Traditional intelligence & mathematical intelligence - do you want them, or not?

[Ghost of the dead horse]

So, what's your take on traditional intelligence, general intelligence and mathematical intelligence? I've used the terms interchangeably, although there are differences.

Do you desire to be intelligent in a traditional, g-factor way? If not, why so?

My answer

Very long time ago (15 years) I was a firm believer in the general intelligence ONLY, and I thought it was much the same as mathematical intelligence, just with small nuances in definition.

I've followed much of the criticism against the concept, but my position has stayed almost the same. I believe that while high IQ is needed to enter some fields or to do some tasks, and it's also an indicator of superior performance in many things.

There's additions too. I believe now that many areas of life are filled with high-IQ folks, and high IQ isn't a distinguishing factor between them. Ever higher IQ gives diminishing returns in most of the stuff people do. In those cases, EQ or emotional intelligence, is more important.

At the end of the day, I want high IQ and mathematical intelligence for myself more than I do want EQ, even though I can see the benefits associated with increased EQ. High IQ just feels desirable to me. I really believe that high IQ can do good, but I also stubbornly believe it SHOULD do good. I'm being irrational and stupid here, but really, that's how I feel.

Then I see what the world is today and feel that I'm striving for something that isn't really useful anymore. I think the IQ has lost it's glamour. Then again, I just love understanding stuff. I'd want to understand more. I'd want to understand everything. In my mind, that's what IQ is all about, so that makes me a fan-boy of IQ.

 

[Such Irony]

Yeah, I relate to what you're saying. In the real world, EQ probably does more good than IQ but given a choice I'd rather have a high IQ than a high EQ. It just feels more special to me somehow. And being an NT, my intelligence is something I highly prize.

 

[entropie]

I dont see why one cant have both, a high EQ and a high IQ. they are in no field in direct opposition against each other and just because someone has proven his EQ sucks bigtime, it doesnt mean automatically he has a high IQ.
I think the stereotype you only can have one of the two, is the most traditional fart you could purposely smell.

I find the g-factor thing intresting and how intelligence manifests in people. I for example always loose the smartass game in which people compete in threads about their superior intelligence by quoting a random quote from a book they once read. Or the intelligence of learning something by rote and later on being able to remember it in detail. I dont do good at any of those but I am for example quite good at math and if I look at an electrical circuit drawing, even if it's very complicated, I can tell you quite quickly how it does work.

There's a difference aswell between the ability to grasp physics and the ability to grasp math. I figured over time you are most often better at one of the two. I am totally sucky in phsycs I barely managed to pass the University exam. We had this rope example, where you had to calculate the force applied to the rope. The force is of course the one applied on the one end of the rope plus the one on the other end, so a rope generally experiences the double of the mass multiplied with gravity an object has. This didnt came naturally to me, I had to learn that and other students to whom this was as natural as shaving in the morning looked at me if I am stupid or some kind.

Then again all courses involving abstract mathematics, I tended to be class best and people came to me to learn stuff. This difference I've seen sometimes in life.

I'ld say I am an abstract thinker in that regards and am good at mathematical and systemizing thought. System analysis is a huge strength of mine, which when properly nurtured gives you great management abilities in daily life. But spatial thinking or pure logical thinking, which is deprived from a bigger context, is totally strange to me.

Cant even park the car properly

Bottom side is that people who wouldnt make the very basic division between a practical and a theorethical thinker, to those people I generally appear stupid or strange regarding my IQ and many more practically oriented people would wonder hoe I managed to survive for so long

 

[omglookitsagoat]

yea I agree. IQ and EQ are not mutually exclusive. There's no reason why someone can't have both. I think my IQ is probably a lot higher than my EQ. Most of the dumbest things I've done common-sense wise were probably because my EQ and social confidence are not that high.

 

[Annaifiwas]

I dont see why one cant have both, a high EQ and a high IQ. they are in no field in direct opposition against each other and just because someone has proven his EQ sucks bigtime, it doesnt mean automatically he has a high IQ.
I think the stereotype you only can have one of the two, is the most traditional fart you could purposely smell.

Ah, this Haha! Coring high on both, I couldn't agree more.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

Ah, this Haha! Coring high on both, I couldn't agree more.

You gave me a chance to look at my writings 6 years ago! I like it.

I score high on both too, but my stance on the issue has changed. Having very emotionally breaking and unsupporting childhood (it was a good childhood otherwise) I started an examination of emotionally intelligent approaches at the time of my writing.

It turns out I liked many, if not all of the approaches deemed emotionally healthy, or intelligent. I still like IQ more, but both IQ and EQ seem like things of the past to me. I think behaviours, habits and attitudes can make or break a person's success. Someone of average intelligence and good habits is going to win a person with great intelligence and lousy habits.

 

[Annaifiwas]

Someone of average intelligence and good habits is going to win a person with great intelligence and lousy habits.

Indeed! Bad habits will break the brightest.

 

[Poki]

People suck at traditional...aka g factor...interpretation because they dont know how to differentiate what actually matters and what they value. Traditional can be used, but you have to be able to read situations and people first. People are quick to judge symptom and not issue which makes them inaccuratd at correctly cross correlating ability in that manner.

 

[meowington]

You gave me a chance to look at my writings 6 years ago! I like it.

I score high on both too, but my stance on the issue has changed. Having very emotionally breaking and unsupporting childhood (it was a good childhood otherwise) I started an examination of emotionally intelligent approaches at the time of my writing.

It turns out I liked many, if not all of the approaches deemed emotionally healthy, or intelligent. I still like IQ more, but both IQ and EQ seem like things of the past to me. I think behaviours, habits and attitudes can make or break a person's success. Someone of average intelligence and good habits is going to win a person with great intelligence and lousy habits.

That's all very interesting...seriously. Even what you wrote, apparently, 6 years ago

This automatically made me wonder about creative intelligence, aside from IQ or EQ. Isn't that very relevant too, perhaps in a more profound way than we might imagine even today ?
I just googled "CQ" for fun to see if that's actually a term and immediately came across this interesting article : Creativity Pays in Work and Life | TIME.com

 

[Poki]

So, what's your take on traditional intelligence, general intelligence and mathematical intelligence? I've used the terms interchangeably, although there are differences.

Do you desire to be intelligent in a traditional, g-factor way? If not, why so?

My answer

Very long time ago (15 years) I was a firm believer in the general intelligence ONLY, and I thought it was much the same as mathematical intelligence, just with small nuances in definition.

I've followed much of the criticism against the concept, but my position has stayed almost the same. I believe that while high IQ is needed to enter some fields or to do some tasks, and it's also an indicator of superior performance in many things.

There's additions too. I believe now that many areas of life are filled with high-IQ folks, and high IQ isn't a distinguishing factor between them. Ever higher IQ gives diminishing returns in most of the stuff people do. In those cases, EQ or emotional intelligence, is more important.

At the end of the day, I want high IQ and mathematical intelligence for myself more than I do want EQ, even though I can see the benefits associated with increased EQ. High IQ just feels desirable to me. I really believe that high IQ can do good, but I also stubbornly believe it SHOULD do good. I'm being irrational and stupid here, but really, that's how I feel.

Then I see what the world is today and feel that I'm striving for something that isn't really useful anymore. I think the IQ has lost it's glamour. Then again, I just love understanding stuff. I'd want to understand more. I'd want to understand everything. In my mind, that's what IQ is all about, so that makes me a fan-boy of IQ.

Its funny that your EQ says IQ matters more. Just hilarious thats all.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

Its funny that your EQ says IQ matters more. Just hilarious thats all.

The quoted post is history. This is not a new thread