If intelligence is truly subjective than is it not foolish for us to claim that we are intelligent?

Question

In the face of the irrationality and uncertainty of the universe the human race continues to believe that they are intelligent, so my question is: "is this self righteousness justified or is our claim to intelligence but a simple way for us to mask our fear of death? does our claim to knowledge actually prove our naivety"
Be it resolved that intelligence can be concretely defined, how can the human race develop a definition of intelligence that is not biased toward our own thoughts. Is intelligence nothing more than the ability to realize that you exist, because ultimately all that we claim to be proof of our intelligence relies solely on our ability to recognize that we exist. for example we set goals so we have something to live for, we love because we need something to die for, and we participate in this immoral society that we were born into because we need to know we are not alone. If we did not know we existed we could not feel or accomplish any of the aforementioned and it seems to me that if something knows it exists it must therefore question why it exists. Isn't our so called "intelligence" just the simple ability to ask why?
And if we are not intelligent how can we justify any of our wars on moral grounds, because morality assumes intelligence. if we are not intelligent our morality is fatally flawed. If we are not intelligent all of our wars have been nothing more that animalistic territorial-ism because all that unites is an idiots lie. If we are not intelligent how can we even truly question if intelligence exists.

Answer 1

this depends on the type of intelligence, or how we Define it. in the most basic sense, intelligence is the adaptability of the mind along with memory capacity. these things can be measured, some have more ability than others. wisdom, judgment and morality are more subjective.



Intelligence and stupidity are not mutually exclusive, indeed, the more Intelligent you are, the greater your capacity for stupidity,evil, bad judgment and all moral sort comings. We could not blow up the world with Nuclear weapons if we lacked the intelligence to make Nuclear weapon, so greater intelligence = greater capacity for stupidity (in the sense of a shortfall off Judgment or wisdom).



Due to the subjective nature of these others, it may be foolish for us to claim that we are Wise, but let others make that judgment. It may be harder to grasp than basic intelligence, but we do have a sense of measure about it. and we should know that Intelligence without wisdom is the most dangerous thing that exists.

Answer 2

Well, you have your problem upfront: intelligence isn't subjective.



How can you tell a rock isn't intelligent? Very simple: we can make plenty of tests which would confirm that it cannot process any form of perceptible stimulus into a self-comprehensible synthesis. In other words, we cannot assert any behavior, attitude - let alone thoughts - to a rock and, hence it is not intelligent.

How can you tell a pork is more intelligent than a dog? Well, a series of test would highlight that the dog can achieve the aforementioned process to a lesser degree than the pork. Broadly, it would mean the pig could comprehend things to a greater extent - it could do more with its mind.

So, how are humans more intelligent than pigs? Again, taking in consideration a series of empirical data, we would find out quickly, the human being can elaborate increasingly complex synthesis of perceptible information than the pork.



EDIT:

There is a partial definition of intelligence in my first explanation... In your little paragraph, you didn't speak of intelligence, but of degrees of intelligence and, yes, I agree that intelligence and knowledge are two different things despite the fact that knowledge requires intelligence to be possessed. Unless you are a fan of long winded metaphysical argumentation on the nature of knowledge and of existence, you can take this little sentence with you: one thing is itself and two things are different because they are not identical in at least one respect. That purely means self-contradiction is impossible in things that exist. So, objectivity is an imperative requirement because it's the only thing that can deal with existence; subjectivity, by its inexorable nature of distinction and relation to the subject, must without exception rely onto nihilism. The short version is: subjectivity deals with what doesn't exist or else its self-contradictory. My point is that, in both cases, subjectivity is pointless. It's either wrong or it's not right, but it cannot be the answer.



EDIT 2:

Science assumes one thing: existence. And, well, answering any question assumes existence. Now, beyond that, I will answer you by an analogy: Thinking and knowing is much like a puzzle. Facts are pieces and, thoughts, the edges that allow every pieces to merge. There is only one picture to draw and you cannot place every pieces together without finding the proper relation between each thing. Imagine what this puzzle look like over many dimensions and you now have an idea of what is Truth.



That scientific process assumes nothing more than which is under hand like the puzzle solver wouldn't do more than pick the pieces he is left with.



EDIT 3:

To the idiot below me...

Very purely, science relies onto the epistemology which is utterly abstract. From your point of you, the basis of which you call pragmatic are flawed, thus making your own process flawed. Hence, you are entering into self-contradiction. If you want the simple version: you just refuted by your own words the method you used to prove yourself right...

Answer 3

Q) Is this self righteousness justified...?

A) Yes, in terms of what comparisons we are able to make and also in light of the thriving survival of the species.



Q) is our claim to intelligence but a simple way for us to mask our fear of death?

A) for some perhaps, but not for all. Not everyone fears death, for one thing.



Q) How can the human race develop a definition of intelligence that is not biased toward our own thoughts.

A) It cannot be done. The only reality that we can perceive is filtered through human perception.



Q) Is intelligence nothing more than the ability to realize that you exist, because ultimately all that we claim to be proof of our intelligence relies solely on our ability to recognize that we exist.

A) Incorrect. It also relies on our proven ability to survive, adapt and prosper.



STATEMENT) We participate in this immoral society that we were born into because we need to know we are not alone.

COMMENT) It is your personal opinion that society is immoral. That does not make it fact. Yes, parts may indeed be immoral as judged by the majority of people, but it would be false to assume that the whole of it is immoral. You are not god, but you are apparently a borderline misanthrope. .



Q) Isn't our so called "intelligence" just the simple ability to ask why?

A) No, it is far, far more than that, but curiosity appears to be one of the fundamental components of intelligence. Without it we would not have survived this long as a species. Intelligence is the ability to acquire and apply both knowledge and skills.



Q) How can we justify any of our wars on moral grounds, because morality assumes intelligence?

A) You are making the false assumption that all war is immoral. Lets simplify it. If someone wanted to kill you, would you say it would be intelligent to not protect yourself? Much of war is this way in moral essence. Not all of it, of course.



STATEMENT) In order for something to be true it must have a definition that never changes.

COMMENT) There is no absolute truth, especially none that we can be certain will be true in all places, in all circumstances and for everyone, at all times past, present and future. Truth as we know it is relative and is arrived at by consensus of opinion, and opinions can change. While there are some things that APPEAR to be true and immutable, it is only because we have not discovered evidence to the contrary. As the saying goes, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". For instance, most everyone will agree that 1+1=2, but because of the nature of the universe and reality, we cannot know if this is a universal mathematical law or not. Perhaps it only applies to our particular notion of reality, but there may be realities that we are not aware of and are unable to perceive.



You raise interesting questions, but you need to think a little deeper. In addition, from a psychological perspective, you might consider that as a general rule we tend to project our worst fears and our most deeply disliked personal characteristics onto other people, rather than look inside and face them within ourselves. Thus, when we look at other people we often see the worst of what is in our own personality.



Thanks for the 2 points and an opportunity to change your mind a bit. While I am often appalled at the state of humanity, I am not convinced that we are beyond improvement.

Answer 4

Aces and Kings and Queens are there in a pack of cards. They have designated values. Is there any truth in those values. Everyone is a genius, realization of the Self brings in the power of Source within each of us. Intelligence is only a material definition and partial expression of the attribute of Ethereal presence within.Intelligence is the power to know one from the other as not this not this and not this. To be more lucid, a table as we call it is not the empty space, a vacuum as we call it or the air as we call it or the atmosphere as we call it around it. So this table is not that. So this is not that or NOT THIS not this, is the only learning process. Intelligence is defined by the equally ignorant mind comparing again this dullness with that sharpness by knowing that this dullness is not that sharpness. Usually everything which human beings do are foolishness because they are body conscious, and body consciousness build ego and compartmentalise one from the other and alienate one from the other. Where the disparity between the This and THAT becomes wider Chasm.

Answer 5

I think God gives us EACH the tools that we individually & personally need when we come to this life to accomplish what is needful while here. Those are all very different & diverse and we don't have His eternal perspective on ourselves or life to fully understand those differences either. Clearly not all have the same gifts, abilities, talents or intelligence and that is for a divine purpose as well. I do believe that we are each expected to learn, study, grow and gain as much knowledge as possible and become the best people we are capable of becoming while in this life. God doesn't choose & compare as humans do. We ALL have the potential of becoming BETTER, changing and becoming like Him. Remember that this life is just a speck compared to the Eternal Life that lies before us. THere we will continue to learn, grow & become even MORE than we can here.

Answer 6

Subjective it may be, but our intelligence is a faculty we possess and we use to distinguish ourselves from other living creatures. It is perhaps nothing more than an extension of our instinctive curiosity, once so essential to our survival as a species; a trait evolved through natural selection, suited to a changing environment but now capable of changing that environment for the better or worse. It remains to be seen whether it is a successful attribute of chance, or one more of nature's many failures. Intelligence is perhaps no more than a wonderful accident of nature, and we are indeed fortunate to possess it and all the glorious contradictions it evokes about life and a universe we will never fathom.

Answer 7

Intelligence isn't subjective. You're either stupid or not. Making decisions based on morality alone is asinine. Solipsism is utterly retarded and a denial of reality akin to a psychotic shrieking of bugs crawling under his skin. Our "proof" of our intelligence has no relation as to whether or not we are aware of our own consciousness. Stop reading Descartes. He was a French a$$hole. Any jerkoff can ask the question "Why?" This doesn't constitute as grounds for intelligence, as the question can be both pointless and unnecessary to ask in certain situations. Also, clearly you consider yourself intelligent (God knows why, judging from your overtly dramatic, masturbatory tone of pseudo-intellectualism.) You're asking the question "Why?", thus solidifying your own intelligence using your personal logic, yet not applying the same standard to the rest of humanity. Are you a f..ucking android or something?



Ex: Realist: You need to eat food in order to survive. Idiot: Why? Our intelligence is judged by our sheer ability to think out and solve problems and how the solution can help to improve our existence in a pragmatic sense. This is the problem with whiny, impotent, college-style philosophers like yourself. You shriek of such great profundity, yet you're incapable of improving reality in any way. That's fairly retarded. Using big Shakespearean, flowery language and shaking your fist at the universe serves for superb dramatism, but it also proves that you can only feign intelligence. Not exhibit it.

Answer 8

A) intelligence isnt subjective



b) from where do you derive the belief that "for something to be true it must have a definition that never changes" ? thats ridiculous



c) any serious student of computer science can tell you what intelligence ISNT, but NO ONE regardless of their education, background or experience can definitively say what intelligence IS.



Much like the biological concept of "life", it is quantitatively undefinable.... one can show "evidence of" or even "proof of" but the "standard" remains undefined.



Remember the famous quote about pornography ... I dont know what it is, but I know it when I see it

Answer 9

If intelligence is truly subjective than is it not foolish for us to claim that we are intelligent?



~~~ I don't see why; I don't see why not.

As 'intelligence' is in the eye (Perspective) of the beholder, so, too, is 'foolishness'!

They are two sides of the same coin! It 'can' be 'foolish', or not, depending on Perspective. Just as the bottom of the cloud is dark and cold, the top is blazing in the purest sunlight, all at once!

Besides we make the definitions, and stuff either is defined or not! If you define yourself as God, then that's who you are! The definitions provided by other Perspectives are unique in their Perspective, and equallyTrue;.features of the sum-total complete definition!



If anyone perceives us as 'intelligent', whatever it might mean to them, then we are so, their Perspective is a Real feature of One Reality, uiltimately, One Omni- 'Self!'!



The First Law of Soul Dynamics;

"For every Perspective, there is an equal and opposite Perspective!"

All True!



"The complete Universe (Reality/Truth/God/'Self!'/Tao/Brahman... or any feature herein...) can be defined/described as the synchronous sum-total of all Perspectives!" - Book of Fudd

ALL INCLUSIVE!!!





"is this self righteousness justified or is our claim to intelligence but a simple way for us to mask our fear of death?



~~~ Ego ("self righteousness") is 'thought' Just as you perceive these words in your monitor, that which is, so you perceive 'thoughts'!

Thats where the (egoic) 'self', righteous or otherwise exist, as a 'thought' construct.

Everything that is perceived is real, true, exists, as Reality and Truth and Existence are all, ALL, inclusive!!

Bye the bye, the only place that the 'fear of death' exists, as 'thought/ego'.

So everything that is perceived, by every unique Perspective, every unique moment of existence is Real and True, NOTHING needs justification!

It's ALL True!!!

And you can't fear death unless you also fear life!

Same coin.





does our claim to knowledge actually prove our naivety"



~~~ Thumbnail version of the critical and final update of the definition of;

'Knowledge' is "that which is perceived"!

ALL inclusive!!

That you perceive it, it exists! Is Knowledge!

Again;

"The complete Universe (Reality/Truth/God/'Self!'/Tao/Brahman... or any feature herein...) can be defined/described as the synchronous sum-total of all Perspectives!" - Book of Fudd

ALL INCLUSIVE!!!





...so me eating the apple was not subjective it was a fact



~~~ There is no 'free-will', no 'choice', every moment of existence exists Now!

Every perceived moment is a 'fact', irrefutably existent!



Existence = the complete Universe = Reality = Consciousness = Truth = 'Self!' = God = Brahman = Tao = ... etc....

ALL INCLUSIVE!!

'One'!



Everything Exists! All inclusive!

Everything is Real! All inclusive!

Truth is all inclusive!

Everything is True! All inclusive!

Existence/Reality/Truth is all inclusive!

'One'!

That which is perceived exists. All inclusive!

That which exists is perceived. All inclusive!

Not a thing exists (notice that I didn't say that 'nothing' exists, 'cause it don't! *__- ) that is not perceived. All inclusive!

Not a thing is perceived that does not exist. All inclusive!

There is no, nor can there be, any evidence to the contrary!



Much depends of your definition of 'fact'; something sometimes 'true'? Universally 'true? From 'your' Perspective? From three 'agreeing' Perspectives? Universally? From ALL (unique) Perspectives?

All moments? I think that accepting something as a 'fact' is a matter of 'belief'; it's the truth and that's it! No more 'critical thought'! Philosophy becomes religion.

All 'objective existence' is perceived subjectively. That which 'is' (if that counts as 'objective' for you), ia, when (subjectively) perceived!





was no less right about anything than you or I



~~~ "All statements are true in some sense, false in some sense, meaningless in some sense, true and false in some sense, true and meaningless in some sense, false and meaningless in some sense, and true and false and meaningless in some sense." -Robert Anton Wilson

Answer 10

The definition of intelligence is the ability to learn so although putting an IQ number isn't too perfectly accurate, you'll know if you're smart or dumb.

Answer 11

we are the product of Universal Intelligence.

we are sentient so we share that conscious intelligence.

so we can share truth

that teaching crucifixion in schools should be banned.

that 911 was an INSIDE JOB

that the wars against muslims to steal their oil are evil.

that the war on terror is to suppress the people and deny our needs for good food, housingvand health care.

that the end of cannabis prohibition is the RAPTURE.

that the royal family is the DEPENDENCY CULTURE.

that we are ruled by a fascist tyranny.

Answer 12

Intelligence is not subjective. Why ever would you think it was?

Answer 13

Everyone has different thoughts and feelings about things and there's no "correct" answer when it's about this subject :/

Answer 14

you add so much more then needs to be.... were intelligent in comparison to other lifeforms we know... theres your answer

Answer 15

huh?