User Tag List

Page 76 of 80 FirstFirst ... 26667475767778 ... LastLast
Results 751 to 760 of 793

Thread: INTJ "Intelligent" Myth

  1. #751
    `~~Philosoflying~~` Array SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008


    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    I bet you if you lived in Hiroshima or Nagasaki around January of 1946, you'd disagree.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Hey, Onemoretime!

    Good thing you showed up to say something totally irrelevant (and that I and everyone else could care less about)!
    I don't think what he mentioned was irrelevant, and I actually do care about it.

    Albert Einstein and the Atomic Bomb

    In November 1954, five months before his death, Einstein summarized his feelings about his role in the creation of the atomic bomb: "I made one great mistake in my life... when I signed the letter to President Roosevelt recommending that atom bombs be made; but there was some justification - the danger that the Germans would make them
    One must define intelligence.

    And, I, for one, agree with Howard Gardner regarding the idea of Multiple Intelligences.

    Not for any PC reason, but through my own personal observations.

    Though, I have to say, Einstein was one smart mofo, through and through.

    Brilliant, innovative and wise.

    The holy trinity of Intelligence, if you ask me.

    'Cause you can't handle me...

    "A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens

    "That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is."

    Veritatem dies aperit

    Ride si sapis

    Intelligentle sparkles

  2. #752
    Just do it Array Zarathustra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    4w5 sx/so


    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Looking for the one I had seen, but not finding it.

    Found plenty of sites that say she is an INTJ, but not the one that talked about her claim that she was...

    Quote Originally Posted by whatever View Post
    never trust a self reported test... especially when taken by a politician
    Agreed... to an extent.

    I mean, take it for what it's worth...
    The Justice Fighter

    XXXX - XwX Xdw XwX sx/so - Neutral Good

    "I trust what you are doing though…I just see it a little differently.
    I don’t see it as you stepping away from the fire. I see it as the fire directing your course.
    No matter how airy or earthy or watery you become... to many of us you will always be...a super nova."

    "Behind these gates of seeming warmth sits, loosely chained, a fierce attack dog. Perhaps not crazy, but dangerous"

    The Aggressive 6

  3. #753


    I vote INTJ. You can see the TeSe.

  4. #754
    No Array Thalassa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    6w7 sx
    SEE Fi


    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    btw hillary clinton is ISTJ
    No way.
    "Sentiment without action is the ruin of the soul." - Edward Abbey

    SEE-Fi /Gamma

  5. #755
    Freshman Member Array simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    7w6 sx/so


    Why not?
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  6. #756
    Gotta catch you all! Array Blackmail!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008


    Well, it seems the main issue remains to define intelligence.
    And it can't be that simple, since intelligence is supposed to specifically define man as a specie: hence, the definition is bound to be more or less circular, somehow.

    Etymologically, Inte-ligare means to "bind together" (or "Inte-legere": to read between). It would be the aptitude to bind together elements that would have been neglected otherwise.
    Neurologically, intelligence is simply a byproduct of brain activity. It could be theorized as the difference between input (senses and fixed memory), and the resulting output.

    It's quite obvious that IQ tests don't measure or match either definitions. Their respective contexts are too specific to generalize anything about adaptation, and abstract reasoning is not necessarily the only way to "bind elements together".
    By the way, Ab-strudere (->Abstract) means "to simplify", and sometimes, "to take (something) out of context", depending on the tense you use in latin.
    A simple child's drawing of a man is already a complex abstraction, far more than a realistic portrait. Does that mean the child is "more intelligent" than say... Velazquez or Vermeer?


    As SolitaryWalker already assumed, there is absolutely no way an IQ test could predict outstanding achievements made by a man during his life, whether as an artist, an engineer or a scientist (or whatever). Because those specific achievements are considered to be the real proof of intelligence, far beyond any test the subject will pass.
    For instance, if here we read that Einstein was considered to be the epitome of an intelligent man, it's because he was able to refine the theory of general relativity, and NOT because he had the opportunity to pass the slightest IQ test during his lifetime. People who consider he should have had a high IQ score only do it retrospectively, and this is a tremendous methodological mistake, besides the fact they invert causes and consequences, and thus make self-fulfilling prophecies. As a matter of fact, Albert Einstein and Isaac Newton never passed any IQ test. People who estimate their IQs are not only deluding themselves, they are dishonest epistemologically speaking.

    And for the reverse scenario, look for instance at Chris Langan: this guy has achieved nothing during his existence, and his CTMU theory is full of odd metaphysical hocus-pocus and similar ignorant approximations. Thus, according to what I know and what I've read of him, I'd say I do not consider him to be very intelligent. Not at all: I pity him.


    Now look at the test itself. Like I said, what's really puzzling is the fact you can train yourself to pass it, and thus, gets far higher scores after a while. The goal is to understand the purpose of the questions asked, to systematize them. There exists only a limited kind of combinations made by numbers or simplified graphic figures. There exists only a limited number of "IQ test games" and presentations. And once you are trained to recognize every category of combination, then you will quickly understand what the test asks.
    It's not intelligence, it's a repetitive technique.
    Why do you score higher? Because you're trained exactly like Pavlov's dog, and know how to anticipate every possible answer.

    Most people who pass IQ tests lose time because they don't understand the question, or because understanding it requires (at least for them) a great effort in abstractive reasoning, especially because such abstractions aren't natural nor familiar to most of us.
    But people who know how to efficiently pass IQ tests (trust my experience! ), on the other hand, use only a tiny fragment of their brains: they simplify every possible context to its maximum. Yes: the idea is to think less to become more effective, to become quicker. You have to put your mind at rest, and think to nothing, just like an automaton. The goal is not to understand questions, but to reduce them to simple, repetitive parameters. This way, you can approximate the right answer even without understanding the question at all.

    So, it's absurd!

    A man with a high IQ is not at all trained to face complex, REAL situations of everyday ordinary life. And the part of the brain he has to use is totally irrelevant if he's an artist, or even if he has to write a serious scientific essay (complex multifactorial scenarios, not simplified ones).

    IQ tests only show us how a tiny portion of what the brain could perform, especially within people who are able to temporarily "shut down" every other area. No wonder some very high IQs actually suffer from brain damage: such damage may in fact eases their task. If most of the time they become tragic failures in real life, it's not because they're too brilliant to be really understood by mere mortals, it's rather because by ordinary standards, they're morons, or mentally handicapped if you prefer. They're tragically unable to understand or postulate complex multifactorial situations where every lobe of their brains has to be simultaneously activated and works together: it's too hard for them, since they can't separate intermingled cognitive components to unique simplified abstractions.

    On the contrary, if ever someday we should be able to measure or define intelligence, it will be either as a global cortex activity (neurologically; for instance the way different areas of our brain interact and thus create new circuits/segregation process/pruning of neurons, and possibly result in decipherable ?-calculus expressions), or either as tangible results we can achieve (empiric definition) in our respective domains of activity.
    But either ways, g-factor or IQ tests have nothing to do with this: their scales are far too narrow, too restricted, limited and subjective to be anything but convincing. Basically, it's a meaningless waste of time, not even worth the paper it is written upon!
    "A man who only drinks water has a secret to hide from his fellow-men" -Baudelaire

    7w8 SCUxI

  7. #757
    Senior Member Array wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007


    Quote Originally Posted by themightybob View Post
    Intelligence= the ability to solve simple and complex problems and to understand and process information.

    Please stop with the overly liberal non-sense.We all know essentially what intelligence means, I assume now you're going to get into a long drawn out speech ultimately leading to the conclusion that i.q. is meaningless and everyone is equally intelligent in their own way, no?That is a nice notion and allows everyone to feel good about themselves but it is not at all accurate.

    I.q tests are not perfect, and i realize this, their are things like cultural biases and poverty to take into account, but chances are if your a white individual that was raised in a middle to upper class family then your i.q. is for the most part an accurate representation of your intelligence.
    Question does not precede the answer.
    It is second hand.

    IQ tests proclaim a measure is beyond the scope of the measure.
    An above average chess player does not anticipate the move of a good chess player.

    Answer is the lead of the question.
    Scope does not measure.

    Imagination has a place.
    Only when it is subject to reason.

  8. #758
    thankful Array PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    937 so/sx


    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    And not to be too INTJish or anything, but that sentence would've worked WAY better if you'd used "everybody" instead of "everyone".

    I used the word with intention; perhaps reflection on the "why" is in order
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt

    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  9. #759
    Banned Array
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    5w6 sx/so


    The answer as to why INTJs are so intelligent, more so than any other type is simple. They are the masterminds, and the rest of us are the sheeple.

  10. #760
    Senior Member Array Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007


    Quote Originally Posted by RaptorWizard View Post
    The answer as to why INTJs are so intelligent, more so than any other type is simple. They are the masterminds, and the rest of us are the sheeple.
    Are you suffering from a hangover, by chance?
    When all else fails, claim it's rigged.

Similar Threads

  1. ISTJ/INTJ/INTP/ISTP "first impression" questions
    By MDP2525 in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 86
    Last Post: 10-18-2013, 07:48 AM
  2. The ESFP "stupid" myth.
    By Mort Belfry in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 846
    Last Post: 10-12-2013, 10:47 PM
  3. Replies: 243
    Last Post: 06-17-2013, 04:39 AM
  4. [INTJ] The INTJ "Doorslam" aka INTJ Pigeonholing
    By PeaceBaby in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 85
    Last Post: 08-06-2012, 11:12 PM
  5. "Multi-tasking" and "project completion" and the cursed compulsion to be honest...
    By TenebrousReflection in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-04-2011, 06:33 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts