What is your IQ?

Many people measure intelligence by way of traditional psychological tests. Yet, why is it that the American with the highest I.Q. supposedly lives in a trailer park and has worked as a bouncer during the last ten years? Why is it that the American individual with the second highest I.Q. also works in a bar and doesn't live the lifestyle standard you may associate with high intelligence?

And then, turn to someone like Thomas Alva Edison. He was an inventor who holds almost 2000 patents even after his death. Would you be amazed to learn he was expelled from elementary school for being considered stupid? Leonardo Da Vinci was seen as an anti-social recluse. He hid away from the world because he didn't think like anyone else. He was ostracized. Yet, remind yourself of his contributions to Humanity, from preliminary designs for flying machines and detailed examination of human anatomy, to applications of complex mathematics and cosmology. Would devising such ideas, long before their time, really reflect a lack of intelligence?

The former examples bring to light that human beings indeed have the potential to develop different kinds of intelligence. In a given era, societies establish standards for intelligence that ignore everyone doesn't learn the same way. Consider home-schooled children who learn outside traditional institutions. Consider artists, pioneers and other individuals who don't fit into traditional categories. Does this reflect short-sightedness or an inability to see beyond intelligence we think we know?

You might know people who are very smart about some subjects and yet, appear hopeless in other ways. A gourmet chef may have no idea how to repair a broken-down car. An olympic medalist may excel in sport yet, struggle to develop lasting relationships. A self-taught accountant who is brilliant alone may struggle in team settings. Some people learn easier through visualization and practical experiences. Other people learn better through repetition and regurgitation. None of these cases implies stupidity. They simply point out that everyone isn't gifted in every way.

Intelligence is quantified and qualified. You can develop emotional intelligence to better relate to and empathize with people. You can develop technical intelligence which might empower you to effectively repair machinery or design software. You might develop spiritual intelligence which permits you to connect with other realms. Varied talents could be understood as different kinds of intelligence. Intellectual intelligence is but one view of learning. Why assume one kind of perceived intelligence is better than another? Maybe its not. Maybe you're brainwashed.

In order to survive, no matter where you live, you need to develop 'life skills.' They include things like the ability to adapt, to develop versatility, to gain insight into emotion and diplomacy (sense when and how to say 'the right thing'). People who realize their views of success are known by qualities such as compassion, accountability, having respect for themselves and others, and listening to instincts which guide their evolution.

No limit may exist for the potential of our intelligence. Each of us may learn new things. Whether you connect with inner passions or act to build on your perceived IQ is up to you. Even if submolecular time travel is your vision, go for it! After all, naysayers didn't stop the invention of telephones, cars, airplanes and many other things that help people. Believe in your potential. Accept yourself. Redefine your I.Q.

Comments

[Mark]

I think Dr. Howard Gardner would agree with you. In his book, Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, he described intelligence as the "application of cognitive skills and knowledge to learn, solve problems, and obtain ends that are valued by an individual or culture." He describes eight different types of intelligence:

* Linguistic intelligence ("word smart")
* Logical-mathematical intelligence ("number/reasoning smart")
* Spatial intelligence ("picture smart")
* Bodily-Kinesthetic intelligence ("body smart")
* Musical intelligence ("music smart")
* Interpersonal intelligence ("people smart")
* Intrapersonal intelligence ("self smart")
* Naturalist intelligence ("nature smart")

Standard IQ tests mostly ignore the last five on that list.

[Liara Covert]

Dr. Gardener is indeed a fantastic reference. Thanks for referring people to another source of information where readers can build on their own understanding of intelligence. Just when one thinks one may know all there is to know about a subject, a gem can pop up to empower and encourage one to expand horizons. Do you personally think any one of these "intelligences" is more useful or more valuable than another for you?

[Mark]

Frankly yes. Not in a general sense, but in my line of work and study, linguistic and logical-mathematical intelligence is more useful than musical intelligence, for example. The rest help, some more than others, but those two are *necessary*

But I do believe each form of intelligence influences each other. Kinesthetic and spatial intelligence go hand in hand. A good idea of how your body moves is not much use if you have difficulty understanding the space within which it moves. And spatial intelligence can also be applied to aiding logical-mathematical intelligence, in the form of mind-maps for example.

I'm sure I could come up with many more combinations but I think you catch my drift. :)

[Liara Covert]

Thanks for your view. Intelligence and its value appear subjective. Its great so many kinds exist. This offers people opportunities to expand on their ideas of self-worth and self-acceptance. I think its fascinating to recognize how some perception and intelligence are magnified in the absence of others. Its up to us to recognize value.

[Pablo]

I agree with Mark in part, but I also think that it's the why how our society has been designed that the musical intelligence is not considered as important. I think musical intelligence is more than we may think. Music is made of several components that each of them alone may occupy a whole stage of intelligence. I think that we lack a better understanding of what music really is and of its scientifical basis. Musical intelligence could be regarded as a major intelligence with several mysteries to be yet uncovered.

The fact that people appreciate more some kinds of intelligence than others may point out some things lacking in our civilisations and therefore find parts of the solution to several problems storming our countries (from wars to everyday problems).

These are just some ideas, I'm not an expert on this but I thought it would be interesting for the experts to think about it. Thanks for such an interesting topic. :) And sorry for my English!

[Liara Covert]

Great to hear from you, Pablo. I agree with you that what we value as individuals is often influenced by society, media and people around us. However, as we evolve, we can also learn to step back from such influences and rethink what is important to us.

If you discover a passion inside for something other people don't value or appreciate in the same way, that doesn't mean you should give up your passion. Similarly, you may evolve to realize different kinds of intelligence exist. Yet, you need not believe one kind of talent or intelligence is necessarily better than another, even if people are compensated (paid) differently. Its useful to evaluate "intelligence" (skills) in ways other than solely based on society's monetary value.