Most Helpful Guys
I see too many types of intelligence, all admirable, to define it. I value people of worth whether we're talking a high school dropout with amazing artistic talent or a PhD in physics who makes groundbreaking discoveries about the universe or an athlete who didn't excel school but does things with their bodies that few of us could ever hope to do or social butterflies who get along so well with people in a way that few can ever do or musicians who can play an instrument with unbelievable skill.
>> How would you decide if someone you meet is intelligent in real life
I don't, and I technically have a "genius" level IQ with a Mensa membership (which I quickly grew tired of because I found it obnoxious). I was also 4.0 GPA student and so forth and I still admire too many different types of people to say whatever my type of "intelligence" I possess is superior to anyone else's. I'm decent at certain things, I'm bad at other things. I have areas where I specialize and I have areas of complete ignorance. And that's the case with just about everyone else I met.
Intelligence is multidimensional, okay, but there are people who confuse that hypothesis with other pandering theories such as being good at quipping and banters or saying the right things during conversation is a better indicator of intelligence than simply your GPA 😂These guys tend to have an irrational dislike for any attempt to measure intelligence by tests, and I'm willing to bet they dislike any attempt to quantify abstract concepts and with it, math, physics, scientific methods...
Despite the multi-dimensionality, the skills at all mental tasks tend to be positively correlated. This correlation is a consequence of the fact that various mental activities depend on "similar circuits" in the brain etc. It means there exists a vaguely defined direction in the space of cognitive skills or an inaccurately defined variable that will be very useful for predicting many aspects of the individual or group's cognitive skills:
So the very basic experimental observation that makes it useful to think about things like the g factor or the IQ is that the results in various kinds of cognitive skills tests are positively correlated with each other. So one may construct some kind of a weighted average of all the "kinds of IQ" to produce one that is most helpful for the predictions of all types of cognitive tests, one that is rather strongly correlated with all of them.
Howard Gardner has developed the theory of multiple intelligences, my favorite meme, after other researchers pointed out that this guy basically conflated success in sports/music/business with cognitive abilities (athletic skills like how fast you can run means intelligence to him lol? musical skills? conversational skills? social skills?) thus making this term even more ill defined. Then people pointed out the huge positive correlation amongst his so called "independent domains of intelligence" that could easily be measured, this basically falsified his whole theory (but of course he still tried to add more excuses for that correlation, so without ever being falsified, his theory is becoming more and more like pseudo science)
Personally I consider someone intelligent when they are good at math. When someone is good at mathematics at school, she is likely to be good at physics as well, and so on. This is the same correlation above, so even if I didn't get the exact dimension, I could still make reasonably accurate conclusion.
Most Helpful Girl
Someone who can create new things from the things that they already know that can change something. Lol being good at school means nothing because you just need to memorize, but if you are able to take everything you memorize and turn it in to something that's intelligence.