Is intelligence immutable?

Is it really possible that intelligence can't be improved? I can personally attest to seeing people who study mathematics intensively, meditate and do image streaming become more intelligent and yet all the research says nothing has effect.

Other urls found in this thread:

philosophy.hku.hk/think/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Intelligence is a dynamic matter that is affected by a diverse number of factors.

>nature vs nurture?
neither. your environment and genetics both have an effect on your intelligence
>all the research says nothing has effect
the easy counterexample to your "research" is children who were not exposed to language growing up. it is obvious that their performance on IQ tests is lower than it would have been otherwise.

Yes, there's no argument about intelligence's capacity to worsen or not reach its its full potential due to a harmful or lacking environment respectively. What I specifically would like to address is its supposed inability to be improved given a baseline normal environment.

The twin studies have found intelligence to be only 20% environmental by maturity, and all metanalysis on interventions that claimed to raise intelligence proved them to be false. Yet, even though it is anecdotal, I have clearly seen people improve their intelligence by putting in a lot of effort.

Is it simply a matter of research's inability to control or motivate groups to that extent, or is neuroscience not developed enough to find a working technique though it may exist?

I honestly believe that you can only improve your IQ by about 15 points at maximum (and that is being fucking generous, I bet 5 is more realistic). But that is not the end-all be-all of intelligence. Getting good at stuff makes you better and faster at it. The brain is fluid. If someone with an IQ of 80 spent enough time they could keep up with someone with an IQ of 120 at almost anything. IQ is just (one of) the best measure(s) we have for interpreting the myriad differences in our brains.

>I can personally attest to seeing people who study mathematics intensively, meditate and do image streaming become more intelligent and yet all the research says nothing has effect.
What makes you think that these people became more intelligent after practicing those things?

Better academic and vocational performance, more fluid conversations, and a greater ability to understand. Those may be attributed to focus, though.

>everyone has 200 billion neurons
>still slobbering retards
why

>If someone with an IQ of 80 spent enough time they could keep up with someone with an IQ of 120 at almost anything.
The problem is that someone with an IQ 80 is very unlikely to succeed in spending significant amounts of time practicing or studying anything that requires reasonable mental effort. The way I see it, intelligence is not only the ability to take in and manipulate information, but it also encompasses things like focus, patience, and self-control. These are in theory not immutable traits, but to develop them to any significant extent requires massive effort to begin with, probably years of dedication and retraining. I also believe they are to a large extent genetically determined. A good example to what I'm saying is the Stanford marshmallow experiment that demonstrated that the ability to self-control in children is a strong predictor of success in all areas of life.

>If someone with an IQ of 80 spent enough time they could keep up with someone with an IQ of 120 at almost anything.
If by "almost anything" you mean shoveling gravel, sure. I do not believe you fully understand how large an impact 3 SD:s in intelligence leads to.

Do you? Just because most with lower talent don't have the motivation to work hard enough to keep up doesn't mean that there aren't those who do.

Most people don't have life on easy mode, but that doesn't make difficult, even exceedingly difficult, into impossible.

>Is it really possible that intelligence can't be improved?
critical thinking skills can be taught
those to whom they are taught can use them

>critical thinking skills can be taught
How?

philosophy.hku.hk/think/

Have these tutorials really helped anyone?

>The way I see it, intelligence is not only the ability to take in and manipulate information, but it also encompasses things like focus, patience, and self-control.
there are plenty of people with super high discipline and mediocre pattern recognition. there are plenty of people with extremely good pattern recognition who lack ambition/drive. by conflating the two you are smearing out the definition of intelligence to the point that it doesn't mean anything. I might as well say
>The way I see it, intelligence is not only the ability to recognize patterns, but it also encompasses things like height, hand size, lung capacity, and reflex time. These are all extremely good predictors of success in the field of basketball.

anyone who takes higher level math classes can attest to this. it is a powerful experience to answer a question you think should be obvious, find out you're wrong, and examine carefully why that is.

So intelligence to you is just the ability to recognize patterns? If you have two people with exactly the same level of pattern recognition, but one of them is able to laser focus for hours on end, this person will be the most intelligent of the two.
Lung capacity might predict athletic ability, but unlike the things I mentioned it does not predict academic and financial success.

1) there are two prominent counterexamples to this assertion that will = intelligence. a) "retard strength" it is well known that dumb people are often extremely stubborn. b) underachievers it is often the case that extremely intelligent people have low motivation, prodigies die in obscurity. etc
2) Lung capacity is (may be, it's just a random physical trait) an excellent predictor of athletic success. Athletic people are also more confident which is an excellent predictor of financial success. The key point here: life is not an IQ test. Intelligence is not and should not be regarded as a catchall for mental fitness (in an evolutionary sense).

3) Imagine instead the mental ability to predict projectile motion as it is happening. Such an ability is (probably) not well characterized by performance on an IQ test. Such an ability may very well have poor correlation with academic ability. Such an ability has great correlation with physical ability. Is this "intelligence"?

Diet is important. Garbage in, garbage out. Eat natural. Also psychedelics will increase your brain power

>Just because most with lower talent don't have the motivation to work hard enough to keep up doesn't mean that there aren't those who do.
Multiple studies have been conducted on this subject, and they all - more or less - confirm my amateur-ish hypothesis.

>So intelligence to you is just the ability to recognize patterns?
That is the definition of the word, yes.
> If you have two people with exactly the same level of pattern recognition, but one of them is able to laser focus for hours on end, this person will be the most intelligent of the two.
That person will be more successful and also considered as the more studious person, but work doesn´t factor into intelligence.

>3) Imagine instead the mental ability to predict projectile motion as it is happening. Such an ability is (probably) not well characterized by performance on an IQ test. Such an ability may very well have poor correlation with academic ability. Such an ability has great correlation with physical ability.
Quarterbacks - i.e. the athletes who make most use of such talent - are, on average, the smartest members of an American Football team.

Intelligence = problem solving = creativity

intelligence
JnˈtɛlJdʒ(ə)ns/Submit
noun
1.
the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills

The more focused you are the more knowledge you can acquire (just think about reading a book or attending a lecture). The more focused you are the better you are at spotting instances in which your knowledge is applicable.
Therefore, focus factor into intelligence.

Flow