Is it possible to see intelligence in the eyes of a person?

[alcoves]

Who said anything about facial expressions? We are talking about "the eyes." I put that in quotes because it's very difficult to explain "the eyes." It's a normal human response though, (I don't know about the eye lids though... it's really "the eyes") to read the eyes for the person's ability or intent and facial expression for their state of mind, it might be subconscious to you, but it certainly influences your reaction and opinion to the new individual you just met (if you are judging someone's cognitive ability from physical features, it's a safe bet you have not had many meaningful interactions with them as verbal interchange is clearly the best way to determine one's ability).

And to 'The Man Beyond', I dig your style my friend. If I understand it properly, I think you are a rather funny individual, which is cognitively difficult in and of itself. Einstein was a very clever guy in physics, he wasn't very good at math though (this of course is relative to the field of physics and not to the general public), he actually created his own math as a result and any physics degree holder has taken a course using his short cut math. With that said, I wouldn't put much more stalk into Einstein outside of physics... it would be like a great actor (though a person that is great at something while using their brains is rather different than a person using their bodies as my example is utilizing here, granted, I admit the error ahead of time, though the idea holds true and is melodramatic for dramatical and hopefully lasting effect as many people with a soapbox will try and use it, don't pay such mind to said individuals talking outside their field, please) trying to talk about medicine on a TV interview. People who are great in one thing should not try to apply opinions to everything. And no, your eyes are not Einstein.

 

[alcoves]

And I explained the anatomy/physiology component to the eyes in my first post (the eye has 4 cranial nerves that directly innervates the brain, cranial nerves are special for a number of reasons... google them).

In a gist; the cognitive ability of a person is proportional to the focus of an individual's eyes. The higher their ability the more they will focus on an object as they are examining every detail of the object for future use; where a person of modest cognitive ability is just acknowledging the objects existence in their space without much or any detail (their eyes will appear rather unfocused to a degree... but if one has modest cognitive ability, they probably aren't examining at such detail and to them the eyes are no different than their color, i.e. they will say no you can't judge IQ by the eyes, which is understandable for the reason I have just stated).

 

[Lurker]

Nope. Seriously, no.

Do you have any scientific basis for this question? It's cool if you don't, I'm just curious.

 

[AndyC]

In a gist; the cognitive ability of a person is proportional to the focus of an individual's eyes. The higher their ability the more they will focus on an object as they are examining every detail of the object for future use; where a person of modest cognitive ability is just acknowledging the objects existence in their space without much or any detail (their eyes will appear rather unfocused to a degree... but if one has modest cognitive ability, they probably aren't examining at such detail and to them the eyes are no different than their color, i.e. they will say no you can't judge IQ by the eyes, which is understandable for the reason I have just stated).

Assuming a limited number of processes.

 

[HDINTP]

I am not sure. Just know more melanin (darker eyes) = possibly faster brain functioning...

 

[alcoves]

Assuming a limited number of processes.

That's like barely a complete sentence...

Would you like to please share your knowledge with all of us and elaborate a bit please?

I'm always interested in new information.

(or at least those that wish to be a source of such)

I am not sure. Just know more melanin (darker eyes) = possibly faster brain functioning...

This line of thinking is not only wrong, it's counterintuitive to modern society social graces. The color of anything plays no role in intelligence.

Nope. Seriously, no.

Do you have any scientific basis for this question? It's cool if you don't, I'm just curious.

Everything I've said can be easily looked up online... actually, would you do me a favor, I'm quite busy, would you please find my scientific basis of all the things I've said and post it for me (all my facts will be commonly accepted in the scientific community so just find a source that satisfies your threshold and post it up here)... I can use it later if asked to cite. Thank you.



And seriously, don't be afraid to add more text in your text box here... the more information the better. So saying "no." without anything else is... well, not very insightful let's say....

I'll be on this forum for a few days... so hit me up while I'm here! I'll disappear into the dark recesses after that and people I've quoted here can go back to ruling this website once I'm gone! ha

Time is of the essence

 

[0neKiwi]

One can tell if another focuses by examining and interpreting their eyes (this I've confirmed from googling). However, I cannot confirm that one can tell another's intelligence from so little data. Those who are blind survive all the same; can you tell their intelligence from their "eyes?" I think that to predict one's intelligence, that person must first be able to efficiently use their "eyes," connect that to their thinking (enough so that another person may recognize it), and have some intent to convey at least something (convey) to the other party. Also, there must not be any other mixed signals; that would be most confusing. Relying on peoples' eyes as the only source of analyzing their intelligence may not be a good thing. (Once you discover it is an efficient process, you may end up relying on it more and more; even if this ...rule applies to most people, there are (probably) always people that cannot be analyzed this way)

Secondly, one can think deeply about many things. For all you know, I could be thinking about something deemed stupid and unthinkable by society, and it does produce no results. Thinking is a process in which your brain processes information, so if you process information in a retarded way, you may appear to be thinking/focusing intently on something, but that does not mean you are intelligent. (Yes, in some cases, their eyes do not focus).

If something like this were to be proven for some population, you would need to collect enough data. Yes, the cranial nerves do affect the brain, but that does not mean you can accurately judge a certain part of the brain with just those nerves. Also, people do not only look in someone's eyes to judge them; as a person, one would have to analyze another person by collecting all the information available to them- and that is not just the eyes. One could also be looking at the person's behavior at the time, or the stature and pose of the person. There are too many variables to accurately analyze this correlation. (What, do you look only at others' eyes? How can you guarantee that?)

To conclude, at best, "eyes" can only give you a basic impression of a person's thought process and intelligence. Eyes have data in them, but how do humans have the capacity to fully analyze them accurately to predict the brain with just a glance or stare(particularly intelligence)? Convince me otherwise with experiments or more solid evidence that they are at least 75% accurate.

 

[HDINTP]

This line of thinking is not only wrong, it's counterintuitive to modern society social graces. The color of anything plays no role in intelligence.

You probably did not understand (maybe I did not express well enough) But first of all - I don't care what is counter-intuitive for "modern" society

And then I never said colour plays role in intelligence I rather meant that color is consequence of more melanin in your system which enables faster brain functioning (not like straight because of that). Because it acts as an insulator for connections between brain cells...

By the way I never said that faster brain equals higher intelligence although I would believe so - at least potentially higher intelligence...

 

[Rixus]

You probably did not understand (maybe I did not express well enough) But first of all - I don't care what is counter-intuitive for "modern" society

And then I never said colour plays role in intelligence I rather meant that color is consequence of more melanin in your system which enables faster brain functioning (not like straight because of that). Because it acts as an insulator for connections between brain cells...

By the way I never said that faster brain equals higher intelligence although I would believe so - at least potentially higher intelligence...

As far as I'm aware, you're confusing different kinds of melanin. Melanin is a group of pigments found in not only humans but also in most living things. Eumelanin is responsible for black and brown pigmentation the hair, skin and eyes and may offer some protection against UV rays. Neuromelanin is found in the brain and may, as you said, act as an insulator for transmitters in the brain, but this isn't known for sure. The two are unrelated.

Otherwise, Albinos (who have little to no Eumelanin) would have extremely slow or non functional brains.

Besides, I have green eyes. So point disproved.

 

[AndyC]

There are mutliple cognitive functions, forms by which our thought manifests, and different levels of focus. Yes, we are constantly bombarded with visual information, but we are also constantly using different cognitive functions (look into vultology). This betrays even the simple extroversion and introversion dichotomy by which we direct our energy. If faster processing speed allowed us to differentiate higher levels of detail at a faster rate, this phenomena would naturally occur given any stimulus, significantly the eyes because of their connection to the brain. That is the only way it would make sense to me as to how and why it works. But the problem is information preference and semantic preference. In differentiation, there is the process of apprehension, which is obscured or enhanced by information preference in the interpretation of visual stimuli. The semantic preferences affect the relevance of extracted information to the mind, and therefore given less relevance, less attention is given to the visual stimuli (object). Therefore the eyes' focus on visual stimuli cannot be used to predict someone's intelligence, perhaps to a degree due to the transitivity of intellect, but not necessarily.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

the eyes are the gateway to the soul of course intelligence can be seen in them unless intelligence is a false notion but to think it is not shown is ignorance

 

[HDINTP]

As far as I'm aware, you're confusing different kinds of melanin. Melanin is a group of pigments found in not only humans but also in most living things. Eumelanin is responsible for black and brown pigmentation the hair, skin and eyes and may offer some protection against UV rays. Neuromelanin is found in the brain and may, as you said, act as an insulator for transmitters in the brain, but this isn't known for sure. The two are unrelated.

Otherwise, Albinos (who have little to no Eumelanin) would have extremely slow or non functional brains.

Besides, I have green eyes. So point disproved.

That is possible

I myself do not know how significant the difference in speed would be...

Hmm. Since it is "Besides" I assume it is meant to work as fancy sidenote. Otherwise I would say I am not sure "Proof by Example" works here since I myself have dark brown eyes...

 

[40winks]

You may be tuning into confidence, which could indicate some level of emotional intelligence.