Recent searches
Search options
Administered by:
I’ll agree with all of what this thread says — still a big fan of the idea of “multiple intelligences” here — and I’ll add to it:
Not only do we not have •tests• for the many things that fall under the umbrella of “intelligence,” we don’t even have consensus about what those all tests are supposed to be measuring.
And worse yet…
1/ https://fed.brid.gy/r/https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:esrrgaktqbyod6pcd7fvh66x/post/3ll76c2fjo224
…there is no widely accepted definition of what “intelligence” even means. Everyone thinks they know until they actually think about it. So, to summarize:
- We can’t define it
- We can’t define •what• we want to measure
- We can’t define •how• we’d measure it
- If we were to measure it, we have no particular reason to think it’s quantifiable on a linear scale
- It’s almost certainly multidimensional
- Whenever we try to measure this mysterious unmeasurable “it” anyway, we always seem to end up with a biased metric that measure something else instead
2/
@inthehands It amazes me how little effort we are expending on trying to understand intelligence. I mean: I'm sure it is studied. But we hear so little about it that I assume not as much as, say, the cost of fish or what day of the week is most depressing
@fishidwardrobe
From what I know of my dad’s background in experimental psychology, there’s been a •huge• amount of work on it, and all of it points toward “We need to try to understand smaller, more specific subunits of this constellation we call ‘intelligence’ because the whole thing at once just isn’t one thing.”
@inthehands then perhaps I should say: it's weird we're not hearing about this because surely it should interest everyone?
@fishidwardrobe
One could ask that question of most research!
@inthehands I'm just revealing my biases… :)