Comments
Follow Comments Sorted by time
guest_
· 5 years ago
· FIRST
Yes. And no. Effective communication is a key skill, and rules of language allow precision- 99.9% of people who are familiar with English know the word that person meant even if it’s spelled wrong- so if a person is physics genius with the grammar and spelling of an elementary schooler- they can still revolutionize the world with math. The idea that wrote memorization of rules and conventions and facts equates to a functional intelligence is not always correct. You can know all the right words and spelling and grammar to say things but say nothing of substance- or you might be less able at the “rules” but be able to effectively communicate important things. Knowing basic rules shows effort and that one possesses a fundamental knowledge set- but isn’t necessarily indicative of ones absolute intelligence or ability.
▼
guest_
· 5 years ago
Case in point- a computer can be programmed and store millions of scenarios and an exact solution for each one- however it can’t be relied upon to solve a problem it has never encountered and is outside the scope of what it’s been told to do. An adaptable human who hasn’t memorized any solutions but knows how to find solutions can solve all the same problems as well as new and novel problems.
▼
guest_
· 5 years ago
In a survival situation it’s better to know based on where you are what plants can and can’t be eaten or used safely from memory than it is to be able to determine it on the spot- but overall it’s usually better to be able to determine answers to complex problems than to know simple trivia by heart. It’s why the brain surgeon might suck at bar trivia night but the reinstate trivia champion works stocking shelves and can’t do brain surgery. Even if they turned that memory to memorizing textbooks on brain surgery that isn’t the same thing as having the ability to do the thing.
▼
guest_
· 5 years ago
So overall it’s better to have a mastery or at least a strong foundation of fundamentals- and usually people are very bad at identifying their own level of knowledge and competence- but there is a valid argument that simply being able to memorize figures and rules and instructions isn’t the same as being able to innovate and deduce. The highest levels of intellect of course tend to have them all in some measure- experiences to draw upon, a strong basis of fundamental facts and measures, and a natural cognitive ability to adapt and learn and notice things. One can be intelligent though without “having it all.”
▼
charliejoachi
· 5 years ago
wasted indeed.
▼
