Carding Forum
Professional
I have repeatedly encountered people in my life who read a lot, have a rich vocabulary, and know many interesting facts.
But in the process of more or less close communication with them, it became clear that the cognitive abilities of these individuals are at a low level.
It will not be difficult for such a person to obtain information, remember it and then reproduce it. But to draw their own correct conclusions based on its analysis – alas. If none of the books, articles, lectures or programs they have read provide an answer to a question, it is difficult for these people to find it on their own, even if the knowledge in their head allows it.
The opposite example is also not uncommon. A seemingly intelligent person, clearly with a high IQ, but he talks some kind of nonsense and draws absolutely incorrect conclusions. You would think that he is simply a fool – but no: you know that he has good analytical skills, knows how to draw conclusions, has remarkable ingenuity, because you have seen it yourself many times.
Cognitive dissonance arises. After all, how is it: a person is well-read, literate, knows a lot, but is a little slow to think. Or vice versa: he clearly knows how to think, he's a savvy person, but he talks nonsense. In fact, there is no contradiction in this.
Ideally, these abilities should be developed equally. But man is far from an ideal being; Each personality is formed and develops in different conditions. Therefore, it is not uncommon for only one part to be strong.
This happens not only with mental abilities, but also with physical ones. One person is able to run a marathon, but is unable to lift a bag of cement, another is able to bend reinforcement and crowbars with his hands, but “dies” after running 5 km. After all, the body develops those abilities that a person trains. If you run and develop your respiratory system, you gain marathon endurance, and if you build your muscles, you gain heroic strength.
Everyone is predisposed to better development of one or another characteristic, but the main thing is training. If a natural runner sits at home all day, no talent will help him win a medal at the Olympics. It is the same with mental abilities.
People who have good erudition, know a lot, but have a weak ability to think, can boast of an excellent memory, but demonstrate an unremarkable level of intelligence. Usually this happens because, not having an innate ingenuity, a high IQ, they do not “pump up” them, but only absorb knowledge in a ready-made form. As a result, memory is trained, but intelligence is not.
For intelligent individuals who, on the contrary, have excellent understanding but know little, the situation is the opposite. They know how to think, quickly draw conclusions, but in conditions of a lack of information they are not able to objectively assess the correctness of their judgments.
An example of the wrong way of thinking is the so-called phlogiston theory of combustion. About 300-400 years ago, scientists came to the conclusion that flammable substances contain a certain substance called “phlogiston”, which evaporates during the combustion process.
They came to this conclusion not because they were stupid, but quite the opposite. The learned men simply did not know the subtleties of the structure of matter that are known today. They did not know about the structure of the atom, the oxidizing abilities and reactions of oxygen, and therefore the idea of phlogiston fits most successfully into their picture of the world.
Similarly, if a person is constantly shown images of tall palm trees with bunches of bananas, he will be sure that bananas grow on palm trees (and not on huge grasses). Not because he is stupid, but because he received such information more than once, while others do not.
Another negative effect of erudition without intelligence is a lack of critical thinking. By absorbing information without analyzing it, a person is overly susceptible to the influence of authorities. This is common to everyone, but excessive devotion to them gives rise to blind faith. And it is often far from the truth.
By drawing incorrect conclusions, a person leads himself into a dead end and can confuse others. Sometimes it's dangerous. At one time, the phlogiston theory of combustion hampered the development of chemical science for a long time. Even the increase in the mass of iron after calcination (caused by the addition of oxygen atoms to metal atoms and the formation of oxide) supporters of the theory argue that phlogiston probably has a negative mass.
A person who thinks well, but knows little, sometimes starts projects that are obviously unsuccessful. He can open a business that is initially doomed to fail, because the lack of knowledge did not allow him to take into account all the nuances, and the person did not take advantage of the help of more knowledgeable people (“I'm not a “fool myself”).
If you have acquired new information, analyze it, ask more questions, delve deeper into the essence and reasons, and don't just memorize. If you are discussing something, look for clarifying information, expand your knowledge base, train your memory, and don't just use what has long been known. Only a few are born geniuses, but if you harmoniously develop all aspects of your mind, you can expand your abilities and achieve success.
But in the process of more or less close communication with them, it became clear that the cognitive abilities of these individuals are at a low level.
It will not be difficult for such a person to obtain information, remember it and then reproduce it. But to draw their own correct conclusions based on its analysis – alas. If none of the books, articles, lectures or programs they have read provide an answer to a question, it is difficult for these people to find it on their own, even if the knowledge in their head allows it.
The opposite example is also not uncommon. A seemingly intelligent person, clearly with a high IQ, but he talks some kind of nonsense and draws absolutely incorrect conclusions. You would think that he is simply a fool – but no: you know that he has good analytical skills, knows how to draw conclusions, has remarkable ingenuity, because you have seen it yourself many times.
Cognitive dissonance arises. After all, how is it: a person is well-read, literate, knows a lot, but is a little slow to think. Or vice versa: he clearly knows how to think, he's a savvy person, but he talks nonsense. In fact, there is no contradiction in this.
Why does this happen?
The human mind is a complex structure consisting of several components. Erudition and intelligence are among the main ones. Erudition, as a product of memory, reflects a person's ability to assimilate information and reproduce it. Intelligence is the ability to process this information.Ideally, these abilities should be developed equally. But man is far from an ideal being; Each personality is formed and develops in different conditions. Therefore, it is not uncommon for only one part to be strong.
This happens not only with mental abilities, but also with physical ones. One person is able to run a marathon, but is unable to lift a bag of cement, another is able to bend reinforcement and crowbars with his hands, but “dies” after running 5 km. After all, the body develops those abilities that a person trains. If you run and develop your respiratory system, you gain marathon endurance, and if you build your muscles, you gain heroic strength.
Everyone is predisposed to better development of one or another characteristic, but the main thing is training. If a natural runner sits at home all day, no talent will help him win a medal at the Olympics. It is the same with mental abilities.
People who have good erudition, know a lot, but have a weak ability to think, can boast of an excellent memory, but demonstrate an unremarkable level of intelligence. Usually this happens because, not having an innate ingenuity, a high IQ, they do not “pump up” them, but only absorb knowledge in a ready-made form. As a result, memory is trained, but intelligence is not.
For intelligent individuals who, on the contrary, have excellent understanding but know little, the situation is the opposite. They know how to think, quickly draw conclusions, but in conditions of a lack of information they are not able to objectively assess the correctness of their judgments.
An example of the wrong way of thinking is the so-called phlogiston theory of combustion. About 300-400 years ago, scientists came to the conclusion that flammable substances contain a certain substance called “phlogiston”, which evaporates during the combustion process.
They came to this conclusion not because they were stupid, but quite the opposite. The learned men simply did not know the subtleties of the structure of matter that are known today. They did not know about the structure of the atom, the oxidizing abilities and reactions of oxygen, and therefore the idea of phlogiston fits most successfully into their picture of the world.
Similarly, if a person is constantly shown images of tall palm trees with bunches of bananas, he will be sure that bananas grow on palm trees (and not on huge grasses). Not because he is stupid, but because he received such information more than once, while others do not.
The dangers of erudition without intelligence
Someone who gives the impression of being a wise man due to his erudition risks failing to cope with the tasks that arise if they require advanced thinking and synthesis of information, and not just its reproduction from memory. When everything goes according to plan, and the solution requires the use of known tools, such a person will do an excellent job. But if an unconventional approach is required, of which he is not aware, then problems will arise.Another negative effect of erudition without intelligence is a lack of critical thinking. By absorbing information without analyzing it, a person is overly susceptible to the influence of authorities. This is common to everyone, but excessive devotion to them gives rise to blind faith. And it is often far from the truth.
Why is intelligence without erudition dangerous?
A person who has good intelligence, but little knowledge and poor erudition, is often prone to making mistakes. He quickly finds a way out of many non-standard situations, comes up with solutions to problems, but can sometimes draw erroneous conclusions. Not having full information on some phenomenon or thing, he moves away from their objective assessment (see about phlogiston and bananas).By drawing incorrect conclusions, a person leads himself into a dead end and can confuse others. Sometimes it's dangerous. At one time, the phlogiston theory of combustion hampered the development of chemical science for a long time. Even the increase in the mass of iron after calcination (caused by the addition of oxygen atoms to metal atoms and the formation of oxide) supporters of the theory argue that phlogiston probably has a negative mass.
A person who thinks well, but knows little, sometimes starts projects that are obviously unsuccessful. He can open a business that is initially doomed to fail, because the lack of knowledge did not allow him to take into account all the nuances, and the person did not take advantage of the help of more knowledgeable people (“I'm not a “fool myself”).
So what to do?
The answer is simple: absorb information, process it and synthesize new information based on inferences. In a word, think. Don't just draw knowledge every day and accumulate it in your head, don't just analyze for the hundredth time what has been known for a long time, but combine both types of brain activity.If you have acquired new information, analyze it, ask more questions, delve deeper into the essence and reasons, and don't just memorize. If you are discussing something, look for clarifying information, expand your knowledge base, train your memory, and don't just use what has long been known. Only a few are born geniuses, but if you harmoniously develop all aspects of your mind, you can expand your abilities and achieve success.
