I'm Smarter Than You Because I Read

[anriana]

High schools should cover most of this information:

Key word. My high school did not have any theatre or literature classes.

[Shards]

One could make the argument that someone who didn't know those things, especially the things that we had to know in various parts of standardized schooling, is not very intellectually curious, and I'd definitely call that being less intelligent.
Those examples weren't about obscure bits of String Theory, they were pretty well-known bits of knowledge floating about our society that would be kind of obvious to anyone paying attention anywhere.

I'm calling BS.

Intelligence has nothing to do with theoretical curiosity. Theoretical curiosity allows you to IMPROVE your knowledge base, which in turn allows you to ACT smarter than you are, but that is a vast difference from intelligence.

I personally have zero theoretical or academic curiosity. If I can't see it or manipulate it, I just plain don't care. However, in all academic examinations I have taken, I've scored top marks, and the same goes for puzzles and mechanics.

Also, books are not the only thing that stimulates one's mind. I very rarely read traditional text books, but am very fond of roleplaying games and comic books. The comics are just simple fun, which involves me much more than some thick dusty tome, and roleplaying games allow me to think and calculate odds and strategies via a set system, which is far more interactive and stimulating than dragging my way through a linear book which doesn't change regardless of the reader's attitude, outlook or decisions.

I would say reading is one of the LEAST stimulating activities in the world, because it takes a very specific type of person to get themselves wrapped up in the book, and everyone else is typically doing it because they've heard such glowing things. Anything wherein you care about a character and genuinely think about the plotlines is more stimulating than anything where you don't, and, for people like me who connect better with someone who has a face than with someone we make up, this makes comics and TV better forms of stimulation.

Personally, though, I'll still stick with my interactive games, and, even better, sports/sparring, where I get to exercise both my brain and my body.

Alright, I'm done now, sorry for the long-windedness.

[Flyndaran]

I'm calling BS.

Intelligence has nothing to do with theoretical curiosity. Theoretical curiosity allows you to IMPROVE your knowledge base, which in turn allows you to ACT smarter than you are, but that is a vast difference from intelligence.

I personally have zero theoretical or academic curiosity. If I can't see it or manipulate it, I just plain don't care. However, in all academic examinations I have taken, I've scored top marks, and the same goes for puzzles and mechanics.
...

Alright, I'm done now, sorry for the long-windedness.

Curiosity is why people learn more than is what is necessary. It is our species' gift, curse, and near magical ability all rolled into one. Without it we truly are nothing but beasts.

Just because you don't get anything out of theoretical pursuits does not diminish their importance or magnitude.
Too often people think that what others do is easy or is a bunch of tricks and interests, but what they personally do is hard and takes effort to excel.
I fully realize that no matter how hard I tried staring at birth, there are many human common things that I could never accomplish.

No test truly represents one's intelligence even in a very specific field.
Heck. I loved the likely apocryphal story of how a primatologist constructed an elaborate test to see if a chimp would solve it. When he left the room he peared through the key hole to see the results. He saw the chimp looking back eye against the door just like his. Technically, he failed the test, but nevertheless showed intense curiosity and a form of intelligence for the researcher.

There are two main types of complex thought. The vast majority of human and non-human intelligence is modular and excellent at solving problems of very specific natures. Squirrels are freakish in solving acrobatics to get food, but they lack much of the other type. This part can improve radically with training and life experience and teaching. The elderly don't diminish in this respect nearly as much as they do with the second.
The second, and most noticeable in primates and humans especially, is general intelligence. That is the beautiful ability to solve problems unlike any they have ever seen or evolved for. Invention of truly novel things, Macgyver-ing a solution with objects outside the normal parameters of similar problems, etc. are the truy intelligence examples.



Good at math? That's specilized int.
Solved a

[AdminAssistant]

Key word. My high school did not have any theatre or literature classes.

Okay, theatre I understand (mine didn't have theatre classes either just 'speech and it was optional)....

Okay, sidetrack. The fear of speaking in public is the number one fear in this country, and we don't require students to take speech? Even though I'm an academic now, I love the fact that I've taken speech and acting, because it makes lecturing so easy.

Sorry, but no...literature? That's awful.

[Flyndaran]

Okay, theatre I understand (mine didn't have theatre classes either just 'speech and it was optional)....

Okay, sidetrack. The fear of speaking in public is the number one fear in this country, and we don't require students to take speech? Even though I'm an academic now, I love the fact that I've taken speech and acting, because it makes lecturing so easy.

Sorry, but no...literature? That's awful.

Literature is normally called English class here. Mine convered the most horrendous novels imaginable despite them being called classics.
Virginia Wolf: to the lighthouse? Hated it and it's rambling mad-woman nature.
Albert Camus: the stranger? Hated it.
Kafka: Metamorphosis? Stupid description of mental illness called lycanthropy.
The list goes on.

People should take public speaking because most fear it?
So since large numbers fear snakes, everyone should take a herpetology class?

[Saydrah]

(snip)

I remarked to my boss one day that I didn't feel right selling him wine, because although he was about 50, he clearly had the mind of a child.

My boss laughed and said that he was one of the scientists at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics.

(snip)

Great post, Boozy.

I met Richard Stallman, who is a genius programmer. He actually stayed with my family once. If I hadn't been informed that he was a highly intelligent visionary in the world of computer programming, I would have thought my parents for some reason took in a wayward homeless person with mental illness. After getting to know him a little he was more friendly, but at first he was so closed off to social interaction that I would have never guessed he was at all intelligent.

Many highly academically intelligent people are uncomfortable in social situations and don't come across as at all smart.

[AFPheonix]

I don't know what kind of schools you went to, but mine certainly didn't cover any of that information.

You're honestly telling me that you didn't get any of the greek classics, Mark Twain, Shakespeare, or anything like that in any of your English classes in school? I was in a private school for junior high and high school, but many people I know who went to various public schools covered these very basic historic works. My brother who graduated 9 years before me from a public school had many of the same works I did when he was in class.
I and others who went to different schools also had to learn how to write papers and how to research. In basic college classes, we also had sections on how to write a basic research paper. I had to regularly go to primary sources for 400 level or higher bio classes for research. I'll grant, that may not be par for the course for most people, but most people should have been shown how to navigate a library, at least in grade school (I went to a middle of the road public school for grades 1-6)
If you DIDN'T, then I recommend perhaps looking into them now. They're good reads. I myself am revisiting A Tale Of Two Cities. I finished Twilight and am half-way through this book again.

I'm calling BS.

Intelligence has nothing to do with theoretical curiosity. Theoretical curiosity allows you to IMPROVE your knowledge base, which in turn allows you to ACT smarter than you are, but that is a vast difference from intelligence.

I personally have zero theoretical or academic curiosity. If I can't see it or manipulate it, I just plain don't care. However, in all academic examinations I have taken, I've scored top marks, and the same goes for puzzles and mechanics.

I said intellectual curiosity, not theoretical.

I'm guessing that with comic books, you delve deep into various aspects of characters, perhaps know more about certain ones than a lay person does. I would call that intellectual curiosity.

[anriana]

You're honestly telling me that you didn't get any of the greek classics, Mark Twain, Shakespeare, or anything like that in any of your English classes in school?

9th grade - nothing
10th grade - A Wrinkle In Time
11th grade - A Hero Ain't Nothin' But a Sandwich
12th grade - Beloved

[AdminAssistant]

Literature is normally called English class here.
People should take public speaking because most fear it?

In my high school, it was English, too. We spent half the year on grammar and half on literature. One year it was solely American literature, another it was more 'world classics'.

We should be teaching people how to communicate, yes. How to stand in front of a group of people and speak to them and not want to run and hide under a bush. It's a valuable life skill, and more relevant to most people than learning how to make pajama pants or running laps.

[AFPheonix]

9th grade - nothing
10th grade - A Wrinkle In Time
11th grade - A Hero Ain't Nothin' But a Sandwich
12th grade - Beloved

Dude, your teachers/school board needed to be shot. One stinkin' book per year? That's IT?

[Flyndaran]

In my high school, it was English, too. We spent half the year on grammar and half on literature. One year it was solely American literature, another it was more 'world classics'.

We should be teaching people how to communicate, yes. How to stand in front of a group of people and speak to them and not want to run and hide under a bush. It's a valuable life skill, and more relevant to most people than learning how to make pajama pants or running laps.

Speaking in front of people is an either you get it or you don't. Even before my crippling anxiety kicked in, I hated being the center of attention for any reason. I always chose the option, when they offered it, of writing an entire report than giving a simple 5 minute oration.
You can't make me like, or even be good at, something I despised that much.
Then my anxiety hit and it became a moot issue.

It was like my H.S. having swimming being a mandatory skill in order to graduate. That pissed me off so much I doggy paddled the perfunctory test lap. I didn't go to school to waste time playing sports, giving reports, or phsycially doing jack. I went to learn things I couldn't get at the W.M.C.A or from a playground, as in science, math, history, etc.

If parents can't get their tubbies outside, then why should we demand that schools do if for them? ( for the record, I'm a fatty, but chose it based on my life preferences without whining about possibilities. I also know that when needed for medical reasons I can get skinnier than most.)
I've been underweight, perfect weight, overweight, and obese. Overweight gives me the most pleasure for the fewest drawbacks and screw anyone that disagrees with my joys. I've had chunky relatives live past 100. How many exercise freaks can say that? Happiness is very important for a happy life. Duh, but not everyone actually follows through.

[Boozy]

It was like my H.S. having swimming being a mandatory skill in order to graduate....I didn't go to school to waste time playing sports, giving reports, or phsycially doing jack.

Swimming isn't a sport like basketball. It's a valuable life skill that could prepare students for possibly serious situations in their future. Thousands of people drown in the US every year.

There's a pervasive attitude that schools should only prepare the mind for the world, not the body. That's a bit short-sighted. We have an obesity epidemic. I certainly don't want to see Shakespeare being replaced with badminton, but neither do I want to see gym classes or health and nutrition classes disappear.

Back on topic (sort of): Public-speaking is another incredibly valuable skill. I think it should be taught in schools more often.

[anriana]

If parents can't get their tubbies outside, then why should we demand that schools do if for them? ( for the record, I'm a fatty, but chose it based on my life preferences without whining about possibilities. I also know that when needed for medical reasons I can get skinnier than most.)

If stupid parents can't teach their children how to count, why should we demand government sponsored schools do it for them? If stupid parents don't teach their children to read, why should we demand government schools do it for them? If ignorant parents don't teach their children about sex, why should government schools do it for them? If stupid tubby parents don't teach their children about nutrition, why should the government do it for them?

[Slytovhand]

Given the direction this thread seems to have taken, I'll pose/ask 2 hypotheticals to prove a point.

Firstly, there are still billions of people on this earth who have never heard of Shakespeare, Ovid, Homer, Twain or any other brilliant writer you can name. They just don't get anywhere near them. For example, how many people living near the Sahara, the Gobi or the Amazon do you expect to not only have heard of them, but also to have read and understood them. Given this, does anyone here presume that all those people mentioned have a below average intelligence?

Secondly, Stephen Hawkings would be considered one of the greatest minds of the century. Due to an illness, if not for technology, his knowledge and intelligence would be lost to us. 100 years ago,, that would have been the case. Just because he would have been unable to express his intelligence, does that mean that he didn't have it?

And I too agree - public speaking ought to be taught in schools - it is a very valuable skill.

[Slytovhand]

If stupid parents can't teach their children how to count, why should we demand government sponsored schools do it for them? If stupid parents don't teach their children to read, why should we demand government schools do it for them? If ignorant parents don't teach their children about sex, why should government schools do it for them? If stupid tubby parents don't teach their children about nutrition, why should the government do it for them?

And if all this be true and accepted, why let stupid and ignorant parents breed in the first place?