Red Expendable

I was searching on the web about info on the human brina. I was GOING to post a question re: 'Why is it that humans only use 10 percent of the brain...' and I came across this article:

<a href="http://www.theness.com/articles/brain-nejs0201.html" target="_blank">http://www.theness.com/articles/brain-nejs0201.html</a>

Not knowing anything about the human brain, I have nothing to go off of. I alway assumed that people of higher intelligence were people that used 'more of their brain'. After reading this article, if it is true, I have to ask, what exactly makes someone more intelligent than another person?

My brother in law is a biochemical engineer and my brother is a chemical engineer, and when they talk about their respective careers/studies, I can only scratch my head and wonder what the hell they are talking about.
What makes these people more capable of understanding these concepts than myself? Is this because of a higher intelligence, or am I off track?

RedEx

[ July 29, 2002: Message edited by: Red Expendable ]
[Fixed the link.]

[ July 29, 2002: Message edited by: Bill ]</p>

Mageth

Your link's not working.

Mageth

"We only use 10% of our brains" is a bit of a myth that's been discussed in some recent threads.

That aside, why would you think that everone should have the same level of intelligence (if you do indeed think this)? No two people's brains are physiologically identical, nor are any two people's experience/environment the same. Results: intelligence is distributed in a bell curve, with most of us somewhat average, a few more intelligent, and a few less intelligent.

Bill

Any sort of intelligence measure is a biased test of only some particularly narrow definition of what "intelligence" really is. My guess would be that you have nearly the same intelligence as your brother does since you share many of the same genes and (presumably, anyway) shared much of the same upbringing (or rather, the "environmental exposure" component of whatever creates intelligence).

But there appears to be some random factors for intelligence just as there appears to be some random factors that control the commitment to moral behavior that each of us chooses to exemplify. Even identical twins with identical environments during their childhood can choose to develop themselves in such dramatically different ways so as to create in later adulthood some dramatic differences in measurable intelligence.

You have made some choice(s) as to how to live your own life, and whatever you chose has affected what you have become today. The fact that you cannot grasp some particular concepts from the careers of others you might consider to be your peers is not necessarily any indication of a lack of intelligence on your own part. It could very well be that you have simply chosen to develop your own abilities in a different way. Presumably, you are happy with the choices you have made in your life. If not, then perhaps you ought to consider doing something to better develop yourself along the lines that might make you happier. It is hardly ever "too late" for you to undertake a program of change to benefit yourself.

== Bill

KeithHarwood

Could it have something to do with three or four years study at university followed by years of practice in the field?

In other words, a lot of hard work on their part.

Red Expendable

Yeah it could be that. No doubt. I understand that much, thanks for the input. I've no desire to do that KIND of hard work, and it was longer than 3 or 4 years of study.

So does this mean everyone is a potential Einstein?

I was not intending this thread to have a 'why can't that me' type of deal. I'm sorry you misunderstood, so it seems from the response(s).

I was trying to gnerate some kind of discussion on the topic of intelligence., the human brain, etc.

So enviroment plays a big part, as well as desire? Is that what is being said?

RedEx

fando

Ok, I'll bite. I'd like to steer the discussion towards a vexing question of mine: Given that intelligence is hard to define objectively, what mechanism allows us to agree on the subjective value of a person's intelligence? That is, what allows you and me to agree that Sue is smarter than Bob without any objective criteria and no data other than behavioral cues? It seems to me that people can tell how smart other people are without much error in their estimation. Why is that?

I offer a conjecture that we measure intelligence using pattern recognition. In our brains, we have a neural network whose input are behavioral cues and output is a valuation of intelligence. As we grow up, this network gets trained to identify smart people. Because the network is trained, it follows that everyone who shares the same culture and upbringing will tend to develop the same network.