[INFP] INFPs And Intelligence

[Zhaylin]

I am not all that intelligent when it comes to educational material or life skills. I think my IQ was something like 112. I was "retarded" in Math but my English/Reading/Grammar scores brought the overall number up.
I forget things almost as soon as I learn them

My skills are mostly when it comes to reading people, being intuitive, up-building, optimistic and seeing the big picture. I frequently play the "Devil's Advocate". There's at least 2 sides to every story and no one ever fully knows the truth of anything... but that's okay
I'm frequently cast as the mediator in other peoples dramas... until I'm just too tired to keep at it. It's a role I'd rather shirk, but I can't turn my back on people when they seek me out or when I'm thrust into a situation

 

[Population: 1]

If we are going by the almighty IQ test, I’m barely above average intelligence. Although I have to wonder what the average is at this point. I can’t get through a day without people stumbling over some very basic concepts that arise during the course of a conversation.

 

[Coriolis]

If we are going by the almighty IQ test, I’m barely above average intelligence. Although I have to wonder what the average is at this point. I can’t get through a day without people stumbling over some very basic concepts that arise during the course of a conversation.

I see the same, and not just with concepts, but also with ordinary life skills, decision making, etc. If we view intelligence as a native ability, like any other it requires the will to use and develop it.

 

[Earl Grey]

Oh god, IQ.

Intelligence has been defined in many ways, including: the capacity for logic, understanding, self-awareness, learning, emotional knowledge, reasoning, planning, creativity, and problem solving. More generally, it can be described as the ability to perceive or infer information, and to retain it as knowledge to be applied towards adaptive behaviors within an environment or context.

Intelligence - Wikipedia

I'd like to mention that there are different kinds of intelligences though, and even if someone is 'intelligent' they might implement them in different ways.

The theory of multiple intelligences differentiates human intelligence into specific 'modalities', rather than seeing intelligence as dominated by a single general ability. Howard Gardner proposed this model in his 1983 book Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences.

Gardner proposed eight abilities that he held to meet these criteria:[2]

1) musical-rhythmic,
2) visual-spatial,
3) verbal-linguistic,
4) logical-mathematical,
5) bodily-kinesthetic,
6) interpersonal,
7) intrapersonal,
8) naturalistic

Although the distinction between intelligences has been set out in great detail, Gardner opposes the idea of labeling learners to a specific intelligence. Gardner maintains that his theory should "empower learners", not restrict them to one modality of learning.

Theory of multiple intelligences - Wikipedia

So if you are mentioning someone 'intelligent' in math, then they possess logical-mathematical intelligence, however, as you can see it is only one of eight. IQ tests measures verbal-linguistic, logical-mathematical, and visual spatial intelligences, and smushes them up to one ultimate number. It can be misleading to think that an IQ of say, 100 points is 'stupid' when people of the same IQ have their intelligences spread then evened out into that end result. Looking at only that end number might lead to individuals thinking that they have lower overall intelligence or not much intelligence at all (and this is discounting the accuracy of IQ tests, even). Two individuals' IQs might be the same but one might ace logical-mathematical tests and be a dumb rock in the others, and vice-versa.

While IQ is often held as a steadfast measure of a person’s ability to perform academic tasks, that’s not the whole story. There are many other untested variables that contribute to a person’s intelligence–learning style, personality, mood–all of these things can impact intelligence and can sway the results of our cherished IQ tests.

There's also the matter of simple intelligence not always translating into action or skill, so 'practical' intelligence consists of intelligence itself mixed along with knowledge, the ability to take and plan out action in accordance to it, and a multitude of other factors that creates those shiny results we all uphold as intelligence. Intelligence, or the capacity for it simply kept in the mind is like a well-polished sturdy knife tucked away in a storeroom. Useless. I think at this day and age, this much should be old news.

 

[Coriolis]

I'd like to mention that there are different kinds of intelligences though, and even if someone is 'intelligent' they might implement them in different ways.

Theory of multiple intelligences - Wikipedia

So if you are mentioning someone 'intelligent' in math, then they possess logical-mathematical intelligence, however, as you can see it is only one of eight. IQ tests measures verbal-linguistic, logical-mathematical, and visual spatial intelligences, and smushes them up to one ultimate number. It can be misleading to think that an IQ of say, 100 points is 'stupid' when people of the same IQ have their intelligences spread then evened out into that end result. Looking at only that end number might lead to individuals thinking that they have lower overall intelligence or not much intelligence at all (and this is discounting the accuracy of IQ tests, even). Two individuals' IQs might be the same but one might ace logical-mathematical tests and be a dumb rock in the others, and vice-versa.

You have run into a minor pet peeve of mine. While these other abilities may be equally valuable, they are not intelligence. Calling them that is little more than a euphemism, used in an attempt to earn them the value they do deserve. It's no better than calling trash collectors "sanitation engineers" and homemakers "domestic engineers" because engineers command respect.

There's also the matter of simple intelligence not always translating into action or skill, so 'practical' intelligence consists of intelligence itself mixed along with knowledge, the ability to take and plan out action in accordance to it, and a multitude of other factors that creates those shiny results we all uphold as intelligence. Intelligence, or the capacity for it simply kept in the mind is like a well-polished sturdy knife tucked away in a storeroom. Useless. I think at this day and age, this much should be old news.

Exactly my point above. Knowing without doing is useless. It's like me and physical strength. I am no stronger than the average person of my size, but people often see me as strong. I suspect this is because I readily use the strength I do have, and don't wait for someone else to pick it up, or carry it there, or pry it open, or whatever needs to be done.

 

[mgbradsh]

FTR I am extremely intelligent. I think that needs to be said.

But really, correlation isn't causation. Any type can be smart. And "smart" can be a thousand different things. I had a friend working on his PhD and he had a windshield wiper that was falling apart in front of us and he had no idea how to change it, but he could read and write at extremely high levels.

Intelligence has always been an area that makes me uncomfortable, as a concept. I don't think it's used effectively by society and in many ways it's used to objectively judge people that probably don't deserve it, or have other great qualities that are overlooked.

Or conversely have negative qualities that are overlooked because of their intelligence.

 

[Earl Grey]

You have run into a minor pet peeve of mine. While these other abilities may be equally valuable, they are not intelligence. Calling them that is little more than a euphemism, used in an attempt to earn them the value they do deserve. It's no better than calling trash collectors "sanitation engineers" and homemakers "domestic engineers" because engineers command respect.

They are different types of intelligences though, and each are important in their own fields and play a role in learning, implementation, and success. How do you define intelligence? I'm following the one I quoted from Wikipedia. For example, in musical intelligence, "People with Musical intelligence recognize sounds and tones with ease. They appreciate music and rhythm. They have a “good ear” for music and can easily learn songs and melodies. They notice when someone is singing off-key. People with musical intelligence are good at imitating sounds or other people’s voice or intonation. Rhythm and music can be a way for them to memorize concepts. Some people with musical intelligence are especially gifted at composing, singing or playing an instrument. They often have a song running through their head. They often learn well through lectures since they are highly auditory."

I understand that as a type of intelligence and proficiency on its own, following the theory of multiple intelligences. Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[Zhaylin]

Meh. There's intelligence and then there's "white washing" or ??? creating undue or excessive merit.

"Wisdom, does not a wise man make. It's the application of the knowledge which makes one wise." It's a saying I came up with eons ago. It's not grammatically perfect, but I love it. (The only time I've ever come up with anything even slightly clever lol.) It ties into "Knowing without doing is useless"; which ties into what mgbradsh said.

Some of the smartest people out there are quite "dumb" in other areas. Sometimes it's just a matter of their field of view being too narrow so that they don't even see a question/problem, let alone the answer.

In academic areas, I'm quite stupid. While, I prefer people not to be mean about it, it is what it is
But, I do accept my intelligence in other things. I tend to specify, when speaking with others, because most people think of intelligence as in all the stuff they learned in school. I don't know. You have "street smarts" and "book smarts", but I can't really think of a phase that covers other areas.

 

[Earl Grey]

In academic areas, I'm quite stupid. While, I prefer people not to be mean about it, it is what it is
But, I do accept my intelligence in other things. I tend to specify, when speaking with others, because most people think of intelligence as in all the stuff they learned in school. I don't know. You have "street smarts" and "book smarts", but I can't really think of a phase that covers other areas.

I think there is also a problem in that we are not operating under the same definition or understanding of intelligence. I do say that if we want to argue semantics, we can be here all day. 'Technically this, technically that' 'Depending on this, depending on that'

For example, if we want to go by a certain type of intelligence (say, mathematical) and ignoring the other 'abstract' ones like Musical and Linguistic, we can easily narrow down and talk about that only, in which only individuals with 'mathematical intelligence' are considered intelligent. Then again, some great founders like Edison himself was apparently rather garbage at maths. So, what is intelligence?

 

[Coriolis]

They are different types of intelligences though, and each are important in their own fields and play a role in learning, implementation, and success. How do you define intelligence? I'm following the one I quoted from Wikipedia. For example, in musical intelligence, "People with Musical intelligence recognize sounds and tones with ease. They appreciate music and rhythm. They have a “good ear” for music and can easily learn songs and melodies. They notice when someone is singing off-key. People with musical intelligence are good at imitating sounds or other people’s voice or intonation. Rhythm and music can be a way for them to memorize concepts. Some people with musical intelligence are especially gifted at composing, singing or playing an instrument. They often have a song running through their head. They often learn well through lectures since they are highly auditory."

I understand that as a type of intelligence and proficiency on its own, following the theory of multiple intelligences. Correct me if I am wrong.

What you are describing is musicality, just as other so-called "intelligences" are more accurately called athleticism, self-awareness, empathy, creativity, and even wisdom. People who demonstrate these talents and abilities can also be intelligent, but that is not the same thing. Yes, it is a matter of semantics in that it is all about what we call things, but what we call things can be important. Take my example of using the term "engineer" to refer to all sorts of legitimate and worthwhile activities that do not fall under any standard definition of engineering. That should seem silly, a misuse of the term. Similarly, we don't need to package these abilities as some alternate form of intelligence to put them on a par in value with the ability generally designated as "intelligence".

I think there is also a problem in that we are not operating under the same definition or understanding of intelligence. I do say that if we want to argue semantics, we can be here all day. 'Technically this, technically that' 'Depending on this, depending on that'

For example, if we want to go by a certain type of intelligence (say, mathematical) and ignoring the other 'abstract' ones like Musical and Linguistic, we can easily narrow down and talk about that only, in which only individuals with 'mathematical intelligence' are considered intelligent. Then again, some great founders like Edison himself was apparently rather garbage at maths. So, what is intelligence?

Well, yes, we need to be operating under the same definitions. To go back to the OP and the thread topic, I might say something like, "Sure, INFPs can be as intelligent as any other type, and they are also capable of the whole spectrum of human ability, to include [the things you list as other 'intelligences']". When I say simply "intelligence", what I mean is close to the standard dictionary definition, something like "capacity for learning, reasoning, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc."

 

[Earl Grey]

What you are describing is musicality, just as other so-called "intelligences" are more accurately called athleticism, self-awareness, empathy, creativity, and even wisdom. People who demonstrate these talents and abilities can also be intelligent, but that is not the same thing. Yes, it is a matter of semantics in that it is all about what we call things, but what we call things can be important. Take my example of using the term "engineer" to refer to all sorts of legitimate and worthwhile activities that do not fall under any standard definition of engineering. That should seem silly, a misuse of the term. Similarly, we don't need to package these abilities as some alternate form of intelligence to put them on a par in value with the ability generally designated as "intelligence".

You have a point. I have not thought about it that way. I grasp what you are saying as a vague concept I can't put into words. How would you describe, or define intelligence? How would you differentiate it from what has been defined as, in the above example, 'musical intelligence'?

 

[Coriolis]

You have a point. I have not thought about it that way. I grasp what you are saying as a vague concept I can't put into words. How would you describe,en or define intelligence? How would you differentiate it from what has been defined as, in the above example, 'musical intelligence'?

See my edit to the last post for a working definition. There is a mental/intellectual focus to what is usually meant by intelligence that is not inherently present in the other abilities. Of course it can be present as well, because intelligent people also are musical, creative, athletic, empathetic, etc., and people displaying all those other qualities can have conventional intelligence, too. Often people who are successful (make contributions) in these areas are combining intelligence with their other abilities. Our abilities don't exist in a vacuum, but work together in everything we do.

Now you could go the other way and take a different, more general term, say "ability" or even "creativity", though that is slightly different. Then I would find it fair to speak of different abilities, or forms of creativity. Intellectual would be one of them, corresponding to what I associate with the term "intelligence".

 

[Saturnal Snowqueen]

Anyone else got that gifted kid burnout? Seems pretty common in INxPs. Was labeled gifted and talented in elementary school, but once I got out my grades were all over the place. Hurt when I couldn't live up to that past potential- getting put in advanced math since I supposedly so good at math, then doing badly in it, then dropping down to regular math and still doing badly. I got anxiety from bad grades, which made the bad grades even worse! I've always loved to learn, but I had poor concentration, glazed over details a lot, and simply wasn't good at some subjects, like math of course, and physics. I was a language whiz though! Got lots of awards in Latin Club and got the highest award in German sophomore year. I've always wanted to travel . I also was good at art, writing(stories, not essays), social studies, and was labeled the "Nutrition Nut".

I agree with the notion that introverts are perceived as naive. At least me, being called little girl in high school, people saying good job and asking if I needed help...over and over again. Also, my Se blindspot makes me feel like an idiot sometimes. I keep bumping into crap, can't snap my fingers, and today I apparently lost my phone by going to put it in my lunchbag and missing the lunchbag.