You see, the blatant ignorance here is had by assuming that there is no way to possibly measure intelligence. And yet who would argue that a slug is as intelligent as a cat, or that there's no way to effectively determine any difference, and more importantly on precisely what basis would one argue such things? — creativesoul
Nobody unconsciously ascertains anything — jkg20
What might get you out of the hole you have dug for yourself is if you could present us with some cogent non-question begging examples of somebody unconsciously ascertatining something. I wish you luck with that. — jkg20
Tomseltje
You sound alot like someone acknowledging that he/she can move his/her arm, but denies the chemical reactions taking place within your muscle tissue.
Exactly what I have I said that entails skepticism about the science of human physiology? Plenty of what I have said manifests skepticism about what the IQ industry is messed up in, but nothing I have said undermines the work of physiologists. — MetaphysicsNow
Well acts and processes are distinct things — MetaphysicsNow
See my example of a violin player who at the beginning has to concentrate very hard on the exact positioning of fingers on the fingerboard, but who - when fully proficient - no longer needs to concentrate on the exact positioning of his or her fingers, they just hit the right spot. — MetaphysicsNow
Not a particularly good analogy - driving tests are also a measure of your ability to manipulate a car - if you can do that in the context of a test you are likely to perform well with a car in other contexts (although not necessarily, bad drivers pass their driving tests). This is a key disanalogy with the IQ test: there is no device/tool being used to take an IQ test, except perhaps a pen (but then there are better ways to test penmanship than an IQ test). — jkg20
Can intelligence be trained to increase? Or if not trained, fall? Yes, but studies show that only within a a small range around the baseline you exist under. The base IQ range level is pretty much set for each person. — Christoffer
Is there a lot of stigma around intelligence based on the fact, as the OP posted, that intelligence is talked about in the same way as money? People that do not have a lot of money often despise those who are rich, while those who are rich look down upon those who are poor. — Christoffer
however there are numerous quite easy ways to drasticly lower intelligence. — Tomseltje
Most people who do so seem to have forgotten that our intrinsic worth is not determined by our intelligence or monetary wealth, but rather by how we choose to use the intelligence and monetary wealth we posess. — Tomseltje
If talking about physical brain damage, then yes. But it's hard to not use the brain to such a level that your IQ drops so low that you almost simulate brain damage. — Christoffer
The optimal function of a person does not equal value of that person — Christoffer
You are riding rough shod over numerous subtle distinctions and probably also misusing the word "ascertain". To ascertain means, in the most general sense, to find something out. How do you unconsciously find out where your fingers need to press the string? Does it involve looking at the score, does it involve looking at where your fingers are actually placed? If so, looking here is intentional, conscious activity. A master of the guitar may indeed know exactly where his fingers need to be on the fingerboard, and may know without having to engage in any reflection or looking at all, but that is precisely the kind of case where there is no finding out going on at all, even if there is knowledge. It's not the case that every display of knowledge or know how is the immediate outcome of actually ascertaining anything, although certainly gaining that knowledge or know how may have involved ascertaining things at some stage. I know that I am going to enjoy the cup of coffee steaming beside me. I certainly at some point in my life found out (ascertained) that I like coffee, but that's not what I am doing now: I'm just looking forward to drinking the coffee.Since when I play the guitar I can unconciously ascertain where my finger needs to press the string to get the right sound out of my guitar when I stroke the string with my other hand.
I know that I am going to enjoy the cup of coffee steaming beside me. I certainly at some point in my life found out (ascertained) that I like coffee, but that's not what I am doing now: I'm just looking forward to drinking the coffee. — jkg20
How did you ascertain where your fingers needed to be on the fingerboard?
And consider in what circumstances that question would actually make sense when:
a) Asked of someone who is learning to play the guitar.
b) Asked of someone who has mastered the guitar. — jkg20
If you have no idea, then how do you know that it has become something unconscious, rather than just something that is entirely there for everyone to see when you play the guitar? It's you that know how to play the guitar, not your fingers nor your head.b) no idea, that part has become unconcious, my fingers know more about how to play it than my head.
Then I can only advise you to read over the thread more carefully.i don't see how the distinqtion between knowing and ascertaining is relevant here.
how do you know that it has become something unconscious — jkg20
You are riding rough shod over numerous subtle distinctions and probably also misusing the word "ascertain". — jkg20
is indicative for you just having an uncomfortable feeling about it, by no means does it mean I was misusing the word. Though such feelings can be indicative for you not agreeing with what you think I meant by it, don't prematurely exclude the possibility that you just misunderstood me by going in offence mode.Then I can only advise you to read over the thread more carefully. — jkg20
How do you unconsciously find out where your fingers need to press the string? Does it involve looking at the score, does it involve looking at where your fingers are actually placed? If so, looking here is intentional, conscious activity — jkg20
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.