• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.
  • Done now. Domine miserere nobis.

[extension] We are related to each other by 6 people.

BurnedOut

Active Member
Local time
Today 8:20 PM
Joined
Apr 19, 2016
Messages
401
-->

"Six degrees of separation is the idea that all people on average are six, or fewer, social connections away from each other. Also known as the 6 Handshakes rule. As a result, a chain of "a friend of a friend" statements can be made to connect any two people in a maximum of six steps. It was originally set out by Frigyes Karinthy in 1929 and popularized in an eponymous 1990 play written by John Guare. It is sometimes generalized to the average social distance being logarithmic in the size of the population." (Wikipedia)

The primary idea behind this theory is that humans evolved in a far superior manner than other species due to their ability to socialize because socializing is a very elaborate mental activity which humans are able to carry out seamlessly to a fair degree.

-> From this, we can deduce that one of the factors of intelligence is a living being's ability to socialize.
-> larger social circles = more intelligence
-> Lack of socialization can lead to degradation of intelligence (yes, it is a fact)

However, one cannot expect to measure someone's intellect by simply measuring their social circles. Moreover, research has also shown that intelligence is inversely related to socializing to a certain degree too.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1) I wonder if the same applies to our skillset. If intelligence is also about wielding knowledge, what if the number of subjects we are fluent in also lie within X degrees?
2) Is it possible to find the value of X and make a bell curve out of it? (Like the IQ bell curve)
3) Is there is a possibility of an alternative IQ test that is more practical and easy for testing?


(Try to get a feel of the example than pointing out that it looks like claptrap)


I think you get it. So let us proceed to this -
Untitled Diagram.png


The information is interconnected. The more the number of subtrees, the greater versatility you wield in your hands. This essentially means that you are able to transcend your collected corpus of information into a set of logic that can be extended to almost anything.

My suggestion is that, a new method of testing intelligence should also be invented. This is not your conventional IQ testing. This one is more practical in its approach - Testing the analytical skill of the subject by testing his interdisciplinary approach. If he is able to absorb pattern from one discipline and able to apply it somewhere else, we can discover his grasping ability and probably his aptitude. From this we also essentially derive the measure of his intelligence.

I believe that this can far-reaching consequences for the society. If we are able to find the value of X in the equation mentioned above (finding the average degrees of subjects), we can really define the curriculum of education very efficiently and result in the proper usage of memory of students - less congestion in the brain - better performance - more national productivity.

I will make a new thread on the testing parameters. Right now I am just adumbrating.


Oh and last thing. I think I may be an INTJ.
 

ZenRaiden

One atom of me
Local time
Today 2:50 PM
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
878
-->
Location
Between concrete walls
Very cool. Though I am not sure what you are trying to say since it seems you have lumped several ideas together.
The problem I have is there are fairly several things that you are talking about and several different ways to approach the issue. Looking forward to what you have next to write.
Few things to consider.
The way people read and write is slightly different these days. Its not different in basic way, but given the wealth of memes, concepts and social paradigms, we live in a fairly new era of ideas.
This was caused by peoples ability to read more due to internet and new ways of collecting information and distributing them more quickly as well as making rather new ideas more relevant both on cultural and intellectual field front.

Resulting in pretty much new hierarchy of information, fanning out the pallets of various sources leading us to more exposure and generally giving us more to process. Though the issue is that having information people are often at loss in terms of how to integrate them, sometimes lacking skills to understand and interpret them and apply them.
This also leads to problems such as people generally unable to put priorities on the information since the information growth is overwhelming yet our way of life is relatively slower to change and adjust.
There is also fairly big issue of whether to remain conservative in acquisition of new information or clog our brains with new stuff.
Quite common theme today is people often know new things better and old world knowledge is being left behind which often leads to situations of where we tend to reinvent the wheel.
Example might be how scientific research also pushing for new ideas and concepts and solutions, but we often forget that such research or better solutions have already existed.
Meaning that its never too bad to read old books written by people long time ago, because sometimes one would be surprised how much was known before.
 

sushi

Well-Known Member
Local time
Today 2:50 PM
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
978
-->
probably no. i dont agree with it.

within the same race perhaps, different race no.

even within the same race i dont think this principle applies.
 

washti

pablo
Local time
Today 3:50 PM
Joined
Sep 11, 2016
Messages
747
-->
You didn't mention the quality of socialization.

It's best to be on friendly terms with people who have knowledge and skills they keep updating - that is, experts.
They're information noise wreckers. No wasting time and money on suboptimal solutions, you are aware of alternatives - you make better choices. Useful socialization is based on competence.

Social intelligence consists of the selection of environments from which we then choose our friends while maintaining good manners towards people who are not interesting (including the ability to minimize contact with them politely).

It is more important to organize your life priorities and then based on them seek other's company.

Of course, this doesn't apply to extreme situations - war / serious illness / natural disaster, when really wide connections come in handy (e.g. each acquaintance creates a potential network of coverage needed to raise money for treatment, leaving the country, rebuilding home, etc.)

-
I like your graph, I have a similar sketch myself, but the weight, relationships, and hierarchy are different.
It's crucial to know where to look for information and how to judge its quality. Something like your map of relationships between methods, theories, and the fundamentals in various fields is a good outline for it.

Though if it won't be just for idea illustration, many people for sure would argue about the content of the graph if that would be a school program base for their children(I would argue)

The curriculum in schools will have to change anyway(where it hasn't yet).
The market had absorbed the scientific method so no business which wants to survive and be competitive can ignore the issue of collecting and analyzing data in real-time, and continuous experimentation in adjusting solutions to those changing consumer expectations. This is a fact and there is no going back. Employees must be as well more flexible in their thinking.

Though I think it's still worth having that old-fashioned erudite's ideal for your enjoyment and gratification of insatiable ego. And because the INTPs lie in wait. ;-)
 
Top Bottom