[MD] Reet and the Weakest Link

[Krimel]

Ron:
I tend to agree,
Snip:
At least two major "consensus" definitions of intelligence have been
proposed. First, from Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns, a report of a
task force convened by the American Psychological Association in 1995:

"Individuals differ from one another in their ability to understand
complex ideas, to adapt effectively to the environment, to learn from
experience, to engage in various forms of reasoning, to overcome
obstacles by taking thought. Although these individual differences can
be substantial, they are never entirely consistent: a given person's
intellectual performance will vary on different occasions, in different
domains, as judged by different criteria. Concepts of "intelligence" are
attempts to clarify and organize this complex set of phenomena. Although
considerable clarity has been achieved in some areas, no such
conceptualization has yet answered all the important questions and none
commands universal assent. Indeed, when two dozen prominent theorists
were recently asked to define intelligence, they gave two dozen somewhat
different definitions."

A second definition of intelligence comes from "Mainstream Science on
Intelligence", which was signed by 52 intelligence researchers in 1994:

"A very general mental capability that, among other things, involves the
ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend
complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from experience. It is not merely
book learning, a narrow academic skill, or test-taking smarts. Rather,
it reflects a broader and deeper capability for comprehending our
surroundings-"catching on", "making sense" of things, or "figuring out"
what to do."

[Krimel]
Right, the first example seems to refer to the traditional concept of a kind
of generalized intelligence. As your quote points out there is no consensus
on what this is. About the closest thing to a concensus I have ever hear is
that intelligence IS what intelligence test measure. 

But there is a bit of common ground centering around the speed of access to
short term or working memory. The idea is that this ability makes one faster
at testing out new options or at comparing the present to the past.

Your second quote seems to be influenced by Howard Gardner's conception of
multiple intelligences. It involves the ability to respond and adapt across
multiple domains, music, art, athletics, social relationship etc. Another
view breaks it down into fluid intelligence which is the ability to
assimilate and use new information and crystallized intelligence which is
the ability to use knowledge previously acquired. The two seem to be of
about equal importance until late adulthood when fluid intelligence declines
while crystallized intelligence grows and becomes more significant.

I see almost no connection between any of this and the MoQ account of
intellect.