| Page 1 of 3 |
Ronhrin
Banned
Posts: 6428
Location: Paradigms are changeable, reality is absolute.
|
 Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 15:41 Post subject: Correlation between Intellect and interpersonal relations |
|
 |
What are your thoughts on the influence of intellectual maturity and high comprehension of the natural world on interpersonal relationships and the disassociation from societal mechanics?
Discuss...
He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither
- Benjamin Franklin - 1759
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 15:46 Post subject: |
|
|
I have no idea what we are discussing, but I'm 26, with the mindset of 16, I have a knack of using tech devices, and can read body language. And I like my life, could be better, but could be worse too.
I dream a lot. Yet struggle to form relationships. Enjoy my solitude, and think of all ppl that tell me to settle down and that I'm childish - that they're old in the mind and too much settled down.
I had to do a psy test for a lorry driver's licence (got all driving licenses, except bus, just for fun and because I like driving), and on the questions part the guy said that there are no wrong answers, so I answered truthfully, but he failed me, because my mind wasn't settled yet, and I had dreamy/childish tendencies. So I gave him the finger in my mind, and next week wrote exactly what they wanted me to answer, with a few mistakes, cause a mate of mine did the same but they told him that his answers were with high lie index, and I passed flawlessly. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fisk
Posts: 9145
Location: Von Oben
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 16:19 Post subject: |
|
|
They have a rather complex relation, for instance having an ability at interpersonal relations requires only basic Intellect (ie. for humans: average Intelligence). However I do believe as your Intelligence AND your ability to interact with people rise they become an upward spiral (one feeding the other) and the reason for this is that I believe that we are inherently dependent upon others to grow beyond our own potential, we need several external sources of data to create an understanding of ourselves, others and the outside world. Our own cognitive abilities and sensory functions are not enough.
Blah, could write more on this, but cba right now.
Yes, yes I'm back.
Somewhat.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 16:23 Post subject: |
|
|
I disagree. I thought that really smart people tend to be socially challenged?
| Lutzifer wrote: | | and yes, mine is only average |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WaldoJ
VIP Member
Posts: 32678
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 16:27 Post subject: |
|
|
| StrEagle wrote: | | I disagree. I thought that really smart people tend to be socially challenged? |
Depends. If smart people hang around other smart people and they socialize that doesn't make them socially challenged. However if smart people hang around idiots and footballers and derps and they don't know how to talk to them... are they socially challenged?
The same can be said about high class people and poor people and regular folk who are thrown into a life that they aren't experienced too.
People adapt to each other.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
helvete
Posts: 2727
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 16:44 Post subject: |
|
|
| fisk wrote: | They have a rather complex relation, for instance having an ability at interpersonal relations requires only basic Intellect (ie. for humans: average Intelligence). However I do believe as your Intelligence AND your ability to interact with people rise they become an upward spiral (one feeding the other) and the reason for this is that I believe that we are inherently dependent upon others to grow beyond our own potential, we need several external sources of data to create an understanding of ourselves, others and the outside world. Our own cognitive abilities and sensory functions are not enough.
Blah, could write more on this, but cba right now. |
I support this theory. Many intelligent people are socially challenged due to arrogance. If you believe you're already at an apex, and others are hard (or too easy) to understand because they're inferior, you'll never see a need for change or growth. The most sociable people I know are very clever, and very rational, lads indeed.
REPOST
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ronhrin
Banned
Posts: 6428
Location: Paradigms are changeable, reality is absolute.
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 16:46 Post subject: |
|
|
| helvete wrote: | | fisk wrote: | They have a rather complex relation, for instance having an ability at interpersonal relations requires only basic Intellect (ie. for humans: average Intelligence). However I do believe as your Intelligence AND your ability to interact with people rise they become an upward spiral (one feeding the other) and the reason for this is that I believe that we are inherently dependent upon others to grow beyond our own potential, we need several external sources of data to create an understanding of ourselves, others and the outside world. Our own cognitive abilities and sensory functions are not enough.
Blah, could write more on this, but cba right now. |
I support this theory. Many intelligent people are socially challenged due to arrogance. If you believe you're already at an apex, and others are hard (or too easy) to understand because they're inferior, you'll never see a need for change or growth. The most sociable people I know are very clever, and very rational, lads indeed. |
Which leads us to the following question.
Do you perceive to exist a tangible relation between intelligence and arrogance?
He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither
- Benjamin Franklin - 1759
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 16:52 Post subject: |
|
|
| WaldoJ wrote: | | StrEagle wrote: | | I disagree. I thought that really smart people tend to be socially challenged? |
Depends. If smart people hang around other smart people and they socialize that doesn't make them socially challenged. However if smart people hang around idiots and footballers and derps and they don't know how to talk to them... are they socially challenged?
The same can be said about high class people and poor people and regular folk who are thrown into a life that they aren't experienced too.
People adapt to each other. |
Footballers? Lol...
Empty again  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Epsilon
Dr. Strangelove
Posts: 9240
Location: War Room
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 16:53 Post subject: |
|
|
Arrogance stems from people believing themselves to be better than others, whether because they're rich, intelligent, good looking, knowledgeable etc.
Generally I like to think that the one thing I know is that I don't know anything, this allows me to approach even the most crazy theories with an open mind, consequently allowing for easier learning and consumation of knowledge.
You shouldn't always judge a book by it's cover, is also very fitting, some of the brightest people I've had the pleasure of working with have not been good looking, well dressed, well articulated etc. But they have been exceptional in their specific field.
The moment you place yourself on a pedestal and say "everybody listen to the words of wisdom coming out of my mouth" then you're not in a position to learn anything.
In 1812 with the advent of the steam engine, man thought he knew and had learned everything.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TSR69
Banned
Posts: 14962
Location: Republic of the Seven United Provinces
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 16:56 Post subject: |
|
|
Arrogance is a personality flaw IMO, a defence mechanism (to hide insecurity for example) possibly linked to some disorder.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WaldoJ
VIP Member
Posts: 32678
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 17:04 Post subject: |
|
|
| Lathieza wrote: | | WaldoJ wrote: | | StrEagle wrote: | | I disagree. I thought that really smart people tend to be socially challenged? |
Depends. If smart people hang around other smart people and they socialize that doesn't make them socially challenged. However if smart people hang around idiots and footballers and derps and they don't know how to talk to them... are they socially challenged?
The same can be said about high class people and poor people and regular folk who are thrown into a life that they aren't experienced too.
People adapt to each other. |
Footballers? Lol... |
It's a personal example. I can't talk football to save my own life. Or talk any sports to save my own life. I can't remember the names of people. I know all the rules and i know how to play. But ask me a sport question and i'm picturing you naked with a wasp the size of a eggball crawling into your testicles.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ronhrin
Banned
Posts: 6428
Location: Paradigms are changeable, reality is absolute.
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 17:05 Post subject: |
|
|
| iconized wrote: | | Arrogance is a personality flaw, a defence mechanism (to hide insecurity for example) possibly linked to some disorder. |
And how do you define something to be a personality flaw, merely based on the normalized average of personalities range.
If we consider your argument to be valid, wouldn't high intelligence, or any other rare super human attributes also be defined as a flaw?
You are defining personality traits as an ought to be ideal, in the same way as you would define a physiological health as an ought to be ideal on the human body.
And this is making an assumption without any sort of empirical evidence to back it up, as when with a disease, your body will probably cease to continue is defined function for the longest amount of time, there is nothing to suggest that we ought to have traits which favor social interaction, we use if often as a convenience, just as we use many other tools at our disposal, there is no evidence that we ought to use them or even that we should define as a flaw personality traits outside the normalized average.
He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither
- Benjamin Franklin - 1759
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
helvete
Posts: 2727
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 17:16 Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with Epsilon's thoughts on the matter, that arrogance stem from a feeling of superiority, no matter the source. So I'd say the correlation between intelligence and arrogance is pretty much the same as that between wealth and arrogance. In either case the one doesn't necessarily infer the other, but it certainly improves the odds. To have such an advantage and still remain humble is what I'd call wisdom.
REPOST
Last edited by helvete on Fri, 10th Jun 2011 17:17; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rofl_Mao
Posts: 3187
Location: Nederland
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 17:17 Post subject: |
|
|
| Epsilon wrote: | The moment you place yourself on a pedestal and say "everybody listen to the words of wisdom coming out of my mouth" then you're not in a position to learn anything.
In 1812 with the advent of the steam engine, man thought he knew and had learned everything. |
I remember Bill Gates' pearl of wisdom he shared with us in the eighties, "computers will never need more than 640kB of RAM". No wonder this fool's Xbox got the RROD syndrome 
| Lopin18 wrote: | | I think you played too much Fallout 3, Pedo Perk acquired. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TSR69
Banned
Posts: 14962
Location: Republic of the Seven United Provinces
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 17:32 Post subject: |
|
|
@Ronhrin: I would call certain traits flaws if they are counter-productive for socialising. Some other flaws IMO shyness, pride.
I really don't see why being born with an high intellectual potential or a low one would be a flaw. It is a given, the arrogance is not. You can't compare it.
Keep in mind though this is psychology and that is not an exact science. If you want some empirical evidence use google scholar.
Formerly known as iconized
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fisk
Posts: 9145
Location: Von Oben
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 17:37 Post subject: |
|
|
| iconized wrote: | | Arrogance is a personality flaw IMO, a defence mechanism (to hide insecurity for example) possibly linked to some disorder. |
I disagree with the first part of your statement. I simply believe arrogance to be antisocial behaviour, ie. merely a display of lack of social ability. Whether it is masking insecurity or not is hard to discern, and is a generalization (you should avoid these). Certain individuals may use arrogance to mask insecurity, yes. Some may simply be arrogant without having Intelligence, others may seem arrogant to you because you're the one feeling insecure.
Yes, yes I'm back.
Somewhat.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ronhrin
Banned
Posts: 6428
Location: Paradigms are changeable, reality is absolute.
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 17:39 Post subject: |
|
|
| iconized wrote: | | @Ronhrin: I would call certain traits flaws if they are counter-productive for socialising |
And that is the question isn't it, how can you prove that socializing is not a flaw in and by itself?
He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither
- Benjamin Franklin - 1759
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fisk
Posts: 9145
Location: Von Oben
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 17:45 Post subject: |
|
|
| Ronhrin wrote: | | iconized wrote: | | @Ronhrin: I would call certain traits flaws if they are counter-productive for socialising |
And that is the question isn't it, how can you prove that socializing is not a flaw in and by itself? |
What an absurd question. Have you even considered it yourself (or do you even know what socialization is)?
Yes, yes I'm back.
Somewhat.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ronhrin
Banned
Posts: 6428
Location: Paradigms are changeable, reality is absolute.
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 17:52 Post subject: |
|
|
| fisk wrote: | | Ronhrin wrote: | | iconized wrote: | | @Ronhrin: I would call certain traits flaws if they are counter-productive for socialising |
And that is the question isn't it, how can you prove that socializing is not a flaw in and by itself? |
What an absurd question. Have you even considered it yourself (or do you even know what socialization is)? |
I formulated it wrongly, what I meant to ask is, in response to iconized's post about defining personality flaws as that which counter social norm, what sort of framework did he have to be able to prove that socialization is the main attribute revolving around personal traits development?
How can he prove that we ought to be social?
He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither
- Benjamin Franklin - 1759
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TSR69
Banned
Posts: 14962
Location: Republic of the Seven United Provinces
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 17:55 Post subject: |
|
|
@Ronhrin: May I ask if you think you differ from other people in regard of wanting to socialise?
Formerly known as iconized
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DXWarlock
VIP Member
Posts: 11422
Location: Florida, USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ronhrin
Banned
Posts: 6428
Location: Paradigms are changeable, reality is absolute.
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 17:58 Post subject: |
|
|
| iconized wrote: | | @Ronhrin: May I ask if you think you differ from other people in regard of wanting to socialise? |
I can't answer that question given that I cannot know what people think, merely what they explicitly exhibit to conform to societies norm.
I would also like an answer to the previous question, is there any tangible prove regarding the issue that we ought to socialize, and that it would be a flaw not to?
He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither
- Benjamin Franklin - 1759
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DXWarlock
VIP Member
Posts: 11422
Location: Florida, USA
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 18:00 Post subject: |
|
|
-double post-
Last edited by DXWarlock on Fri, 10th Jun 2011 18:01; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DXWarlock
VIP Member
Posts: 11422
Location: Florida, USA
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 18:00 Post subject: |
|
|
| Ronhrin wrote: | | iconized wrote: | | @Ronhrin: I would call certain traits flaws if they are counter-productive for socialising |
And that is the question isn't it, how can you prove that socializing is not a flaw in and by itself? |
because its one of the mechanics that fuels mankind as a species to go forward. as animals we are "pack' animals. working a s community helping each other is what made us take the "smarts over power" approach in the animal kingdom.
to call one of the traits that define us as an animal and is a core part of what helped us survive would be absurd. because its a trait that was learned AS a important part of furthering the species.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
helvete
Posts: 2727
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 18:02 Post subject: |
|
|
| Ronhrin wrote: |
I would also like an answer to the previous question, is there any tangible prove regarding the issue that we ought to socialize, and that it would be a flaw not to? |
The question is still absurd since you can't define "flaw" if you take this wholly relativistic approach.
REPOST
Last edited by helvete on Fri, 10th Jun 2011 18:02; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 18:02 Post subject: |
|
|
The egomaniac is at it again.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
helvete
Posts: 2727
Location: Sweden
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fisk
Posts: 9145
Location: Von Oben
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 18:09 Post subject: |
|
|
| Ronhrin wrote: | | How can he prove that we ought to be social? |
Here's why I believe you are more of a provocateur than someone who is standing by some kind of antisocial ideal. Just the construction of your sentences are built up as to cause (strong) reaction. People, whether they admit they "hate people" or not use provocation as a means to get attention. This seems to be your whole deal here, and the thing is most of the people on this forum are seeing through it, yet you continue with this stuff... it's some sort of survival mechanism I suppose.
It is indeed ironic though that you're asking that question whilst practically begging for people to respond to you.
Yes, yes I'm back.
Somewhat.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DXWarlock
VIP Member
Posts: 11422
Location: Florida, USA
|
| Posted: Fri, 10th Jun 2011 18:10 Post subject: |
|
|
well the question itself is flawed..
hes confusing psychology and social 'norms' with what is required to survive and traits needed to do so.
a 'flaw' in a creature is one that is still a 'bug' in the coding that natural selection hasn't eliminated from the gene pool yet.
being less social is a psychological variance in what is considered the norm based on opinions of what is deemed as "friendly and easy to talk to" of sorts. that in no way is a bearing on if its a 'flaw' as its not the amount of direct frivolous interactions you have with people..its the quality of the ones you do have that matter for if your helping or hindering 'society'.
so to ask if socializing less is a flaw, is like asking is not smiling and nodding when someones rambling on about useless info is a flaw. no neither are, as from the aspect of "flaws' neither causes a loss or degradation of furthering our species.
philosophically and based on psychology maybe its seems as a deviation from the norm. but one cannot compare whats considered "Joe average normal socializing" with any form of special flaw list. the two are mutually exclusive...but many people want to compare them.. the "collective social standard" and "natural traits that are favorable" because we are social creatures...so it goes hand in hand we confuse the 2 as one in the same.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 3 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
