solarwind wrote:
>> "Smart" is a measure of how quickly and efficiently you can process and
>> absorb this knowledge.
>
> And how do you envision measuring that? It's like comparing apples to
> oranges. An orange is smarter than an apple. What does that even mean?

There are plenty of ways. IQ test is one. There is also SAT/ACT (I'm sure 
you have equivalents in Canada).

Some math professors give their Calculus students a set of simple algebra 
problems in a timed test. Everyone in the class can solve the problems, but 
there is a strong corellation between _how quickly_ someone can solve them, 
and their final grade in Calculus.

Same test works for programming. Someone who can quickly solve a set of 
simple programming problems, will do well with more complex problems, and 
vice versa.

As a manager, from time to time I have to sort resumes and conduct 
interviews. After you've done it a few times, it's easy to tell the smart 
ones from the not-so-smart ones.

Etc, etc.


> And by your definition, you can change the efficiency and the rate at
> which you process and absorb knowledge.

Non sequitur. This does not at all follow from my definition.


> Certain chemicals, such as
> those found in fish, change the brain chemistry in a positive way.
> Also, certain hormones and chemicals produced by the body may have the
> same effect.

True, but the improvement is barely measurable. In first world countries, 
very few people are malnourished.


> Also, just plain studying may improve it.

Yes, it may. However, a person with a higher IQ will benefit more from the 
mental exercise, and will be smarter than the person with average 
intelligence (IQ = 100), doing the same amount of studying.


> For example, I
> knew a kid in my math class who was literally failing because he could
> not understand how the slope of a graph relates to calculus. That took
> him forever to understand. You might call him "dumb", by your
> definition, because he was unable to process this knowledge
> efficiently. After hours and hours of studying this simple concept, he
> finally got it. After that, he started picking up things faster than
> you or I. Now would you say he was "smart" because he was picking up
> on calculus concepts twice as fast as anyone else in the class?
>
> What does that even mean?

I wouldn't judge a person's intelligence based on their failure to 
understand one concept. Even brilliant people experience mental blocks. 
However, if this kid consistently failed to understand other concepts, or it 
consistently took him longer than his classmates, I would say he wasn't as 
smart as them.


> Smart and dumb. You make it sound like a new class of human. Oh, he's
> smart. He's dumb. He's black. He's white.

Trying to paint me as a racist, is dumb. :)

Different people have different levels of intelligence. Some are smarter 
than others. It's a fact of life, learn to accept it.


> Yes, no matter how hard you
> try, you can't be white if you're black and vice versa (unless you're
> MJ). But it doesn't make any logical sense to tag people as "smart" or
> "dumb" because things can drastically change. You can change them.

It's the classical "nature vs nurture" argument. For best results, you need 
both.

Vitaliy 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist