Slashdot Mirror

Although I appreciate your perspective, all of the things I listed are different kinds of intelligence. I should preface this by saying I am not a professional in the field. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, so you people with letters feel free to jump in.

I thought it was clear from the context that in regards to math I was talking about the ability to work with numbers, not memorize times tables (that's memorization and recall, of course).

Yes, music. Yes, humor. Yes emphatically empathy (this is a vital intelligence that is completely absent from public discourse), and yes, athleticism (AKA kinesthetic intelligence).

These are just links I grabbed randomly, but there is significant material that covers them as well. I'm not sure why you are so hostile towards rote memorization. I agree that it is over-emphasized in the current system, but it is an important kind of intelligence.

I don't have the energy to explain why understanding languages is another kind, but it's all out there. Verbal intelligence maybe.

I would never dispute that it is difficult to measure intelligence, I simply stated that there are parameters by which it can be measured - if imperfectly. It sounds as though you are working from the false premise that "Intelligence" is a single fact or feature, but modern science does not support that assessment. Each of these items are separate kinds of intelligences. They are interrelated in different ways, and influence each other, but they are distinct from each other as well.

Regards,

Stone

Glial cells are pretty important -- the only difference found in Einstein's brain over "normal" humans so far is that he had many more glia (compared to neurons) in the area that processes information from many other information sources. source: Wikipedia

Also, rats in more highly enriched envionronments have higher glial counts than rats in more impoverished environments, and the ratios of glia to neurons progresses as you go up the evolutions (9 to 1) than any other animal -- it would be nice if the article discussed what the ratio of glia to neurons was in the dolphin so we could know if that still held true.

So far, glia are a sign of a highly active brain -- they provide metabolic support and many other functions:

      1. They play an active role in establishing and maintaining the fundamental patterns of neuron circuits.
      2. They produce growth and trophic factors, playing a key role in regeneration and plasticity.
      3. Some play an active role in the formation of myelin which speeds impulse conduction. Myelinated fibers conduct more rapidly than unmyelinated fibers.
      4. Some glial cells respond to rapid repair of myelin in demyelinating diseases such as MS and ALS.
      5. Glial cells play a crucial role in immunological responses to various infections and toxic agents.
      6. Glial cells increase in number when nerve cells grow with enrichment.

(from http://www.newhorizons.org/neuro/diamond_einstein. htm)

Finally, if the glia in the dolphins are just a function of cold water, it would make much more sense to have the brain surrounded by a large layer of fat than the relatively more expensive (metabolically speaking) brain cells. Dolphins may not be so intelligent, but that would be beter proved through behavioral studies -- if the argument that they are dumber is that their brains are more like Einstein's in that they have a high glial cell count, that idea just doesn't seem to "hold water".

Check out this site. Google Gardner and intelligence. We heard a lot about this guy in college.

That's actually open to interpretation.

Furthermore, there is GREAT variability in the gyral/sulcal pattern of the human brain. Harvey's description of the folding patterns in Einstein's parietal lobe is NOT good evidence that his brain was grossly different. (However Marian Diamond's examinations on a cellular level may be...) My brain, for example, has an extra sulcus in the left premotor cortex. It's not uncommon to see these kinds of variations, and it really doesn't amount to a "genetic defect".

I remember watching a documentary or two about autism and something that was repeatedly found was that as an autistic individual tried to remedy their problems with autism (usually getting better with age) their savant like knowledge began to deteriorate. I have always thought that there is almost a finite amount of brain capacity any one individual is able to have. Meaning, while a savant is able to have incredible knowledge of some things, their brain is so devoted to that knowledge that things, like knowing where the silverwear drawer is, get sacrificed.

The capacity of the brain is functionally unlimited. Look up one of the various amazing people who memorized large amounts of trivial facts as an example. If there is a limit to human knowledge, no person has ever reached it, and that includes Euler. So that's not very plausable.

I've read the same facts about the loss of savant abilities, but depending on the context, you may not have learned that the specifics related to the loss of autistic powers generally concerns young people who lose one or more amazing feats as they learn to function socially (functioning socially or learning language almost always is associated with the loss of savant abilities: see google.) Since the gain of one skill and the loss of another are so closely related, this seems to suggest a finite processing power in the brain and maybe some plasticity in its parts, not a finite capacity of knowledge.

Even more specifically, a savant's inability to find the silverware drawer or dress himself likely relates to his cerebellum, which differs from most of ours. My favorite intiutive concept for the cerebellum is "rhythmic autopilot." As we learn procedural tasks and are conditioned to react in various ways, this automatic processing is largely taken up by the cerebellum. It's the conditioning/feedback loop center of the brain and hence governs movement, speaking with others, automated responses to stimuli, and all procedural knowledge. They can't find the silverware because their brains don't click into autopilot when performing these activities. So what seems trivial to us, like getting dressed, is essentially a new task for them every day. Could you imagine having to navigate your world through facts, unable to learn the rhythms of automated procedures we take for granted hundreds of times a day? And, as we'd expect, the autistic also often have differences in their cerebellums: click here for more. Here's a quote from a page of the functioning of the cerebellum, which has an excellent section describing its function (it uses a computer metaphor, so you guys might wanna check it out). Quote:


The skills involved in human communication, for example, require both motor and mental activity: the motor activity of speech or gesture, and the mental activity that formulates what is to be said. In the course of learning these skills, an individual's performance can be improved incrementally through practice so that the skills eventually can be performed without conscious attention to detail. For example, in recalling words stored in the memory, the activity can be performed without conscious attention to the details of how the words are selected by the brain during the retrieval process.

In social interaction, we take for granted automatic signals like voice tone, body language, or even the specific words we're using (I've never met anyone who thought over every word every time they spoke). My guess is that the plasticity of the brain allows the unused sections in autistics that are normally used for activities like social interaction to adapt for other uses, hence generating the autistic ability. When these brains are rightfully claimed by their social or lingusitic origins, the computing power is lost and the sa

Buses, bicycles, feet.

Has no one heard of Curitaba, Brazil? While the entire city is not car-free, some sections are, and car usage has declined in the face of increased population.