A true measure of intelligence is money

Occidendum

Arriving to the conclusion that a standard of recognizable intelligence doesnt exist in IQ tests that can be trained and taken for. Which accounts for a small fraction.
I wanted to have a definitive proof of overall excellence and intelligence. You may be smart enough to conceive the notions but are you aware enough to control it? Those who excelled in arts might fail in mathematics and vice versa. On top of that the environment plays.a heavy roll on the recognization of intelligence. A gifted student in on are may be seen as a disabled person but put into another situation and people praise the 'rain man'.
My thought is this, the only way to recognize intelligence is via money. The capitalism and monetary exchange allow for a seemingly universal identification of what I will define as 'assertive' intelligence. From perfecting a skill or talent and navigating through the maze of social and judicial rules. Whatever your intellectual gift is in you must be able to apply it and the reward for that application is money to he put bluntly.
summarizing this point is that given all the constraints and freedoms of our daily modern society, most persons have the opportunity to utilize them. So to my reasoning it stands that objectivelely the 'naturalistic' measure of intelligence is the very money system we live in.
If it is truly and game than it stands to reason the smartest player wins with the highest score.
Thoughts?

xyz-zyx

Take this thought experiment: You are truly intelligent in a world where the majority aren't. You solve a mathematical problem that will be important to humanity, research a cancer cure or write a huge philosophy book.

However a movie star or a sports star end up earning way more money, because the large majority do not read your philosophy book, but rather watch sport or movies.

In a world were everyone were intelligent, intelligence would be appreciated and sports not so much as entertainment other than as exercise.

Money is not a good measure of intelligence.

One might argue that a intelligent individual would earn and invest in what will make him money and that do happen, but we have a limited time and a highly intelligent individual might also realize that writing down his or her thoughts in a philosophy book or researching a cancer cure might in the long term be more important. As lots of people can earn money but no one else can solve the math problems, find the cure or do the philosophy.

Also in order for it to be a good indication, all individuals should start with the same amount of money.
Right now a tiny percent are born into extreme riches, this removes money as a good measure of intelligence.

Heracloitus

A true measure of intelligence is penis size.

Edit: I mean measuring intelligence seems pretty arbitrary

unenlightened

I just won the lottery - and became a genius.

A true measure of intelligence is to take a moment's critical consideration of one's speculations before inflicting them on the world.

DingoJones

I think the truest mark of intelligence is not a measure of intellectual strengths but rather the measure of the LACK of intellectual WEAKNESS.

Tim3003

According to Wikipedia: "Intelligence has been defined in many ways, including: the capacity for logic, understanding, self-awareness, learning, emotional knowledge, reasoning, planning, creativity, and problem solving. More generally, it can be described as the ability to perceive or infer information, and to retain it as knowledge to be applied towards adaptive behaviors within an environment or context. "

If we cant agree on its definiton, how can we agree on its exemplar?

praxis

↪Occidendum

Just out of curiosity, if acquiring money is your goal in life how exactly are you training yourself to achieve it? Philosophizing doesn’t seem like a good activity to train for this goal.

Occidendum

↪praxis

I'm suggesting this as a standardized method of intelligence above the IQ test which only a select group of people actually take. However the system of money involves almost all parties making it more accurate?

praxis

↪Occidendum

Acquiring money is a rather specific goal, Occidendum, and in this way is not a good indicator of general intelligence. Indeed it’s not even an intelligent goal.

Occidendum

↪praxis

I'm honestly asking, okay so then what do you suggest?

BC

↪Occidendum

Successful adult animals, including humans, have enough intelligence to succeed in their preferred environment. Success in obtaining the necessities of life is a minimum test of intelligence. Maybe 90%-95% of the population pass the test.

Of the 90%-95% who pass the test, there is a range of of performance outcomes, but money is a poor measure of success. Some extremely intelligent people are not interested in the activities that produce high incomes. Or they are just unlucky and their brilliant schemes fall through the cracks. Some highly motived people of middling intelligence make all kinds of money. And so on...

Very high levels of achievement probably do indicate intelligence. I don't think one can be a great concert violinist, a great software engineer, a top-rated entertainer, or an extraordinarily successful operator of anything without intelligence. The problem is that not achieving the heights doesn't mean that one is stupid. Many people who we think of as distinguished were not recognized while they were alive. Very intelligent people who lead very stimulating private lives not oriented towards material or performance success are just not going to be noticed.

Why does identifying intelligent people matter?

Baden

A true measure of intelligence is to take a moment's critical consideration of one's speculations before inflicting them on the world. — unenlightened

Or one may find their thread closed.

EDIT: Don't take this as a discouragement to start other discussions, @Occidendum, but this argument doesn't have enough fuel to get on the road.

A true measure of intelligence is money

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions