i am sorry if i am confused about this all, but when someone says someone is high academic, does that imply that the person concerned is highly intelligent?
Are these two words synonyms, meaning one word.
I think to be highly academic, you need a few brain cells to rub together, and that a lot of people who are highly academic are also pretty smart; however, I know of people who are very academic, and although they aren't stupid, neither are they 'highly intelligent'.
Basically, from that, I think that being academic is not synonymous with intelligence, so to follow on from that, I don't see how 'high academic' could by synonymous with it either.
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.
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.
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.
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'.
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.