Scientists 'locate' intelligence
ohgs at chatham.demon.co.uk
Mon Aug 7 04:27:06 EST 2000
"MS" <marshmallow5 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>It sounds like a premature generalization to say that because several tasks
>activated one area that it validates a g-factor of intelligence.
Indeed. A recent meta-survey suggests that there are three factors which
drop out of assessments of human capabilities: symbolic intelligence
(closely linked to G), creative intelligence and practical-social skill.
The three are orthogonal in the human population: you can be high or low on
any one without this being a predictor of your position on the others. A
person in the top 1% of the population on e.g. symbolic intelligence would
rarely be in the top 1% of the others, and indeed only one person in a
million of the population could be expected to be in such a situation. This
may explain much that one observes amongst one's colleagues. :)
More information about the Neur-sci