Re: Rethinking the concept of intelligence

From: abyss (abyss@megalink.net)
Date: Fri Jan 07 2000 - 15:04:53 GMT

  • Next message: Wade T.Smith: "Fwd: On CBS News, Some of What You See Isn't There"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id PAA00829 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 7 Jan 2000 15:06:40 GMT
    Message-ID: <001301bf5920$8e130560$2bf894d0@abyss>
    From: "abyss" <abyss@megalink.net>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    References: <20000101170125.AAA14396@camail2.harvard.edu@[205.240.180.119]>
    Subject: Re: Rethinking the concept of intelligence
    Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 10:04:53 -0500
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    I have Faith in Justice
    abyss
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Wade T.Smith" <wade_smith@harvard.edu>
    To: "SKEPTIC-L" <skeptic@listproc.hcf.jhu.edu>; "Memetics Discussion List"
    <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2000 11:56 AM
    Subject: Fwd: Rethinking the concept of intelligence

    > Rethinking the concept of intelligence
    >
    > By Howard Gardner, 1/1/2000
    >
    > What is likely to happen to the concept of intelligence in the new
    > millennium? As a longtime researcher in the area of intelligence and as
    > the creator of the theory of multiple intelligences, I anticipate four
    > principal struggles.
    >
    > BREADTH. I have proposed that human beings are best thought of as having
    > several intelligences, ranging from the familiar linguistic and logical
    > intelligences to more esoteric forms such as interpersonal intelligence
    > and naturalist intelligence.
    >
    > Linguistic and logical intelligences are valuable in school and IQ tests.
    > Interpersonal intelligence is crucial in doing clinical or sales work,
    > while naturalist intelligence figures in hunting, agriculture, and our
    > capacity to make and appreciate differences among commercial products,
    > like sneakers and cars.
    >
    > Psychologist and journalist Daniel Goleman has proposed emotional
    > intelligence (the ability to understand and control one's emotions), and
    > psychiatrist Robert Coles has nominated moral intelligence (the sense of
    > character that we hope our children will have and that we look for in
    > friends and associates).
    >
    > It is a good idea to broaden our notion of intelligence, especially if we
    > want to recognize the range of human capacities.
    >
    > But I worry about definitions that collapse assessments of our cognitive
    > powers with statements about the kind of human beings we favor. Our
    > ability to understand other persons (a cognitive capacity) does not
    > necessarily mean we will use that capacity to help others (a decision
    > involving a value judgment). Indeed, primatologists speak of
    > Machiavellian intelligence - the capacity to use our understanding of
    > others to ''do them in.''
    >
    > PURITY. For many years psychometricians have searched for the ultimate or
    > ''pure'' essence of intelligence. They would like to ferret out the brain
    > structure or the gene that controls intelligence.
    >
    > I remain skeptical that there is such a thing as pure intelligence. In my
    > view, what we count as intelligence changes from one era to another - the
    > intelligence needed to succeed in an agricultural society may be
    > different from that needed to thrive in a computer-based society - and
    > from one situation to another (trying to negotiate a contract, planning
    > one's life carefully).
    >
    > Indeed, should one intelligence become overly prized (as it is on Wall
    > Street), resourceful individuals will discover or exploit another form
    > (as they do in Silicon Valley or Hollywood). Wall Street looks for skill
    > with figures and trends, Silicon Valley rewards daring ideas and
    > inventions in technology, and Hollywood is ever in search of a new plot
    > twist and a new cinematic technique.
    >
    > ASSESSMENT. What one thinks intelligence is determines how one believes
    > it should be assessed. Devotees of the IQ test prefer sharp questions
    > that are thought to best assess intelligence (e.g., solving a complex
    > maze, mapping an analogy). In contrast, those who view intelligence as
    > operating distinctively in different contexts prefer assessments that are
    > as realistic as possible. For them, a simulation, where you actually have
    > to navigate new territory or write an essay that compares two quite
    > different entities, proves to be a far more effective assessment than a
    > short-answer or multiple-choice measure.
    >
    > INDIVIDUATION. One of the most widely debated works on intelligence in
    > recent times was ''The Bell Curve.'' Authors Richard Herrnstein and
    > Charles Murray espoused the classical position on intelligence: that each
    > of us represents a particular point on a bell-shaped curve of
    > intelligence and that our intelligence is largely a product of our
    > genetic heritage.
    >
    > I believe that the bell curve view is unsubstantiated on scientific
    > grounds and unpalatable on social grounds. According to my rival
    > ''multiple intelligences'' view, each of us has many intellectual
    > potentials. Which ones are realized depends on opportunities available,
    > effectiveness of teaching, and one's own motivation.
    >
    > In the future, will we assume a passive view with respect to intelligence
    > - receiving a test score and letting it determine our life options? Or
    > will we see intelligences as flexible opportunities, which we can shape
    > and enhance for ourselves and for others under our care, such as our
    > students or our children? Will we try to realize as many variations of
    > intellect as possible?
    >
    > Before long it will be possible for us to intervene actively in matters
    > of the mind through hormonal injections, operations on the nervous
    > system, or even genetic engineering or cloning. Deciding on such matters
    > will certainly test our intelligence. What we ultimately decide will
    > reveal the quality of our wisdom and the merit of our values.
    >
    > Howard Gardner's book ''Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Intelligences for
    > the Twenty-First Century'' has been published by Basic Books.
    >
    > This story ran on page A23 of the Boston Globe on 1/1/2000. © Copyright
    > 1999 Globe Newspaper Company.
    >
    > This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    > Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    > For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    > see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
    >
    >

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 07 2000 - 15:06:41 GMT