Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[eerr]

Knowledge is the information one gains
Intelligence is the capacity to retain that information
Wisdom is the application of that information.

BAM!
Defined.

so smarts is the ability to see and hear, intelligence is the ability to memorize that stuff, and wisdom is spitting it back out again for regurgitated use?

[Splendiferous]

THat isn't what I said. And smarts is not a real words.
By smarts I assume you mean knowledge. And knowledge is not the ability to see and hear. It is, in layman's terms, that amount of stuff you know. Your mixing intelligence and knowledge and calling it smarts. And for that you must die.

TO THE GUILLOTINE!!!

[Muz]

You might be thinking of aptitude tests like the SAT, which try to measure academic ability.

SAT is supposed to measure aptitude. Which is one of the most annoying things I find about how the USA views intelligence. It's not all about aptitude, most of 'intelligence' is about hard work. Asia runs almost solely on the 'hard work' principle, you have kids who have no attention span becoming doctors, lawyers, and engineers. There's the little problem with lacking creativity; these people don't invent as much as the western world, but then, chances are that your state-of-the-art motherboard is being assembled in a Chinese factory supervised by engineers who have no interest or aptitude in engineering. But they know what a lot of others don't, and do it for cheap too.

[bjlong]

Smarts is presumably a noun version of "smart," which only really lends itself to the particularly terrible-sounding "smartness."

I still consider being smart as being able to quickly understand and assimilate information, break one realization down into its component bits, and being able to make a realization given limited information--the acquisition part of cognition.

[Jreengus]

Intelligence is knowing a tomato is a fruit, Wisdom is knowing not to put it into a fruit salad.

[Vester]

That's knowledge and wisdom, though. Intelligence and wisdom are native but act towards different things, knowledge is acquired.

Also what's wrong with tomatoes? Tomatoes are good!

[blah28722]

SAT is supposed to measure aptitude. Which is one of the most annoying things I find about how the USA views intelligence. It's not all about aptitude, most of 'intelligence' is about hard work. Asia runs almost solely on the 'hard work' principle, you have kids who have no attention span becoming doctors, lawyers, and engineers.

I'm not sure where you got that info from.

Most Asian countries (China, Taiwan, and Japan I know for sure) employ a nation-wide exam that tests you on just about every subject possible.

As a result, there's an industry for teaching specifically for these exams. The most commonly used method is simply straight up cramming and hoping you can pull out enough useless facts during the test. As a result, the students who spend the most time memorizing things they'll never need to know (we do it here too, but it's much much worse over there.) are the ones that get accepted into high school.

There's a bunch of criticism about this, namely the fact that cramming info doesn't actually allow you to be effective at work, which resulted in well-educated individuals who aren't capable of fulfilling their job requirements (I don't think I got this across correctly, can't word it properly).

I was looking at some chinese newspapers on a flight from Shanghai the other day, and it had questions from their high school entrance exam, which was a huge (200+ Qs, with essays) test. It had:

World history/geography/culture:
which of the following cities would be least affected by global warming?
a) <city in netherlands>
b) New York
c) Paris
d) etc.

Math, fairly advanced geometry (I'd say it'd fit in well with the hard SAT math questions)

English (this is China), fairly basic, maybe first or second grade

Ancient Chinese Literature

Ancient chinese history

Recent history

Chemistry, biology, and a lot of Gees.


Most of this stuff isn't even taught until taught until high school in the US. This is a test for what would be kids finishing their 9th year (last year in middle school) to get into high school.

Basically, they have the SAT on steroids.

[Vester]

The Philippines had a similar test system.

Then it got switched for one that was worse.

[eerr]

Crap, people are dangerously close to figuring out how much bullshit I mix into what I say.

Quick! my dwarf is on fire, in magma, drowning (from magma) has lost all of his limbs because of [sever_on_breaks], has water falling down upon his head from a lever pulled by a noble, and is hexed with magic the gathering's "pacifism", is filled with paralyzing spider venom, and has completely flown the coop(with his head in a chicken coop)!

Ahhh good times.

[Virex]

SAT is supposed to measure aptitude. Which is one of the most annoying things I find about how the USA views intelligence. It's not all about aptitude, most of 'intelligence' is about hard work. Asia runs almost solely on the 'hard work' principle, you have kids who have no attention span becoming doctors, lawyers, and engineers.

I'm not sure where you got that info from.

Most Asian countries (China, Taiwan, and Japan I know for sure) employ a nation-wide exam that tests you on just about every subject possible.

As a result, there's an industry for teaching specifically for these exams. The most commonly used method is simply straight up cramming and hoping you can pull out enough useless facts during the test. As a result, the students who spend the most time memorizing things they'll never need to know (we do it here too, but it's much much worse over there.) are the ones that get accepted into high school.

There's a bunch of criticism about this, namely the fact that cramming info doesn't actually allow you to be effective at work, which resulted in well-educated individuals who aren't capable of fulfilling their job requirements (I don't think I got this across correctly, can't word it properly).

I was looking at some chinese newspapers on a flight from Shanghai the other day, and it had questions from their high school entrance exam, which was a huge (200+ Qs, with essays) test. It had:

World history/geography/culture:
which of the following cities would be least affected by global warming?
a) <city in netherlands>
b) New York
c) Paris
d) etc.

Math, fairly advanced geometry (I'd say it'd fit in well with the hard SAT math questions)

English (this is China), fairly basic, maybe first or second grade

Ancient Chinese Literature

Ancient chinese history

Recent history

Chemistry, biology, and a lot of Gees.


Most of this stuff isn't even taught until taught until high school in the US. This is a test for what would be kids finishing their 9th year (last year in middle school) to get into high school.

Basically, they have the SAT on steroids.

Measuring all that knowledge seems a bit redundant. To pick an example from one of my exams (materials A probably):
There was a question about the crystal lattice of a metal (either Vanadium or platina, or perhaps an alloy), with several questions concerning calculations and just basicly knowing what a crystal lattice is and what defects are, followed by identifying empty spaces in the crystal latice. Then the final part of that question was: Why is this mettal usefull as a cataclyst.

This illustrates what I mean. You can easely sum up all characterestics of the crystal latice of Vanadium, but that doesn´t help one damn bit untill you realise the voids line up to make small channels in which something can react. Knowledger is good and neccesary and it defines your smartness, but you need to be able to combine existing knowledge into conclusions to be intellegent.

[Muz]

SAT is supposed to measure aptitude. Which is one of the most annoying things I find about how the USA views intelligence. It's not all about aptitude, most of 'intelligence' is about hard work. Asia runs almost solely on the 'hard work' principle, you have kids who have no attention span becoming doctors, lawyers, and engineers.

I'm not sure where you got that info from.

Most Asian countries (China, Taiwan, and Japan I know for sure) employ a nation-wide exam that tests you on just about every subject possible.

As a result, there's an industry for teaching specifically for these exams. The most commonly used method is simply straight up cramming and hoping you can pull out enough useless facts during the test. As a result, the students who spend the most time memorizing things they'll never need to know (we do it here too, but it's much much worse over there.) are the ones that get accepted into high school.

There's a bunch of criticism about this, namely the fact that cramming info doesn't actually allow you to be effective at work, which resulted in well-educated individuals who aren't capable of fulfilling their job requirements (I don't think I got this across correctly, can't word it properly).

I was looking at some chinese newspapers on a flight from Shanghai the other day, and it had questions from their high school entrance exam, which was a huge (200+ Qs, with essays) test. It had:

Most of this stuff isn't even taught until taught until high school in the US. This is a test for what would be kids finishing their 9th year (last year in middle school) to get into high school.

Basically, they have the SAT on steroids.

Lol, sorry, I meant "no interest in their field", not "no attention span", just edited that wrong before posting

But you sort of proved the point I was trying to make there. Those people are surprisingly good at their job, but they understand little to nothing about what they're doing. They're pretty much the cliche of nerds.. the kind of guys who can find the value of pi to 100 digits, but don't know what it's for. It's not exactly intelligence.. but they're damn knowledgable without having any aptitude for it.

[blah28722]

I don't think anyone would have trouble understanding pi.

I have that kind of trouble with writing/English though. I have a repertoire of words to use in my vocabulary (i c wat i did thar), but I have a hard time writing anything but the most direct sentences. I can write an instruction manual, but not a short story.

[LegoLord]

If I had a map I could tell you which city would be the answer to that question about global warning.  Which ever option is closest to one of the poles; the closer to the equator you are, the more your area is affected by green house gases, apparently.

In fact, I also heard that the north and south poles are the only areas affected by solar winds (which is what causes the auroras), due to the poles of the magnet that is the core being the weakest points in its magnetic field.  On top of that, it is hypothesized that Mars lost it's atmosphere to solar winds; there is evidence that mars too had a molten core capable of producing a magnetic field, but it cooled and the field faded, leaving the atmosphere vulnerable to being stripped by the the solar winds (from the sun, obviously).

Now Earth's field is weakening, but it is looking more like the field is weakening from flipping magnetic poles (there is evidence of this having happened before, a long time ago, in more-magnetically aligned minerals, such as magnetite, on sea beds and such where it has not been disturbed by man); it is molten, after all, so any shift would look like a gradual weakening as north and south polarities mix.  This temporary weakness would leave the atmosphere vulnerable to solar winds.

From this, I have developed a hypothesis:  Solar winds slow the rate of global warming in the poles (those areas least resistant to them).  Were this a science project, the problem, or question, would be "do solar winds slow or affect the rate of global warming?"

So if this were to turn out true, the next question would be:  Will this have any positive effect on the global warming that will afflict the earth when its field is too weak to protect its atmosphere?  Or:  Will the temporary vulnerability to the solar winds have a enough of a beneficial effect to make up for the temporary increase in unhealthy radiation? (I would of course say yes out of optimism)

This is of course all just speculation from a 17 year old who may not quite have a good enough grasp on the concepts (although I left details out on purpose for being too long, so keep that in mind) and I'm largely recalling things we went over after EOC exams in Physical Science Freshman year.

But if we assume all of what I said is as I said it, then that would be an example of what those IQ questions we've been making fun of might be aiming for ('dogs can run.  Jill can run.  Therefore Jill is a . . .' or however it goes).

Edit:  Now after posting I realize that if I am at least close to right about some of those concepts, this might have shown up in some science magazine.  Then someone will think I just copied that, and it would be embarrassing.  But I don't read those sorts of magazines.  Or any magazines other than those from which my screen name is derived.

[blah28722]

If I had a map I could tell you which city would be the answer to that question about global warning.  Which ever option is closest to one of the poles; the closer to the equator you are, the more your area is affected by green house gases, apparently.

In fact, I also heard that the north and south poles are the only areas affected by solar winds (which is what causes the auroras), due to the poles of the magnet that is the core being the weakest points in its magnetic field.  On top of that, it is hypothesized that Mars lost it's atmosphere to solar winds; there is evidence that mars too had a molten core capable of producing a magnetic field, but it cooled and the field faded, leaving the atmosphere vulnerable to being stripped by the the solar winds (from the sun, obviously).

Now Earth's field is weakening, but it is looking more like the field is weakening from flipping magnetic poles (there is evidence of this having happened before, a long time ago, in more-magnetically aligned minerals, such as magnetite, on sea beds and such where it has not been disturbed by man); it is molten, after all, so any shift would look like a gradual weakening as north and south polarities mix.  This temporary weakness would leave the atmosphere vulnerable to solar winds.

From this, I have developed a hypothesis:  Solar winds slow the rate of global warming in the poles (those areas least resistant to them).  Were this a science project, the problem, or question, would be "do solar winds slow or affect the rate of global warming?"

So if this were to turn out true, the next question would be:  Will this have any positive effect on the global warming that will afflict the earth when its field is too weak to protect its atmosphere?  Or:  Will the temporary vulnerability to the solar winds have a enough of a beneficial effect to make up for the temporary increase in unhealthy radiation? (I would of course say yes out of optimism)

This is of course all just speculation from a 17 year old who may not quite have a good enough grasp on the concepts (although I left details out on purpose for being too long, so keep that in mind) and I'm largely recalling things we went over after EOC exams in Physical Science Freshman year.

But if we assume all of what I said is as I said it, then that would be an example of what those IQ questions we've been making fun of might be aiming for ('dogs can run.  Jill can run.  Therefore Jill is a . . .' or however it goes).

Edit:  Now after posting I realize that if I am at least close to right about some of those concepts, this might have shown up in some science magazine.  Then someone will think I just copied that, and it would be embarrassing.  But I don't read those sorts of magazines.  Or any magazines other than those from which my screen name is derived.

IIRC I think the timing of the flipping of the poles coincide with mass extinctions of the past, so I'm not that optimistic.

Then again, these things have also coincided with ice ages, sunspots, solar flares, and asteroids.

[LegoLord]

And our atmosphere is a lot like an oven now, so we might do better than they did at the start of the last ice age.  If not, then it might be necessary to blow up a volcano and an oil refinery.  That oughta do it.