I know from experience that people who get the highest grades in my school are among the dumbest, most narrow minded people I've ever met. Unfunny, rude, intellectually incurious, lacking in self-awareness, overly serious, stupid sheep incapable of any sort of independent thinking whatsoever. Their only skill is the ability to do what the teacher tells them to without question. Basically, not "intelligent" in any way.
You need to go to a better school. There are, thankfully, programs out there that actually want people to learn, and independently at that.
Unfortunately, I think a lot of high school is as you described. It gets better in college.
Intelligence is creative problem solving. What's more to define? You want me to define "creative" and "problem solving" too? And then the subsets of those definitions as well? You can deconstruct everything to the point of meaninglessness if you want to. I don't. I'm content with the definition I've provided: creative problem solving.
Don't freak out on me. I'm trying to understand your point of view. I was trying to understand whether creative thinking was ONE facet of your definition, or whether there were multiple factors taken into account. I now understand that you consider "creative problem solving" as the most important/only factor.
What are your feelings on the concept of multiple intelligences? I mean, obviously you disagree, but why do you undervalue emotional intelligence? Linguistic skills? Musical talent? For example, when trying to understand the feelings/emotions of others... I just can't read people for shit. And it makes me feel quite dumb sometimes. Yet there are people who are so tuned into other's emotions that it's like they're psychic. And that can't be taught. Thats something that I will never be able to learn. Why is there no value in such a skill?
Also, how do you feel about autistic savants? For example, let's say there was an individual who had creative problem solving talent, but aside from that was very, VERY low-functioning. Do you consider them to be intelligent, or not?
“Everybody has a secret world inside of them. All of the people of the world, I mean everybody. No matter how dull and boring they are on the outside, inside
them they've all got unimaginable, magnificent, wonderful, stupid, amazing worlds. Not just one world. Hundreds of them. Thousands maybe.” -Neil Gaiman
I meant that, if it is true that "ESFPs can be the smartest people in the world", then where are all the ESFP mathematicians and physicists?
Were they just "uninterested" in pursuing such subjects even though they were capable? No, the answer is this; ESFPs are by definition incapable of creative thinking.
This is where the disconnect is. How does ESFP=incapable of creative thinking? Where in the world are you extrapolating this from?
I defined intelligence as the ability to think creatively and abstractly, which the ESFP is incapable of doing.
Originally Posted by Perch420
ESFPs, by definition, cannot be "intelligent", if we go with the traditional definition of "intelligence"; creative problem solving and analytical reasoning.
Are all ESFPs stupid? No.
How can you not be stupid if you're not intelligent and incapable of a) creative problem solving and b) abstract thinking according to "the traditional definition"?
Sorry, you're still not making any sense.
Originally posted by Marmie Dearest
This. Nurses (also doctors!) mothers, fathers, singers, artists, performers, managers, mechanics, or even film collecting...many roles could be filled by ESFPs or ESFJs, and I seriously don't know where he gets off saying people who make straight As in college aren't necessarily intelligent...last time I checked, it requires creative problem solving to do university level work.
God knows where we would be without all the SP's and SJ's of society, they know how to get shit done. A hug of appreciation for all you SJ's and SP's out there
Of course, Perch wouldn't know that, because he's still in high school.
Last edited by Kasper; 03-12-2011 at 08:09 PM.
Reason: personal attack removed