically unremarkable; Person B is mathematically precocious but verbally unremarkable; Person C is mediocre both verbally and mathematically, but exerts that intuitive grasp of trajectory commonly associated with a professional pool-player: all three have registered I.Q.s of 140.
Tell me; who is the more intelligent?
Intelligence is a notional abstract, and quintessentially intangible. Thus, we variously impute certain attributes quite arbitrarily to a hallmark conception of what constitutes intelligence, without ever truly encompassing it. Whether or not an emeritus professor in Renaissance Philosophy is more intelligent per se than the President of M.E.N.S.A. International, or even your perennial dustbin-man, is irrelevant: chances are that the professor will during his life-time accomplish more of lasting consequence, albeit only within the parameters of his field, than either of the latter. Unless, of course, you happen to be a member of M.E.N.S.A.; or inhabit a certain suburb. In fact, I would go on to assert that 'intelligence' doesn't exist per se, at all.
Tell me; who is the more intelligent?
Intelligence is a notional abstract, and quintessentially intangible. Thus, we variously impute certain attributes quite arbitrarily to a hallmark conception of what constitutes intelligence, without ever truly encompassing it. Whether or not an emeritus professor in Renaissance Philosophy is more intelligent per se than the President of M.E.N.S.A. International, or even your perennial dustbin-man, is irrelevant: chances are that the professor will during his life-time accomplish more of lasting consequence, albeit only within the parameters of his field, than either of the latter. Unless, of course, you happen to be a member of M.E.N.S.A.; or inhabit a certain suburb. In fact, I would go on to assert that 'intelligence' doesn't exist per se, at all.
seeing as how 140 is quite high, i think your example is a bit unrealistic. also, IQ tests are crap.
for example: on an IQ test that tests mainly verbal intelligence i test relatively low for me, and only end up scoring about a 129.
IQ tests that test more highly on math or spacial reasoning i get in the upper to mid 140's.
intelligence. like you said......is quite crap when youre looking at the assesment of it from an objective standing.
however, i just came from driver's education.....the first ever integrated class as regards to intelligence i have taken and i can tell you that it does, indeed exist.
most people in that classroom have niether the ability or ambition to do anything that pertains to upper level thinking. its quite shocking.....and rather dismal, if youre looking at it from the point that these people will be voting in a few years.
curryADD
in response to your sig.....i can only say the wish is mutual
for my post, however......i think most people who are highly academic are clever. i'm highly academic and most would say i'm quite clever.
though completely lacking in comman sense.
for my post, however......i think most people who are highly academic are clever. i'm highly academic and most would say i'm quite clever.
though completely lacking in comman sense.
And evidently the use of the English language too.
You can be very intelligent and not at all academic if you just don't give a crap. Likewise, if you revise 3 hours a night and spend all your life concentrating on school work, you can be very academic and still not be very clever.
Related discussions
- Lancashire man medicine
- Peter Symonds vs Queen Mary's college
- Uni of Leicester vs Uni of Kent
- A* business a-level tutorial EDEXCEL - How to get an A star
- Is King's College London good?
- Notthingham trent vs kent
- What does annual compensation mean?
- Best thing to do in year off to improve application for business course?
- Chances on pupillage, a bit of an unorthodox background
- Could someone grade my GCSE English Lit essay?
- Friend always acts as if she's smarter than me?
- Biologist Meike Stoverock proves female hypergamy
- Do UCL care about personal statements?
- Got into Oxford despite missing a grade. I feel like I don't deserve to be there
- GCSE Options (please read and help me)
- Is the University of Winchester good?
- UCL or HKU?
- How do you feel about the announced increases in undergraduate tuition fees?
- Dissertation issues - consequences of not submitting it?
- Oxford University applicants fall out rate
Latest
Trending
Last reply 4 weeks ago
An academic has correctly called 9 out of the last 10 US Presidential electionsLast reply 1 month ago
University Tuition Fees to rise in England for the first time in 8 yearsLast reply 1 month ago
Achieved top grades (3 A*) at school, but not sure uni is right for me
