An A/A* student is not a ‘smart’ person Watch

ML8020
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#61
Report 1 week ago
#61
(Original post by Gent2324)
so a D student is a dumb person?
I'll put it this way: An A* student has a larger probability of being smart than a D student.
0
reply
black1blade
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#62
Report 1 week ago
#62
(Original post by Gent2324)
humans can be consistently logic, what makes you think they cant?
Because humans aren't infallible, everyone makes mistakes. Most of the time when people are wrong, they *think* they're being logical about something when they aren't.
1
reply
thekidwhogames
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#63
Report 1 week ago
#63
(Original post by Gent2324)
i wasnt talking about that subject, using the same logic as the person i replied to, you could say that all D students are dumb
Fam, clearly we're talking about academic intelligence. It's very hard to define general intelligence and apply it to that very limited scenario you gave.
0
reply
Gent2324
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#64
Report 1 week ago
#64
(Original post by black1blade)
More likely or maybe they're just lazy or maybe they were in a bad place. You can't determine much about someone's character just from their grades, just that certain things are more likely so I'd say it's more likely they are below average intelligence esp if it was in a gcse.
more likely?
maybe?
seems to me like your logic is a bit inconsistent? you seem to have no trouble saying that A* students are smarter than the others with no "maybe" or "more likely" so why not the other way round?
0
reply
black1blade
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#65
Report 1 week ago
#65
(Original post by K1NGZ)
sadly yes but no . A*A*A* in all stem subjects is not the same as A*A*A* in all humanities subjects . just saying u could take sociology which is considered more easier and get an A* etc
I mean I personally would have found it much harder to get an A* in sociology since I don't really care about it, I don't think there is some hierarchy of subjects in terms of difficulty.
0
reply
thekidwhogames
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#66
Report 1 week ago
#66
(Original post by Gent2324)
more likely?
maybe?
seems to me like your logic is a bit inconsistent? you seem to have no trouble saying that A* students are smarter than the others with no "maybe" or "more likely" so why not the other way round?
I think you're gasping at straws here. What nearly all of us said is that top grades ==> fairly intelligent so if someone gets A*A*A*, that's a sufficient condition to say they're fairly intelligence (academically) but the converse isn't necessarily true e.g. some geniuses may not get as high e.g. A*A*A (or just a lower raw mark). Of course, other intelligence can be taken into consideration.
0
reply
Gent2324
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#67
Report 1 week ago
#67
(Original post by thekidwhogames)
Fam, clearly we're talking about academic intelligence. It's very hard to define general intelligence and apply it to that very limited scenario you gave.
no, the person i replied to wasnt.
"A-Levels are one of the (but not the only) tools to measure smartness"
"The approximate smartness of the high-achievers is the best explanation to their success"

and as i said, why would anyone be trying to prove that people who get A*s are academically clever? it literally says A* which is the highest grade so clearly they are academically clever, so what is there to debate about academic intelligence?
0
reply
black1blade
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#68
Report 1 week ago
#68
(Original post by Gent2324)
more likely?
maybe?
seems to me like your logic is a bit inconsistent? you seem to have no trouble saying that A* students are smarter than the others with no "maybe" or "more likely" so why not the other way round?
Only smarter at that one thing plus again more likely. Maybe someone just got coached really hard by their school. However saying there is 0 correlation is saying that grades are randomly distributed with intelligence which clearly isn't true.
0
reply
Gent2324
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#69
Report 1 week ago
#69
(Original post by black1blade)
Because humans aren't infallible, everyone makes mistakes. Most of the time when people are wrong, they *think* they're being logical about something when they aren't.
when i was talking about logical i was talking objectively, everyone thinks they are being logical but not everyone is smart.
i dont know why you think someone who doesnt look both ways when they cross the road can still be considered smart
0
reply
thekidwhogames
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#70
Report 1 week ago
#70
(Original post by Gent2324)
no, the person i replied to wasnt.
"A-Levels are one of the (but not the only) tools to measure smartness"
"The approximate smartness of the high-achievers is the best explanation to their success"

and as i said, why would anyone be trying to prove that people who get A*s are academically clever? it literally says A* which is the highest grade so clearly they are academically clever, so what is there to debate about academic intelligence?
I don't know since most of us are arguing about academic intelligence. As for general intelligence, I'd say you're probably right in that academics is only one part of it.
0
reply
WhatIsLife1
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#71
Report 1 week ago
#71
The raw grade isn’t the best parameter to measure intelligence. A person could get a B with absolutely 0 work, and I’d consider them as or more intelligent as someone who got an A* with an insane amount of work (common sense is another matter entirely).

People need to stop confusing hard work and intelligence. While hard work is a commendable and great trait to have, it isn’t intelligence.
1
reply
_gcx
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#72
Report 1 week ago
#72
(Original post by Gent2324)
a smart person wont
This is just absurd. Einstein was absent minded as are many smart people.
0
reply
Gent2324
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#73
Report 1 week ago
#73
(Original post by black1blade)
Only smarter at that one thing plus again more likely. Maybe someone just got coached really hard by their school. However saying there is 0 correlation is saying that grades are randomly distributed with intelligence which clearly isn't true.
your logic is completely inconsistent, you cant just use your logic when it suits you, you indirectly said that people who get D grades are dumb so either change your original statement or accept that thats your opinion.
0
reply
MediocreSince01
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#74
Report 1 week ago
#74
(Original post by K1NGZ)
sadly yes but no . A*A*A* in all stem subjects is not the same as A*A*A* in all humanities subjects . just saying u could take sociology which is considered more easier and get an A* etc
True. But someone who has an A* in sociology is clever at sociology. Someone who has an A* in further maths is clever at further maths.
0
reply
black1blade
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#75
Report 1 week ago
#75
(Original post by Gent2324)
when i was talking about logical i was talking objectively, everyone thinks they are being logical but not everyone is smart.
i dont know why you think someone who doesnt look both ways when they cross the road can still be considered smart
I mean sure if someone consistently never looked then that would be pretty stupid but say if someone forgot once then I wouldn't immediately call them a dumbass. A foolish, careless action sure that could be dangerous but everyone does foolish things from time to time.
0
reply
MediocreSince01
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#76
Report 1 week ago
#76
Someone who gets an A* at A-Level is clever at their subject.

Someone who is clever at their subject doesn't necessarily have to get an A*, though.
0
reply
thekidwhogames
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#77
Report 1 week ago
#77
(Original post by WhatIsLife1)
The raw grade isn’t the best parameter to measure intelligence. A person could get a B with absolutely 0 work, and I’d consider them as or more intelligent as someone who got an A* with an insane amount of work (common sense is another matter entirely).

People need to stop confusing hard work and intelligence. While hard work is a commendable and great trait to have, it isn’t intelligence.
Well, what most people would say, it's a smart thing to work hard though..
And I don't like this example since it's fairly subjective. Perhaps, even with insane work, that B may not raise to an A*. A lot of people over-work not knowing they don't need that much work for the grade.
1
reply
jnkkjnkjhn
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#78
Report 1 week ago
#78
(Original post by Gent2324)
your logic is completely inconsistent, you cant just use your logic when it suits you, you indirectly said that people who get D grades are dumb so either change your original statement or accept that thats your opinion.
He is clearly using averages and probability not making strict statements (just like most people who have replied to you).....
0
reply
MediocreSince01
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#79
Report 1 week ago
#79
(Original post by WhatIsLife1)
The raw grade isn’t the best parameter to measure intelligence. A person could get a B with absolutely 0 work, and I’d consider them as or more intelligent as someone who got an A* with an insane amount of work (common sense is another matter entirely).

People need to stop confusing hard work and intelligence. While hard work is a commendable and great trait to have, it isn’t intelligence.
But quite often to achieve an A* it takes more than hard work. It takes the ability to adapt and apply knowledge.
0
reply
ML8020
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#80
Report 1 week ago
#80
(Original post by Gent2324)
no, the person i replied to wasnt.
"A-Levels are one of the (but not the only) tools to measure smartness"
"The approximate smartness of the high-achievers is the best explanation to their success"

and as i said, why would anyone be trying to prove that people who get A*s are academically clever? it literally says A* which is the highest grade so clearly they are academically clever, so what is there to debate about academic intelligence?
As I mentioned, my argument is "An A* student has a larger probability of being smart than a D student."
General Intelligence (GI) consists of much more than Academical Intelligence (AI), but AI is a subset of GI. With all other factors being unclear, it is fair to say a higher-performing student has a larger probability of being smart than a lower-performing student at this stage. Only when more empirical evidence is presented can we make a modified deduction.
Last edited by ML8020; 1 week ago
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Are you tempted to change your firm university choice on A-level results day?

Yes, I'll try and go to a uni higher up the league tables (137)
17.79%
Yes, there is a uni that I prefer and I'll fit in better (73)
9.48%
No I am happy with my course choice (453)
58.83%
I'm using Clearing when I have my exam results (107)
13.9%

Watched Threads

View All