Intelligence is the ability to effectively adapt to a dynamic environment; it cannot be measured quantitatively, does not involve retrieving and storing information from memory, and involves being able to quickly respond to any situation.
Does not involve retrieving and storing information from memory- I believe that that does mean someone can be intelligent. So I think this is good since it has a opposition.
so if I can't store and retrieve anything from my memory, the only thing I would know was in the "now". And if I can not comprehend anything seconds before or after, I'm still considered intelligent? How does one learn if it has nothing to do with storing and retrieving information?
Very arguable. This definition links intelligence with survival, and that is entirely debatable. Is survival of the fitest really survival of the smartest? Or is it the strongest and fastest that adapt?
The ability to retrieve and store information from memory is an ability developed throughout time that allows a person to "adapt" to changes in the enviornment. It helps a person to know bad choices and make wiser ones. From a scientific, psychological point of view, it will be very hard to argue that point. You might want to revise it. Memory that becomes instinct helps one to "quickly respond to any situation."
This is arugable, like how we discussed in class, an ant in this case is smarter than humans even if they don't appear to be. When you say memory adds to intelligence, I don't have that great of memory so does that mean I am not intelligent. 0.o
Your definition is very arguable because I would argue that intelligence has a lot to do with memory. People learn from experiences which requires memory.
This is a very arguable definition since there are many different types of intelligence. I would just encourage you to look beyond the qualifiers you have and maybe add even more kinds of intelligence to them. Memory is not the only intellectual requirement.
This is very debatable. Intelligence can be interpreted in so many ways and you express you opinion very well. I think your take on immediate response is very interesting.
Does not involve retrieving and storing information from memory- I believe that that does mean someone can be intelligent. So I think this is good since it has a opposition.
ReplyDeleteSome may argue that intelligence involves straight A's and a sharp memory, so this is very arguable.
ReplyDeleteThis is a really great definition and very arguable because people see intelligence as IQ level or "street smarts".
ReplyDeleteYou could also consider the qualitative aspect of intelligence too.
ReplyDeleteMemory has a lot to do with intelligence. Or who is your audience?
ReplyDeleteso if I can't store and retrieve anything from my memory, the only thing I would know was in the "now". And if I can not comprehend anything seconds before or after, I'm still considered intelligent? How does one learn if it has nothing to do with storing and retrieving information?
ReplyDeleteI think having knowledge and retrieving and storing information is an aspect of intelligence, so it can be argued for sure.
ReplyDeleteVery arguable. This definition links intelligence with survival, and that is entirely debatable. Is survival of the fitest really survival of the smartest? Or is it the strongest and fastest that adapt?
ReplyDeleteMain counter argument memory, someone also may argue that quickly responding to any situation are just reflexes or instinct.
ReplyDeleteThe ability to retrieve and store information from memory is an ability developed throughout time that allows a person to "adapt" to changes in the enviornment. It helps a person to know bad choices and make wiser ones. From a scientific, psychological point of view, it will be very hard to argue that point. You might want to revise it. Memory that becomes instinct helps one to "quickly respond to any situation."
ReplyDeleteThis is arugable, like how we discussed in class, an ant in this case is smarter than humans even if they don't appear to be. When you say memory adds to intelligence, I don't have that great of memory so does that mean I am not intelligent.
ReplyDelete0.o
Your definition is very arguable because I would argue that intelligence has a lot to do with memory. People learn from experiences which requires memory.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very arguable definition since there are many different types of intelligence. I would just encourage you to look beyond the qualifiers you have and maybe add even more kinds of intelligence to them. Memory is not the only intellectual requirement.
ReplyDeleteThis is very debatable. Intelligence can be interpreted in so many ways and you express you opinion very well. I think your take on immediate response is very interesting.
ReplyDelete