The 4 Types of Intelligence. A Theory by me.

Makhnovshchina

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Feb 23, 2023
Analytical
Analytical intelligence is a form that requires education on specific topics, mainly math or scientific related. It is mostly an elitist form, as the years of training and teaching needed to properly understand it incentivizes how most studies have unreproducible conclusions, and therefore create elitism and unwarranted appraisal by the majority of society. While it may lead to advancements in certain sects of education, it fails to see that once that specific advancement is solved, reverting it is almost impossible.

Example: The De-Extinction of the Pyrenean Ibex.

The Pyrenean ibex became extinct in January of 2000, when a falling tree killed the last surviving member of the species. Three and a half years later, the Pyrenean ibex became extinct for the second time, when Spanish Scientists managed to successfully clone a kid from ear-tissue from a specimen. While this was obviously a giant breakthrough for Analytical intelligence & Science. With it's nature, and as with all genetic cloning; it was fundamentally useless. Analytical intelligence seems to assume that with enough money thrown at a project, it will succeed, regardless of the outcome succeeds or not, and a "playing of god", as theistic types may say.
1677834843200.png



Socio-Analytical
Socio-Analytical is simply the intelligence that is related to understanding humans and the human condition, anthropology, sociology, and the mapping of ways to properly analyze human behavior, be it for good or bad intentions. This intelligence is probably the most dangerous, as easy cracks in human behavior can lead to acceptance of breaching of social norms and taboos and classical conditioning.

Example: The Stanford Prison Experiment.

The experiment involved the selection of 24 male participants who were randomly assigned to play the roles of either prisoners or guards in a simulated prison environment. The prison was set up in the basement of the psychology building at Stanford and was designed to look and feel like a real prison. The guards were given uniforms, sunglasses, and batons, while the prisoners were given smocks and identification numbers. The experiment was intended to last for two weeks but was terminated after only six days due to the abusive behavior of the guards towards the prisoners. The results of the study were shocking and showed that both the prisoners and guards quickly became absorbed in their roles. The guards began to exhibit aggressive and sadistic behavior towards the prisoners. The Stanford Prison Experiment is a classic example of the power of socio-analytical intelligence, which is the ability to understand and navigate complex social situations. This type of intelligence involves the capacity to analyze social systems, recognize patterns of behavior, and anticipate the likely consequences of actions. It also involves the ability to understand the perspectives and motivations of others and to effectively communicate and negotiate within social contexts, it shows that the true double edged sword of this form of intelligence.
1677835494779.png


Street
Street intelligence is common-sense, survival, basic essentials in one's life one knows by birth, or builds up along their life by seeing others use this form. It is a more "primitive" form than Analytical intelligence, but is the most useful, as Analytical only covers superficial qualities and questions. While Street is more of a natural "gut-feeling" type reaction, which could lead to success or death depending on the context.

Example: Christopher McCandless.

One way to understand McCandless is through the lens of Street Intelligence, which refers to the practical knowledge and skills necessary for survival in challenging and unfamiliar environments. Street intelligence encompasses a wide range of abilities, including the ability to adapt to new situations, navigate complex social dynamics, and make quick decisions in the face of danger or uncertainty. McCandless also represents the double edged sword of Intelligence, much like with Socio-Analytical. Candles used both positive and negative aspects of Street intelligence, which, sadly would culminate in his death. Chris McCandless exhibited many of the skills during his journey into the wilderness. He was resourceful and self-sufficient, able to live off the land and find shelter and food in the harsh Alaskan wilderness, but showed how Street intelligence can fail, much like all forms.
1677835979701.png



Esoteric
Esoteric is intelligence based around cognitive dissonance based training. Cults, theology, political science. It is somewhat of a mix between Analytical and Street, but by it's very nature it exists only to be understood by one, or many people. Due to this, it indeed also creates elitism, but that elitism is often justified by said followers of the intelligence with mental gymnastics that end up making sense to an uninitiated individual.

Example: Marcus Wesson

Marcus Wesson was a somewhat unknown cult leader and murderer who displayed a high degree of esoteric intelligence. Esoteric intelligence refers to the ability to access and understand knowledge that is not readily available to the general public. This can include spiritual, metaphysical, and philosophical concepts, as well as hidden or obscure information,. Wesson's esoteric intelligence also allowed him to justify and commit heinous acts of violence. In 2004, Wesson was arrested and charged with the murder of nine of his children. He had fathered the children with several of his own daughters and had convinced them that it was their duty to carry out his wishes. Wesson's esoteric intelligence was a tool that he used to manipulate and control his followers. His belief system was so complex and obscure that it was difficult for outsiders to understand, saying Jesus was a vampire in a bible he wrote, and ultimately he was god. The case of Marcus Wesson is a stark reminder of the dangers of esoteric intelligence when it is used to manipulate and control others, possibly even being more dangerous than Socio-Analytical.

1677836215496.png
 
What a dumb OP. Ambitious though. The stanford prison experiment is one of the fakest experiments there ever was. The researcher wasn't an external observer but played as prison warden. The kids knew what was expected of them. One faked a breakdown so he would he released early and have time to study for his exam.

Stanford experiment and the milgram experiment both helped build a foundation for the believability of the holocaust in the time when that term was being popularized. Both these experiments were somewhat fraudulent and some of the holocaust history is too.

There is nothing about christopher mccandless that showed he had a unique type of intelligence. A kid from a broken home trying to get away from it all and not smart enough to bring a back up plan in case things went wrong.

You're also conflating knowledge with intelligence, as esoteric knowledge depends more on your position to access true information, whereas intelligence is the ability to understand, integrate and recall that information.

I don't know marcus wesson, but it's pretty common for faith healer types to confidently play their nonsense off as esoteric wisdom. It's particularly common in blacks as their higher extraversion can commonly fool people into thinking there is more to what they say than there really is. Couple that with a charles manson type sociopathic outlier and it can lead to some crazy shit.

I can appreciate the OP for looking at the stars in subject matter. But as for furthering the understanding in intelligence, it doesn't do a great job.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Makhnovshchina
A better one in my opinion:
* Smart and knows he's smart - Usually insufferable, especially when they are usually right.
* Smart and thinks he's dumb - The right side of the DK curve.
* Dumb and think he's smart - The average redditor.
* Dumb and knows he's dumb - Down to earth people who are fun to talk to.
 
The stanford prison experiment has long been known to be a complete fraud. Citing it should be punishable by spanking of the buttocks until raw.
The Stanford prison experiment (SPE) was a psychological experiment conducted in the summer of 1971. It was a two-week simulation of a prison environment that examined the effects of situational variables on participants' reactions and behaviors. Stanford University psychology professor Philip Zimbardo led the research team who administered the study.[1]

Stanford prison experiment
Plaque with the text: Site of the Standford Prison Experiment, 1971, conducted by Dr. Philip G. Zimbardo
Plaque at the location of the Stanford prison experiment
DateAugust 14–21, 1971
Locationsingle corridor in the basement of Stanford University's psychology building
Coordinates37.4286304°N 122.1729957°W
Also known asSPE
Typepsychology experiment
Organised byDr. Philip G. Zimbardo
Participants were recruited from the local community with an ad in the newspapers offering $15 per day to male students who wanted to participate in a "psychological study of prison life." Volunteers were chosen after assessments of psychological stability, and then randomly assigned to being prisoners or prison guards.[2] Critics have questioned the validity of these methods.[3]

Those volunteers selected to be "guards" were given uniforms specifically to de-individuate them, and instructed to prevent prisoners from escaping. The experiment officially started when "prisoners" were arrested by real Palo Alto police. Over the following five days, psychological abuse of the prisoners by the "guards" became increasingly brutal. After psychologist Christina Maslach visited to evaluate the conditions, she was upset to see how study participants were behaving and she confronted Zimbardo. He ended the experiment on the sixth day.[4]

SPE has been referenced and critiqued as one of the most unethical psychology experiments in history. The harm inflicted on the participants prompted universities worldwide to improve their ethics requirements for human subjects of experiments to prevent them from being similarly harmed. Other researchers have found it difficult to reproduce the study, especially given those constraints.[5] Critics have described the study as unscientific and fraudulent.[6][7]
 
  • Like
Reactions: Makhnovshchina
The Stanford prison experiment is the kind of experiments that are accepted because they roughly sound correct (since it's a repeated pattern that as old as human history) but as an experiment it fails on every regard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marsh Rabbit
Back