Is there such a thing as being smarter?

[Bleid]

Can one person be smarter than another?

What does it mean for someone to be smarter than another?

Is being smart the same as having more knowledge than someone else?
Is being smart the same as having a different kind of knowledge than someone else?

If someone gets a higher score on an IQ test than someone else, does this mean they are smarter than that other person?

[Karkat]

Can one person be smarter than another? I feel that objectively, yes, they can. I feel that there are levels, some are at higher levels than others. They can use their brains in a way to grasp concepts of a certain complexity/etc. that those beneath them can't- what I do NOT believe is that a person's WORTH should be base on their mental prowess.

What does it mean for someone to be smarter than another? Honestly, that's really hard, if not impossible to measure. I believe there could be a way to measure this... I just wouldn't know it.

Is being smart the same as having more knowledge than someone else? Not necessarily. I would define being smart as having vast knowledge (at least of a topic) and possessing the ability to apply it practically. Ergo, smarts =/= knowledge, but rather knowledge+practical application. This is why smart and wise are sometimes synonyms, but educated and wise are not.
Is being smart the same as having a different kind of knowledge than someone else? Possibly- possessing knowledge that is rare has its own level of usefulness, and is a bit of a category of its own.

If someone gets a higher score on an IQ test than someone else, does this mean they are smarter than that other person? Noooooo. I'm inclined to believe that IQ tests are bullshit. You can have people who are highly adept at anything, and I believe it takes a special type of person to score well on an IQ test.

[ksdnfkfr]

I believe there are levels of intellect.

Some of it has to do with aptitude. Someone may just be more adept in some areas but not more intelligent overall. Now I know someone on my autism forum who is intellectually disabled. That means she scores low on IQ tests, but from what she writes, she is also very smart in ways than can be measured on an IQ test.

I think accumulated knowledge more equals being well informed rather than intelligence. There are people with PhD's who behave stupidly. They may have book smarts, but they are lacking in common sense.

[Karkat]

I believe there are levels of intellect.

Some of it has to do with aptitude. Someone may just be more adept in some areas but not more intelligent overall. Now I know someone on my autism forum who is intellectually disabled. That means she scores low on IQ tests, but from what she writes, she is also very smart in ways than can be measured on an IQ test.

I think accumulated knowledge more equals being well informed rather than intelligence. There are people with PhD's who behave stupidly. They may have book smarts, but they are lacking in common sense.

Basically ignore all the bullshit I wrote and listen to Ezra, because this is exactly what I was trying to say. :P

You can tell which one of US is smarter. Or, at very least, more eloquent.

[ksdnfkfr]

Basically ignore all the bullshit I wrote and listen to Ezra, because this is exactly what I was trying to say. :P

You can tell which one of US is smarter. Or, at very least, more eloquent.

I thought yours was better because it went into greater detail.

[Karkat]

I thought yours was better because it went into greater detail.

Yours seemed more organized, mine felt kinda ranty and circular. ;w;

[Stronk Serb]

As an example, I'll compare a university professor and an Serbian football player. The professor has had at least 17 years of studies of which 5-9 were around the science he wanted to study. He earned his doctorate and is now teaching students. On the other hand you have the average Serbian football player. He started playing football when he was young. Because he didn't study in elementary, he couldn't get into a grammar school or even a craft school but because he trained football he got into a sports school and then went professional. The difference between these guys is that the football player refused to commit himself to studies and now depends on his sport and his career is short, there's a risk of injuries etc, not to mention he can barely write his name and do 4th grade maths, while the professor is well-read in his field of study, literate, obviously and higher up in society. I'd say the professor is smarter.

[Karkat]

As an example, I'll compare a university professor and an Serbian football player. The professor has had at least 17 years of studies of which 5-9 were around the science he wanted to study. He earned his doctorate and is now teaching students. On the other hand you have the average Serbian football player. He started playing football when he was young. Because he didn't study in elementary, he couldn't get into a grammar school or even a craft school but because he trained football he got into a sports school and then went professional. The difference between these guys is that the football player refused to commit himself to studies and now depends on his sport and his career is short, there's a risk of injuries etc, not to mention he can barely write his name and do 4th grade maths, while the professor is well-read in his field of study, literate, obviously and higher up in society. I'd say the professor is smarter.

In a general sense, yes. However, I bet you that football player knows football like the back of his hand, whereas the professor doesn't know jack shit about it.

Does that make the football player smarter? No, however, the football player has knowledge and wisdom in other areas of life than the professor.

[Kahn]

As an example, I'll compare a university professor and an Serbian football player. The professor has had at least 17 years of studies of which 5-9 were around the science he wanted to study. He earned his doctorate and is now teaching students. On the other hand you have the average Serbian football player. He started playing football when he was young. Because he didn't study in elementary, he couldn't get into a grammar school or even a craft school but because he trained football he got into a sports school and then went professional. The difference between these guys is that the football player refused to commit himself to studies and now depends on his sport and his career is short, there's a risk of injuries etc, not to mention he can barely write his name and do 4th grade maths, while the professor is well-read in his field of study, literate, obviously and higher up in society. I'd say the professor is smarter.

This example assumes that the football player is literally incapable of going to school as an adolescent or an adult which, today, is inaccurate. It also assumes institutionalized learning is the only (and best) way to learn, which I wholeheartedly disagree with.

I feel as though, given the proper time, tools, and dedication, one can continue to develop a vast foundation of knowledge their entire lives (no matter when they start). Intelligence is a construct, and people are privy to the detriments of their current circumstances and desires.

[Stronk Serb]

In a general sense, yes. However, I bet you that football player knows football like the back of his hand, whereas the professor doesn't know jack shit about it.

Does that make the football player smarter? No, however, the football player has knowledge and wisdom in other areas of life than the professor.

What if the professor is an amateur football player? :P
After reading your reply I realised that the term "smart" cannot be clearly defined. For example I'm dumb as three dumbs when it comes to physics or chemistry but I'm a wonderchild when it comes to English, history and geography.

[Karkat]

What if the professor is an amateur football player? :P
After reading your reply I realised that the term "smart" cannot be clearly defined. For example I'm dumb as three dumbs when it comes to physics or chemistry but I'm a wonderchild when it comes to English, history and geography.

You've still got the difference between amateur and professional the though :P

Yeah, I know what you mean.

[James Dean]

It doesn't mean anything. We are all the same as far as how our mind works. Just some people use intelligence in things like that in other ways. I don't like calling people dumb or stupid or smart or intelligent. Because nobody is perfect and usually smart kids are sheltered and very serious, never want to have fun. I know because I was, and still in some ways forced by family to be like that, and not to to be wise and I don't like that. There are different levels of personalities that people can use their brains for. I like being myself and I like being wrong, and no two people are the same, so smarts and intelligence is stupid to argue about.

[Karkat]

It doesn't mean anything. We are all the same as far as how our mind works. Just some people use intelligence in things like that in other ways. I don't like calling people dumb or stupid or smart or intelligent. Because nobody is perfect and usually smart kids are sheltered and very serious, never want to have fun. I know because I was, and still in some ways forced by family to be like that, and not to to be wise and I don't like that. There are different levels of personalities that people can use their brains for. I like being myself and I like being wrong, and no two people are the same, so smarts and intelligence is stupid to argue about.

I can really relate to this, actually.

Growing up, I was both praised as well as teased mercilessly and bullied for "being smart". I was also told that certain behaviors meant that a person was stupid, etc.

And really, that's how society views it too. Very black and white.

People are surprised that someone can carry on an intellectual conversation and have a massive vocabulary, but use "fuck" as every other word, and get high. (Actually, 'highly intelligent' people seem MORE likely to get high- because they're like the rich kids of the mental world. They have the tools to appreciate the affect the high has on the body.)

Or, I don't know, people seem to think I'm kind of a moron for some reason. And to tell you honestly, I agree with it, but only because it's what everyone else thinks. I never questioned my own competency until my peers and the world around me started to.

[Miserabilia]

Can one person be smarter than another?


In principle it all relies on one's definition of "smart".

If we look at the history of the word, we'll see;

smart (adj.)
late Old English smeart "painful, severe, stinging; causing a sharp pain," related to smeortan (see smart (v.)). Meaning "executed with force and vigor" is from c.1300. Meaning "quick, active, clever" is attested from c.1300, from the notion of "cutting" wit, words, etc.

It basicly means being sharp at mind, being witty, historicaly.
The word "smart" can be thrown around as an opinion, unlike the word "intelligence' which has a more objective definition, despite not having a single meaning.

So yes, as "smart" carries opinion, one person can definetly be smarter than the other, depending on who you ask.
Intelligence is not completely objective either, but it usualt requires some sort of measurement. If we have no measurement or some kind of data, we usualy say "smart" instead of "intelligent".
So I think that a teacher, for example, could use "intelligent" instead of "smart", when comparing students by grades.

I guses intelligence is related to numurous things such as born intelligence like one's IQ, one's reaction speed, social intelligence/capability, etc etc.

I personaly feel tempted to call people smart when they are more creative, think things through (before they do them), and so forth.
I don't think reading a lot of books or memorizing 20 alphabets makes someone smarter. After all, they will carry more knowledge, but it won't make them sharper or more witty.

[DeadEyes]

Speaking of stupid questions.
Obviously some people are more intelligent than others. What's intelligence you ask? Open a dictionary (or Wikipedia). Understanding (one simple word, is what it is).
Of course some people understand things better than others (then again, it may depend on what types of things, as there is different types of intelligence).
Knowledge is knowing things, not necessarily understanding them (knowledge is often mistaken for intelligence, by people who don't UNDERSTAND the difference).

[vboy]

I believe that you are smarter than someone else if you chose to better things witn your brain. If you get drunk and play conputer ganes all day you are not smarter than the person studying hard for their phd

[DeadEyes]

I believe that you are smarter than someone else if you chose to better things witn your brain. If you get drunk and play conputer ganes all day you are not smarter than the person studying hard for their phd

Again, knowledge mistaken for intelligence.

[Bleid]

Again, knowledge mistaken for intelligence.

I agree with the claim that knowledge is not the same as intelligence.

However, I want to ask about when you said,


Of course some people understand things better than others (then again, it may depend on what types of things, as there is different types of intelligence).

What does it mean for someone to understand something better than someone else? Can you give a specific example?

Knowledge is knowing things, not necessarily understanding them (knowledge is often mistaken for intelligence, by people who don't UNDERSTAND the difference).

What do you mean when you say, "knowing things" here? Can you give a specific example?

[DeadEyes]

What does it mean for someone to understand something better than someone else? Can you give a specific example?
What do you mean when you say, "knowing things" here? Can you give a specific example?

Somebody with more Mathematical Intelligence will understand mathematical problems better (obviously).
Again, you may KNOW about a ton of complex mathematical operations that you read in a book, but you might fail to UNDERSTAND them.

[Paladino]

I believe that everyone is smart in their own way. For example, my girlfriend, she isn't the brightest, but there are some times where she blows my mind with mad facts that only she could know lol. Another example could be, I could understand Computer Science to the extent where I basically was a computer, where as you couldn't, but you could understand how every piece of a car works to get it moving, you know?

[Plane And Simple]

I think "smart" doesn't really refer to the knowledge one possesses, but to how easy and fast you catch the stuff you're taught. What most of you say refers to certain fields of knowledge independently (say, I can be smart in maths but suck at Spanish - which I do - but i still am capable of catching what I'm taught relatively easy, so I'm somewhat smart) while what I say would apply to all kinds of knowledge.

Would anyone agree with this?

[mollyjellybelly]

I think being "smarter" is just the perception we have of how another person applies their intelligence. High intelligence, poorly applied, is no better than low intelligence, vigorously applied.

[Miserabilia]

I think "smart" doesn't really refer to the knowledge one possesses, but to how easy and fast you catch the stuff you're taught. What most of you say refers to certain fields of knowledge independently (say, I can be smart in maths but suck at Spanish - which I do - but i still am capable of catching what I'm taught relatively easy, so I'm somewhat smart) while what I say would apply to all kinds of knowledge.

Would anyone agree with this?

Yes. That's also the difference to intelligence and knowledge to me. A less intelligent person can work incredibly hard to obtain the amount of knowledge a more intelligent person can easily accumalate.

[Ben_Frost]

I think that some people just happen to know more about a certain given subject, more adept at certain skill or art. Everyone is just good in their own specialty.

[Bleid]

Somebody with more Mathematical Intelligence will understand mathematical problems better (obviously).
Again, you may KNOW about a ton of complex mathematical operations that you read in a book, but you might fail to UNDERSTAND them.

Then I have a further question nagging me - how exactly does someone have more mathematical intelligence? Is it through genetics? Is it through life experiences? What exactly does that mean?

Also, how do you personally define "knowledge"? What I mean is, do I need to have a justification about why something is true to say that I have knowledge that it is true?

[DeadEyes]

Then I have a further question nagging me - how exactly does someone have more mathematical intelligence? Is it through genetics? Is it through life experiences? What exactly does that mean?

Also, how do you personally define "knowledge"? What I mean is, do I need to have a justification about why something is true to say that I have knowledge that it is true?

It would seem we are born with a certain potential but it can develop as well.
The Grass Is Green & The Sky Is Blue, we all know that, it's a fact. And color is the reflection/absorption of light on things, we pretty much all know that as well, but we may not all understand exactly how it works.

[Bleid]

It would seem we are born with a certain potential but it can develop as well.
The Grass Is Green & The Sky Is Blue, we all know that, it's a fact. And color is the reflection/absorption of light on things, we pretty much all know that as well, but we may not all understand exactly how it works.

So if something is true and I believe that it is true, I can say I know it even if I do not necessarily understand it?

[DeadEyes]

So if something is true and I believe that it is true, I can say I know it even if I do not necessarily understand it?

You don't even make any sense.
You obviously can't think straight which does proves some are faster to catch up than others.
If you read an instruction book, you know the instructions but you my fail to understand the meaning of them.

[dakeep18]

an increased level of intelligence lol

[Bleid]

You don't even make any sense.
You obviously can't think straightOh.If you read an instruction book, you know the instructions but you my fail to understand the meaning of them.How can I say I know the instructions if I do not understand them?

Let's say there's one:

"Put X into Y"

But I do not understand what "X" is, what "Y" is, or what it means to put one thing into another thing.

Can I justifiably say I know the instructions? Could I put together whatever this thing is?

Essentially what I'm getting at here is that I don't understand your definition of knowledge. Can you explain it to me?

[DeadEyes]

Can I justifiably say I know the instructions? Could I put together whatever this thing is?

Have you ever heard, yeah, I saw that but I don't get it? Is it because you read a book, that you do know the words, you understand the meaning of it? Is it because you know a proverb that you necessarily understand the sense of it?

[Bleid]

Have you ever heard, yeah, I saw that but I don't get it?Yeah, but doesn't that mean I merely saw something? I wouldn't say I know that something if I just merely saw it, right?Is it because you read a book, that you do know the words, you understand the meaning of it?Then this would be two different things, like this:

I read the sentence "I like fruit."

I may happen to know the words I just read, but this doesn't mean I also know what it means to like fruit, right?Is it because you know a proverb that you necessarily understand the sense of it?

Similarly, I may know the WORDS of the proverb "The wicked flee when no one persues"

But I could very well not know what the proverb means. Correct?

[DeadEyes]

Yeah, but doesn't that mean I merely saw something? I wouldn't say I know that something if I just merely saw it, right?Then this would be two different things, like this:

I read the sentence "I like fruit."

I may happen to know the words I just read, but this doesn't mean I also know what it means to like fruit, right?

Similarly, I may know the WORDS of the proverb "The wicked flee when no one persues"

But I could very well not know what the proverb means. Correct?

What would be your definition of understanding then? Even if you did know the meaning, you might still fail to understand it.

[Bleid]

What would be your definition of understanding then? Even if you did know the meaning, you might still fail to understand it.

My definition of understanding would be,

"To know how and why something is true or false."

And to know something would be:

"To have a justified, true belief for something."

[DeadEyes]

My definition of understanding would be,

"To know how and why something is true or false."

And to know something would be:

"To have a justified, true belief for something."

We are coming back to the same here, then again you might think you know something, you might be absolutely convinced for a fact that something is true, but you might actually be way wrong and not getting it at all: a question of understanding and perception.

[Miserabilia]

We are coming back to the same here, then again you might think you know something, you might be absolutely convinced for a fact that something is true, but you might actually be way wrong and not getting it at all: a question of understanding and perception.

The structure of this sentence explains itself.

then again you might think you know something,

You might think you know something. If you were actualy countering Bleid's description of the word, you'd have said

Then again you might know something.

But once this is in place in the sentence it doesn't make sense anymore. This seems to justify Bleid's definition, no?

[DeadEyes]

But once this is in place in the sentence it doesn't make sense anymore.

Well, it would seem that no matter what, you won't ever make sense of whatever I might say, as if we wasn't even speaking the same language, and since nothing of this speaks to you then, might as well nevermind. You won't ever get the points I'm trying to make. Major communication issues.

[Gigablue]

Can one person be smarter than another?

Short answer: yes

Long answer: keep reading

If someone gets a higher score on an IQ test than someone else, does this mean they are smarter than that other person?

Not necessarily, but probably. IQ tests don't measure intelligence, but they do measure a set of abilities very closely correlated with intelligence (logic, knowledge, memory, reasoning, etc.) and infer intelligence from them. Are IQ tests perfect? No. However, someone with an IQ of 130 is definitely smarter than someone with an IQ 70.

Is IQ the only trait needed to determine someone's potential? Absolutely not. Is it important? Yes. Raw intelligence is simply necessary for certain tasks. There are some jobs that you can't do if you lack a certain level of intelligence. Also, raw intelligence makes it much easier to learn. Someone with lower intelligence could spend weeks learning something that someone of higher intelligence could learn in minutes.

I believe that everyone is smart in their own way.

To me, this is as meaningful as saying 'everyone is tall I their own way'. It makes no sense. There are definite differences in intelligence between people. Some people have different aptitudes for certain areas, but there is a general intelligence that underlies all of them. In the same way that some people are definitely taller than others, some are more intelligent.

That doesn't mean that people with more intelligence are more valuable, or more worthy, simply that they have greater abilities in a given area.

I think that the idea that everyone is smart in some way is born of misguided, but well intentioned egalitarianism. It is nice to believe that everyone has some area where they excel, but it just isn't true. Most people are average, and some people are exceptional, either far above or far below average.

[Bleid]

Short answer: yes

Long answer: keep reading



Not necessarily, but probably. IQ tests don't measure intelligence, but they do measure a set of abilities very closely correlated with intelligence (logic, knowledge, memory, reasoning, etc.) and infer intelligence from them. Are IQ tests perfect? No. However, someone with an IQ of 130 is definitely smarter than someone with an IQ 70.

Is IQ the only trait needed to determine someone's potential? Absolutely not. Is it important? Yes. Raw intelligence is simply necessary for certain tasks. There are some jobs that you can't do if you lack a certain level of intelligence. Also, raw intelligence makes it much easier to learn. Someone with lower intelligence could spend weeks learning something that someone of higher intelligence could learn in minutes.



To me, this is as meaningful as saying 'everyone is tall I their own way'. It makes no sense. There are definite differences in intelligence between people. Some people have different aptitudes for certain areas, but there is a general intelligence that underlies all of them. In the same way that some people are definitely taller than others, some are more intelligent.

That doesn't mean that people with more intelligence are more valuable, or more worthy, simply that they have greater abilities in a given area.

I think that the idea that everyone is smart in some way is born of misguided, but well intentioned egalitarianism. It is nice to believe that everyone has some area where they excel, but it just isn't true. Most people are average, and some people are exceptional, either far above or far below average.

Fair enough.

Just curious using what you said above - how exactly does someone become more intelligent than another person, then?

Since you did explain what would constitute someone being more intelligent. But this leaves us with the question of how in particular does someone gain those attributes?

[DeadEyes]

I still don't believe knowledge is intelligence: you may lack the ability to make use of that knowledge because you don't understand it well.

[Whiskers]

I'd say everyone is equally intelligent but the intelligence my be spread into an area that is different to others because in my school I'm "smartest" in science and they call my friend an idiot because he is terrible in science but he can build a car with all the right pieces he's just not recognised as smart because it's not in an area known for intelligence like science

[DeadEyes]

Let me put it differently, intelligence is the ability to assimilate (understand) the knowledge you are acquiring. You may have the same piece of information and understand it right away or get it much later, this, without having any complementary informations.

[Bleid]

Let me put it differently, intelligence is the ability to assimilate (understand) the knowledge you are acquiring. You may have the same piece of information and understand it right away or get it much later, this, without having any complementary informations.

What's complementary information?

[DeadEyes]

What's complementary information?

Without any further information, the one original piece of information you had all along before figuring it out, such as an instruction, as I've mentioned. You have the instruction in question, you are trying to apply it to whatever you're doing and you eventually (or almost instantly) understand what it means. Assimilating, processing, understanding the information. Clear enough?

[Bleid]

Without any further information, the one original piece of information you had all along before figuring it out, such as an instruction, as I've mentioned. You have the instruction in question, you are trying to apply it to whatever you're doing and you eventually (or almost instantly) understand what it means. Assimilating, processing, understanding the information. Clear enough?

And so what makes one person able to do that better than someone else? Genetics? Experiences?
Since if two people were to have the exact same item of knowledge to figure out, without any further information, there'd be nothing there to make one person figure something out first without some sort of advantage given to one person over another. What is it?

[everlong]

I think one can definitely be smarter than another. Knowledge comes in different ways. Book smart, street smart, tech smart, etc.. One can be smarter than someone in one way, but dumber than someone in another way. That's just my opinion I guess.

[DeadEyes]

One can be smarter than someone in one way, but dumber than someone in another way.

That's different kinds of intelligence, like I've said before. One can have the ability to understand certain things easier/faster and have more difficulty to understand other kinds of things.

And so what makes one person able to do that better than someone else? Genetics? Experiences?

It would seem we are born with a certain potential but it can develop as well.

Since if two people were to have the exact same item of knowledge to figure out, without any further information, there'd be nothing there to make one person figure something out first without some sort of advantage given to one person over another. What is it?

Intelligence.

[CosmicNoodle]

Can one person be smarter than another?

Yes, oh god yes. Spend more than 1 atto second talking to a chav and you'll see it is possible for one person to be smarter than another.