What is Intelligence

[Black Rose]

This is a message I posted on someones blog about IQ.
I thought it was worth posting here if anyone would agree or had something to add?

I think that intelligence begins with a map in your head. Abstraction is the building up of layers that reduce the resources needed to represent these maps. This is a form of Structuralism. What references have meaning are determined by where they point. So as an example Sigma is a sum. But then a sum refers to all the functions that also have symbols that refer to other functions. These are branches that can be feed back into a main equation as self referential (z=z2+c). But even though a person has self reference what makes them intelligent is the ability to use that reference to find their relationship to the world and all objects in relation to all objects. To do this those branches must arrange themselves to form a good map. Intelligence is the ability of entropic compression to increase the resolution of the map by which we learn the consequences of our actions as a self model (meta) and a model of causal relations. Adaption is the ability model some aspects of reality effectively (skills). General Intelligence is the ability to model all aspects in equal measure. Abstraction allows you to model the world in the most efficient way and this is because of branching. renaissance painters had high abstraction in the vision cortex.

The contents of this message has more abstract meaning than the segmentation of words used which would score lower on a vocabulary test. My comprehension was really high on school tests but I am a really bad speller.

https://watson-pi-demo.mybluemix.net/

 

[Cognisant]

Rate of behavioural adaptation.

In other words how quickly something can learn and apply the insights gained into optimising the outcome of its behaviours.

The more intelligent someone is the better use they'll make of the information available to them and the faster they will adapt towards achieving an optimal state in their environment.

 

[ENTP lurker]

IQ and intelligence?
Well, I think modern IQ tests favors intuition and sensing balance. Why?
You have to take information in what is fed to you and then apply it.

Along with intuition Si is actually pretty important component. You'll need to sense the fed information internally.
I have results from modern cognitive test. It says my visual performance is extremely lacking. I agree.

People usually say that I'm very intelligent. For them it means mental capacity to generate internal imagery and give them insight. Being mentally not so ordinary and not retarded?

Anyways I have hard time of understanding it as ability survive and multiply. There are other species around. How about speed? No. It does not take into account deeper systematizing for instance. How about comprehending material? No. People vary even in there. Concrete vs abstract. Combination?

Conclusion
Humans are mixed bag. It is in the eyes of perceiver.

 

[StevenM]

Quoted from 5 ways to maximize your cognitive potential

Intelligence isn’t just about how many levels of math courses you’ve taken, how fast you can solve an algorithm, or how many vocabulary words you know that are over 6 characters. It’s about being able to approach a new problem, recognize its important components, and solve it—then take that knowledge gained and put it towards solving the next, more complex problem. It’s about innovation and imagination, and about being able to put that to use to make the world a better place. This is the kind of intelligence that is valuable, and this is the type of intelligence we should be striving for and encouraging.

It was one of those articles that ended up persuading me. The writer disagrees that IQ is fixed; that a person may actually be able to increase their intelligence.

 

[Haim]

Ammmm,hard to answer when you consider other species.
Is it reaching a goal?having a goal in the first place?choosing a good goal ?good result?will,tools(IQ,imagination,Intuition..) and conscious?group intelligence?
Maybe a computer in the general sense.
A brain?then what about species with no brain?.

I guess it is just too much broad,just a lot of similar things.

 

[Shieru]

I've been pondering the question of a concise definition of intelligence lately. @Cognisant's description is very similar to the conclusion I've settled on (for now at least..), but I think it still could be deduced to a deeper level.

I think intelligence is about the overall efficiency of one's thought processes - this includes perception and judgement (since both are needed for accurate conclusions to be made). Well developed, efficient processes lead to faster learning and adaptation, but I think that these are signs of intelligence, not the phenomenon of intelligence itself.

As far as whether intelligence is innate or can be developed, I think it's both, but is primarily about development. The brain is a lot like a muscle, if you don't work it, intellect won't build and what intellect there is may depreciate. There are cases where someone is highly developed in one kind of mental processing, but severely lacking in another (ex: the socially awkward genius). This shows that whatever area of processing is focused on and developed is the one where intelligence manifests.

 

[Tannhauser]

It is a model, but does it generate any concrete statements about intelligence that we can use to verify (or falsify) the model?

 

[Rudolph Mondal]

Lately I've noticed a difference between how I process information compared to how people probably much more intelligent process information. It's not so much I think a qualitative difference than a quantitative one.

The model I can sort of use to describe this process is perhaps that of optimization or a constraint satisfaction problem. When very intelligent people try to understand something for the first time, all the concepts that "constrain" what they're trying to learn get mapped out in the sense that they're at least subconsciously aware of all the links in their brains involving each of those concepts to other concepts. Having done so, they're able to draw a "shortest path" that links all of those concepts.

With more ordinary people such as myself, firstly, not all of the concepts that constrain the topic one is trying to learn are activated meaning that some constraints get overlooked. Secondly, not as many links that can be associated with a concept are activated. So as a result, it takes us much longer to learn something or follow a series of interlinked concepts to their conclusion.

So I think perhaps the key feature that very intelligent people possess is a much larger working memory. I don't think the differences are actually qualitative, at a more fundamental level at least.

Of course, these are mere hypotheses and speculations, I have no evidence to back up these claims. Just my two cents.

 

[Rudolph Mondal]

In case anyone is interested, it turns out there is a similar concept to what I mentioned in my previous post in this thread called "neural propagation depth".
The paper where I encountered the concept is linked below:
http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/Papers/Giftednessmodel.pdf

 

[WALKYRIA]

Oh, god, another nth thread on intelligence on intpf, seems like intps are really obsessed about intelligence nd its potential.
Anyways, love the idea of a "map of knowledge".... one day we will be able to absorb maps and maps and maps of knowledge via chip/brain implants. It's the future.

 

[sushi]

we probably have the answer once we reverse engineer the brain.

 

[Haim]

we probably have the answer once we reverse engineer the brain.

That is excluding creatures without a brain.That do not have consciousness,virus,germs and mushrooms, they are complex enough as a group to be considered to have intelligence,the rest of the human body is also a complex system.Also we need to consider aliens that might have entirely different intelligence.
Than there are computers,can you really not consider them to have intelligence at all?

In the end intelligence is not one thing,there is no criteria and you can not make one,because it is a bunch of similar things,like any word or name,when do you stop consider a thing as that thing?when dogs became different enough than wolfs they no longer were considered wolfs and a new name was needed.

 

[Black Rose]

In the end intelligence is not one thing,there is no criteria and you can not make one,because it is a bunch of similar things,like any word or name,when do you stop consider a thing as that thing?when dogs became different enough than wolfs they no longer were considered wolfs and a new name was needed.

Orange Juice
Milk
Dr Pepper

They may seem different but they all have water in them.
Without water an organism can not function.
Intelligence is simply a map of the world inside your head that helps you survive.
Different maps can exist but a bigger map can help you plan things better.
Basically memory creates a simulation of reality and how it works.
When you learn stuff complexity increases, this can happen faster in some people.
Once you learn stuff you can understand how to manipulate it to get what you want.

https://youtu.be/JY8-gP3Sw_8

 

[Haim]

Orange Juice
Milk
Dr Pepper

They may seem different but they all have water in them.
Without water an organism can not function.
intelligence is simply a map of the world inside your head that helps you survive.
Different maps can exist but a bigger map can help you plan things better.
Basically memory creates a simulation of reality and how it works.
When you learn stuff complexity increases, this can happen faster in some people.
Once you learn stuff you can understand how to manipulate it to get what you want.

A context of a name(intelligence) is not just what you know that is similar to it,it is every possibility thing that is similar.
Once thought Swans are white,even after discovering a black swan,we still regard a black swan as a swan,because it does not make him different than a white Swan very much.A name/word is a group,I don't think water is important to intelligence group,there might be aliens that are not made of water,a black swan of the word life,you may consider computer today to have some sort of intelligence,even if not I sure you will consider future computers.
I think evolution itself is an act of intelligence,your definition is very limited,there may be or will be very different kind of intelligence than you describe.

 

[Black Rose]

A context of a name(intelligence) is not just what you know that is similar to it,it is every possibility thing that is similar.
Once thought Swans are white,even after discovering a black swan,we still regard a black swan as a swan,because it does not make him different than a white Swan very much.A name/word is a group,I don't think water is important to intelligence group,there might be aliens that are not made of water,a black swan of the word life,you may consider computer today to have some sort of intelligence,even if not I sure you will consider future computers.
I think evolution itself is an act of intelligence,your definition is very limited,there may be or will be very different kind of intelligence than you describe.

What I was trying to convey with that comparison was that things may seem different when really they are the same. Different intelligences would imply intelligence is not realy intelligence just as saying orange juice and milk are different so that they both can not be liquids. That is superficial. Food is something you can eat, does that mean that a diversity of food can reject what food is for or what it does? If you have something you cannot eat it is not a food. What is intelligence for? What does intelligence do? What is the negation of intelligence? What is it "not"? I think it is understanding reality. Computers can understand reality and so could a space alien. But without a map of reality you cannot understand reality. And evolution has a goal which is survival.

Animals survive because they change reality but you cannot change reality to the extent possible if you can not move / act. Maps allow a collection of learned actions / movements. Maps come from perception and actions come from judgment. It may seem that anything could be intelligence but as with the food example food is for survival. Animals may eat different foods and some food are poison to them and not others but is performs a function, survival. The function of intelligence is (intel) information gathering and what you do with that information. People in spy movies or military movies usually say "what is the intel on our subject". So it is that information results in actions. Inaction is also an action as in timing your moves. Some people gather lots of information while others take many of actions. Crystallized Intelligence is accumulated memories (a library) and Fluid Intelligence is real time use of present information. People who know more and do more have high intelligence.

Different information is still information and acting upon that information is still actions. That is what intelligence does and what it is for regardless of circumstances. Blues cups do the same thing as red cups, the color / differences are irrelevant to what cups are for, holding liquids. You cannot have intelligence without information gathering and actions based upon that information.

 

[Haim]

What I was trying to convey with that comparison was that things may seem different when really they are the same. Different intelligences would imply intelligence is not realy intelligence just as saying orange juice and milk are different so that they both can not be liquids. That is superficial. Food is something you can eat, does that mean that a diversity of food can reject what food is for or what it does? If you have something you cannot eat it is not a food.

If there are the same then you can put them in the same group/word/name based on the similarity,drinks,liquid things,not being in one group have no bearing on other group.
Intelligence like any other word does not "exists" itself,there is no checklist,human brain definition does not work like that,the brain is dividing categories.
Let's see it is brown,have wings,have legs and moves,hey here's another,brown have wings and have legs,than once we have 2 things that belong to similar categories we create new category,brown things with wings and legs(birds).Suddenly you see blue have wings and have legs,you don't create other blue things... category,and most times don't make it a new name,you realize you need to reorganise,you delete the brown things with... category,make it things with wings and legs category(birds) with the added category of color.I think that you include a wasted brown on your definition of intelligence,that is not what makes this category what it is.

 

[Black Rose]

It's not the "word" that matters it's the meaning behind the "word".
Intelligence means something that I have tried to explain with metaphors, it's not literal?
Intelligence is not a category of things / objects, it is a process.

 

[Haim]

It's not the "word" that matters it's the meaning behind the "word".
Intelligence means something that I have tried to explain with metaphors, it's not literal?
Intelligence is not a category of things / objects, it is a process.

The thing is that a meaning in the end is a thing built in the brain,process is another category in the brain,everything in the memory is made up of categories,for some things making formal definition is nonsense,because these things are a group of similar things,they make the meaning of themselves,for example life,in a formal definition a virus is not "alive",I will argue this is false as the brain recognize him as alive,he is similar to alive and only because of that,no other reason he is alive.You can not ignore the meaning of meaning when you are talking about meaning.
(points for digging to the definition of definition of definition?)

 

[Black Rose]

The thing is that a meaning in the end is a word,process is another category in the brain,everything in the memory is made up of categories,for some things making formal definition is nonsense,because these things are a group of similar things,they make the meaning of themselves,for example life,in a formal definition a virus is not "alive",I will argue this is false as the brain recognize him as alive,he is similar to alive and only because of that,no other reason he is alive.You can not ignore the meaning of meaning when you are talking about meaning.

Does this mean you do not understand what I mean by my descriptions of Intelligence? I am trying to discuss Intelligence by how I understand it so I make statements to try to explain what I mean. If I am not being clear enough than I will try to do better.

This is my definition:

Intelligence is the ability to gather information and use that information to act in the environment. This requires memory and motivation to understand how the environment changes and the consequences of actions. High Intelligence is having high degrees of freedom in knowledge and actions. Knowing stuff allows you to do stuff. Knowing more allows you to do more.

If you do not know what I mean by this perhaps you can give a definition of what you think Intelligence is so that I can understand your perspective. Arguing semantics is boring if that is all you want to do instead of understanding my perspective.

 

[Black Rose]

I think that you include a wasted brown on your definition of intelligence,that is not what makes this category what it is.

I think this is referring to my use of the word water.
No, water is not a requirement to be intelligent.
But I was saying intelligence is intelligence,
it's application may be different but it is still intelligence. (reference post #19)

 

[tyjdx]

The writer disagrees that IQ is fixed; that a person may actually be able to increase their intelligence.

Wouldn't IQ be the rate of change of intelligence then? dIQ/dt etc? And the rate is fixed, or maybe approaches fixed? I don't know, I'm tired.

 

[INTPWolf]

I think this is an argument that was made a long time ago. it's a good example of the two different kind of logical intelligences, called The Conflict Between Ancients and Moderns. Where ancients sought knowledge for the sake of knowledge, and moderns sought knowledge as a means to an end. We see this conflict clearly between John Locke and Thomas Hobbes.
I see a lot of moderns these days. Only a few Ancients in this society. I believe it's a cycle, Moderns have a time where all we try to do is based on the idea "can we use it?", great strides are made in technology, and each jump becomes bigger than the last, but eventually our current understanding of the world becomes a barrier.
It was riding a wave caused by the Ancients, the ones that create grand concepts of the world, then experiments prove the concept true, or at least more true then the last theory, then technology revs up once again.

 

[Grayman]

This is my definition:

Intelligence is the ability to gather information and use that information to act in the environment. This requires memory and motivation to understand how the environment changes and the consequences of actions. High Intelligence is having high degrees of freedom in knowledge and actions. Knowing stuff allows you to do stuff. Knowing more allows you to do more.

I think that last part(high intelligence) is wisdom which includes experience. I see intelligence as more of a potential than an actuality which is as you first described. A person might waste their intelligence by not excercising it.

I think there must be a balance between retention and plasticity of the brain in order to not only learn and discover but to also be able to retain that new wiring in their brain when it is useful. The imbalance comes from lack of plasticity or an inability to rewire the brain when the enviorment changes and what was efficient no longer is efficient. On the other side of the scale is when one is always exploring/rewiring without ever retaining the most efficient and direct pattern.

Side thought:
The brain itself has many different sections that function to perform different tasks and I think that efficiency in specific functions produces what we recognize as talents(potential) and skills(actual) but I would not call that intelligence.

 

[Haim]

Does this mean you do not understand what I mean by my descriptions of Intelligence? I am trying to discuss Intelligence by how I understand it so I make statements to try to explain what I mean. If I am not being clear enough than I will try to do better.

This is my definition:

Intelligence is the ability to gather information and use that information to act in the environment. This requires memory and motivation to understand how the environment changes and the consequences of actions. High Intelligence is having high degrees of freedom in knowledge and actions. Knowing stuff allows you to do stuff. Knowing more allows you to do more.

If you do not know what I mean by this perhaps you can give a definition of what you think Intelligence is so that I can understand your perspective. Arguing semantics is boring if that is all you want to do instead of understanding my perspective.

I am trying to say that the meaning of intelligence does not come from it qualities,but intelligence is us putting into a category an existing thing,it is an observation,your definition is like saying the meaning of the blue bird that I saw is to fly.The meaning of me is not me qualities,I make my qualities,at some point I may be a child at another point an old man,what I was doing in me life does not change me,it does not matter for me to still be me.The meaning of intelligence is observation,if we were to find a computer that simulate a universe(which is not intelligence by your definition) ,I would consider it intelligent.Because it is different than any other intelligence we know ,I would change my internal definition/observation of intelligence.To some degree no matter how much I change,even if I spontaneously grow wings or something,the meaning of me will not change,only the observation of other will change("Haim have wings").

 

[Grayman]

I am trying to say that the meaning of intelligence does not come from it qualities,but intelligence is us putting into a category an existing thing,it is an absorption,your definition is like saying the meaning of the blue bird that I saw is to fly.The meaning of me is not me qualities,I make my qualities,at some point I may be a child at another point an old man,what I was doing in me life does not change me,it does not matter for me to still be me.The meaning of intelligence is absorption,if we were to find a computer that simulate a universe(which is not intelligence by your definition) ,I would consider it intelligent.Because it is different than any other intelligence we know ,I would change my internal definition/absorption of intelligence.To some degree no matter how much I change,even if I spontaneously grow wings or something,the meaning of me will not change,only the absorption of other will change("Haim have wings").

In order for me to convey my understanding of amnekiitys definition let me use the concept of energy as an example.
Energy isn't a thing or object. It is a process or action. Thermal energy is the action of atoms vibrating. It is not concrete but abstract. I think it accurate to call intelligence a process and a personality a process. The moment a person becomes static the cease to exist and they are essentially dead.

 

[Haim]

In order for me to convey my understanding of amnekiitys definition let me use the concept of energy as an example.
Energy isn't a thing or object. It is a process or action. Thermal energy is the action of atoms vibrating. It is not concrete but abstract. I think it accurate to call intelligence a process and a personality a process. The moment a person becomes static the cease to exist and they are essentially dead.

Must intelligence be alive?what if there will be a computer like in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy,were until I ask it something it is "dead",can you say it is not intelligence?you think so because you can not tell from just seeing,it have the structure of intelligence,which is the true thing behind the observation,which intelligence is merely is.
*had a serious spelling error,I meant observation not absorption previously.

Intelligence is the conclusion from an observation of similar phenomenons.

 

[Black Rose]

I am trying to say that the meaning of intelligence does not come from it qualities,but intelligence is us putting into a category an existing thing,it is an absorption,your definition is like saying the meaning of the blue bird that I saw is to fly.The meaning of me is not me qualities,I make my qualities,at some point I may be a child at another point an old man,what I was doing in me life does not change me,it does not matter for me to still be me.The meaning of intelligence is absorption,if we were to find a computer that simulate a universe(which is not intelligence by your definition) ,I would consider it intelligent.Because it is different than any other intelligence we know ,I would change my internal definition/absorption of intelligence.To some degree no matter how much I change,even if I spontaneously grow wings or something,the meaning of me will not change,only the absorption of other will change("Haim have wings").

I'd rather say intelligence is the flying part and that flying is what the blue bird can do. The meaning of blue bird is not flying but the meaning of flying can be assumed to be demonstrated by the blue bird. In fact you could say that different birds fly in different ways. And that some birds perform better at flying than others. Some birds like penguins cannot fly so it is pointless to say that they are really flying by any standard when they can not, even if it looks like they can under water because that is swimming. We can say they are good at swimming but normally we do not call movement in water flying. Now all this is purely physical abilities but I think that intelligence is a mental attribute of understanding. What is understanding? Well it could be Absorbtion but then you can ask another question: Do some people Absorb more than others? Can some people be more intelligent than others? The meaning of Haim is not intelligence but Haim is more intelligents that some people and other people may be more intelligent than Haim. Haim is still Haim no matter how intelligent he / she is. But as a measurement Haim could take futuristic smart drugs and then be able to absorb more. Smart drugs in the future will allow intelligence to increase by objective measures. And not only that but also you would feel yourself becoming smarter. Maybe you can now play a video game 10 times better than before. Or there is a book you could not understand and now you can understand it.

As for your example of a computer that can simulate a universe; I would say that the planet earth is not intelligent but the creatures on the planet that are intelligent because they can change things through understanding / knowledge. The universe is not intelligent in that it can not make plans and choose what it wants to do. You could say that humans are the hands, feet, eyes and ears of the universe; "we are the way for the universe know itself"(Carl Sagan) But frankly I think I have more free will than the planet saturn. Saturn as a planet knows less than I do. It is a dead object and if my body dies the goo left over will be less intelligent than I am now. Agency is important to having intelligence. A bucket of water is less intelligent than I am and Saturn is like a big bucket of water. There is very little agency in both of them. If you want to define a simulation of the universe as intelligent that is O.K. I just want to communicate that it has very little agency inside of it like a bucket of water. But If creature evolved inside the simulation then you could say that those creature have collective intelligence just as humanity has collective intelligence as it is becoming a global civilization.

As a last thought The NSA and The CIA are two of the American Intelligence Agencies most known of by the public. They are called Intelligence Agencies for a reason. It has to do with what they do. If we look at what they do that might give a hint at what the word intelligence means?

 

[Grayman]

As for your example of a computer that can simulate a universe; I would say that the planet earth is not intelligent but the creatures on the planet that are intelligent because they can change things through understanding / knowledge. The universe is not intelligent in that it can not make plans and choose what it wants to do. You could say that humans are the hands, feet, eyes and ears of the universe; "we are the way for the universe know itself"(Carl Sagan) But frankly I think I have more free will than the planet saturn. Saturn as a planet knows less than I do. It is a dead object and if my body dies the goo left over will be less intelligent than I am now. Agency is important to having intelligence. A bucket of water is less intelligent than I am and Saturn is like a big bucket of water. There is very little agency in both of them. If you want to define a simulation of the universe as intelligent that is O.K. I just want to communicate that it has very little agency inside of it like a bucket of water. But If creature evolved inside the simulation then you could say that those creature have collective intelligence just as humanity has collective intelligence as it is becoming a global civilization.

I think using 'free will' to help define intelligence complicates matters. There is no and cannot be a any physical scientific proof to the existence of free will beyond the fact that we experience it. I think it better to say that intelligence is the ability to anticipate adapt in order to perform a function. Whether that function is of your choosing or not is irrelevant.

 

[Black Rose]

I think using 'free will' to help define intelligence complicates matters. There is no and cannot be a any physical scientific proof to the existence of free will beyond the fact that we experience it. I think it better to say that intelligence is the ability to anticipate adapt in order to perform a function. Whether that function is of your choosing or not is irrelevant.

In my mind 'free will' is associated with degrees of freedom. I can see how that would be confusing though. I think that I have more options to 'choose' from than the planet saturn does. 'Free will' capacity = the awareness of more options. A greater capacity to influence reality.

 

[Grayman]

Must intelligence be alive?what if there will be a computer like in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy,were until I ask it something it is "dead",can you say it is not intelligence?you think so because you can not tell from just seeing,it have the structure of intelligence,which is the true thing behind the observation,which intelligence is merely is.
*had a serious spelling error,I meant observation not absorption previously.

Intelligence is the conclusion from an observation of similar phenomenons.

It is about potential vs actual.

It is like voltage vs current. The energy exists in the battery and has a potential called voltage. We cannot observe the potential or know it exists until the conditions change and we observe the current flow and then by observing the current flow under the conditions (resistance) we know what it's potential is.

Intelligence is the potential for intellectual thought.
An intelligent person is capable of intellectual thought but may not be having an intellectual thought. A dead person has no potential for intellectual thought.

So I guess you could say that intelligence is when a physical condition has the potential to allow for intelligent thought to occur BUT 'the physical condition should not be defined'. Voltage can exist in a battery through chemical reactions or it can exist in a capacitor where atoms are stripped of their electrons on one side and have excess electrons on another. These are two very different physical conditions but they both have the potential of producing current and therefore have a voltage.

 

[flowboat]

I/Q

 

[Polaris]

Not all it's cracked up to be.

 

[Haim]

I/Q

iq is just a very specific test for certain tools the "brain" use,and even that I not sure he test very well.

Ok after giving it more thought,I think the next definition cover everything.
A process which manipulate data and can change the way he manipulate that data according to that data state.
*the data can be internal(the process itself) or not.

 

[Reluctantly]

Rate of behavioural adaptation.

In other words how quickly something can learn and apply the insights gained into optimising the outcome of its behaviours.

The more intelligent someone is the better use they'll make of the information available to them and the faster they will adapt towards achieving an optimal state in their environment.

I think I agree with your view. That pretty much covers it in my opinion, as far I'm concerned.

 

[Grayman]

I think I agree with your view. That pretty much covers it in my opinion, as far I'm concerned.

Is that why people talk about evolution like it has a mind if its own? The great engineer who consciously plans biological advantages...evolution.

 

[Reluctantly]

^ Maybe, but evolution doesn't really involve intelligence. Intelligence kind of throws a cog into its gears; it puts evolution in your hands, instead of due to obvious genetic predestination.

But yeah, maybe it's the same line of thinking - adaptation.

 

[Grayman]

^ Maybe, but evolution doesn't really involve intelligence. Intelligence kind of throws a cog into its gears; it puts evolution in your hands, instead of due to obvious genetic predestination.

But yeah, maybe it's the same line of thinking - adaptation.

I always viewed intelligence as a second layer in evolution. Like evolution itself had evolved. Tools and tech are evolution at turbo speed.

 

[Intolerable]

Rate of behavioural adaptation.

In other words how quickly something can learn and apply the insights gained into optimising the outcome of its behaviours.

The more intelligent someone is the better use they'll make of the information available to them and the faster they will adapt towards achieving an optimal state in their environment.

This but with an emotional component. There has to be something in it for us to produce an appetite for learning.

 

[Haim]

Rate of behavioural adaptation.

In other words how quickly something can learn and apply the insights gained into optimising the outcome of its behaviours.

The more intelligent someone is the better use they'll make of the information available to them and the faster they will adapt towards achieving an optimal state in their environment.

There is a reason we humans learn slower how to be human than animals(a cats in a few months already know anything that a cat need to know)
A faster learning type is answer based on the previous answers.Giving the need to learn the sequence of numbers 0,2,4,6,8 the fast learning will solve it faster but the slower learning will have more understand of the sequence and giving the new sequence 1,3,5,7 will learn much faster.We are smarter than other animals because we learn slow and for a long time,making the learning slower but more accurate in the end.
Therefore I think you are wrong,someone that quickly change his mind is not smart,he is built only to solve specific problems and given new one he will fail.Like a politician that change his mind every time public opinion change or a manager that change something for the worst after he received criticism from the higher hps,both are reactionary,improve based if they are corrected or not and do not understand the problem itself.

 

[ZenRaiden]

The ability to benefit from experience.

 

[Black Rose]

Intelli - gen - ce

Intel = Information

gen - erate
gen - eration

gen means within or source

ce is the tense

gence means to become from within

Simply Intelligence is Introversion.
Introversion is the map of reality in our head.
Extraversion is the interface between reality and the map.

Kolmogorov complexity is the true source of Intelligence.
Adaptation is the speed at which it increases map resolution.
General intelligence a map with greater symmetry of adaptation.

Metacognition is a map of the map.
This is why we can ask questions.
We can know what the map of reality is missing and fill it in.

https://youtu.be/VG2tfvWJ5tQ

 

[JPS]

Provided an input, which could be information encoded in any way, intelligence is basically the ability to secure an output, which, again, could be information encoded in any way.

Of course, this definition is broad enough to include all organic life, as well as all computational machines. But it's workable. I'd personally reserve the troublesome ambiguity not for "intelligence" but for "sentience," a different matter entirely.

 

[headspace]

Provided an input, which could be information encoded in any way, intelligence is basically the ability to secure an output, which, again, could be information encoded in any way.

Of course, this definition is broad enough to include all organic life, as well as all computational machines. But it's workable. I'd personally reserve the troublesome ambiguity not for "intelligence" but for "sentience," a different matter entirely.

I like this,
it's quite accurate.

 

[sushi]

i think its a mathematical function

or how to find the fastest route from point a to point b in a maze.
understanding information
learning
able to memorize and execute things you have learned

That is excluding creatures without a brain.That do not have consciousness,virus,germs and mushrooms, they are complex enough as a group to be considered to have intelligence,the rest of the human body is also a complex system.Also we need to consider aliens that might have entirely different intelligence.
Than there are computers,can you really not consider them to have intelligence at all?

In the end intelligence is not one thing,there is no criteria and you can not make one,because it is a bunch of similar things,like any word or name,when do you stop consider a thing as that thing?when dogs became different enough than wolfs they no longer were considered wolfs and a new name was needed.

sceintists can probably do it with implants someday, finding the connection between structure and function in the brain.

 

[Black Rose]

I have recently begun to understand how the wais 4 IQ test "measures" intelligence.

(Verbal Comprehension) and (Perceptual Reasoning) search out patterns in language and shapes. They are the most correlated with general intelligence (g factor).

The capacity to hold items in your head is (Working Memory). The capacity to rearrange them without external references is (Processing Speed) Together they are pure mental calculation.

Both g and mental calculation are "measured" by the wais 4.

When I took the wais 4 test my ability to understand patterns in shapes and language was really high. But as for my ability to perform mental calculations, I am slow as a brick.

I hope this helps clarify most of the aspects of intelligence people refer to in their definitions of it.

 

[QuickTwist]

@AK,

I have to ask you about how behavior fits into your view of Intelligence. Some people use the same system and never really change, and they can still have different levels of intelligence. By this definition, animals can actually be pretty intelligent. I like your idea that intelligence is a roadmap of reality because it gives the subject a solid state of reference for a framework.

I might have more to contribute depending on how this plays out.

Good thread, I like this kind of discussion.

 

[Black Rose]

http://www.kurzweilai.net/forums/topic/we-need-a-new-theory-of-intelligence

Mental abilities such as introspection are the result of an internal simulation as an environmental reconstruction. Modification at speed is the representation of possible future modifications. It is not simply trial and error but also planning around changes that gives a result of internal paths that become external actions. This is close to how DeepMind won Go against the world champion, accept being that modification is four dimensional. Thus a subset of representation is modified according to a smaller compressed representation. A branch searches for stable patterns. Unstable patterns branch into parallel hypothesis as 4D. What worked in the past is stable, unstable would combine different strategies of correlation. Recurrent Neural Nets would be the source of short term memory, failure or success, and this would allow retroduction. The mind's eye is a RNN. Retroduction link future events to past events. The key is to make the A.I. have as many self inclusive hypothesis as possible. Optimal choices are not required for learning. It learns from experience, integrating more patterns.

I do not have a mind's eye.
It might be helpful if I had one.

http://www.bbc.com/news/health-34039054

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Wouldn't IQ be the rate of change of intelligence then? dIQ/dt etc? And the rate is fixed, or maybe approaches fixed? I don't know, I'm tired.

Kudos for the application of calculus to psychology.

I would say your statement "IQ = dI/dt" is false (IQ is generally regarded as a kind of projection of Intelligence onto a certain Domain relevant to the testing instrument), however the important part is simply the introduction of the term dI/dt.