Does conversation measure intelligence?

Question

Can someone that cannot communicate be said to be intelligent,or does intelligence lie in the receiving of the information,i have recently read something about this and wondered what your thoughts were.

Answer 1

Being able to communicate is not a good indication of intellect. As learning to communicate with other people (or animals) depends on how much time you spend in company of others when as a child. Early on we learn all aspects of communication, both verbal and non verbal, by being put into social situations. (Stephen Mithen: The Singing Neanderthals)

Intellect as I see is the ability to learn different skills. One of the skills learned might be conversation, another the ability to play music. As far as I know there is no intelligence test that can measure the whole variety of different type of intellect. Savants quite often score low on intelligence tests and are not able to hold a conversation, but their skill in other things (ie. music, mathematics etc.) shows that they do not lack intelligence, it is just balanced differently.

Answer 2

Well, firstly it depends on what you are talking about because some people have seriously pointless conversations! Also, i think that a lot of people who are unable to communicate verbally can communicate very well with computers or writing down their thoughts can be very intelligent. If you think some of these people may listen more to what they are being told or what they are being shown as they are not always chatting away and may therefore gain more intelligence than some who can communicate well.

That's what I think anyway but it depends on what you really mean by they cannot communicate. Does this mean they can't speak and write or just speak in a conversation?

Answer 3

What you are overlooking is that verbal conversation is not the only means of communication. There are MANY ways to communicate, and any historian or traveller in foreign lands can tell you.

Consider art. Art 'speaks' to us. Almost like having the artist right there, even though he may have died a thousand years ago. It is obviously quite impossible to hold a conversation with Van Gogh right now, but if we look at enough of his work, we may understand quite a bit about him... even how intelligent he may have been.

I think this might be said of any work. Some people spent their lives building aqueducts. And some still do. If you look closely enough at such things, you can learn things even about the specific individual who carried them out. What pride he took in his work, his physical characteristics. And yes, probably something about his intelligence as well.

So not communicating in any way, shape, or form, really means not DOING ANYTHING. And though I would tend to think that a completely inactive entity might still have intelligence, I would say that any intelligence it has was completely irrelevant anyway.

So it goes.

Answer 4

Does conversation measure intelligence?
Yes

Can someone that cannot communicate be said to be
intelligent?
Yes, in fact in my opinion, if an individual who can
communicate and individual who can't communicate
both perform a task and their solutions are measured to be
equally as efficient then I would state that the individual
who can't communicate is probably more intelligent
than the individual who can communicate. The reason
why is because the individual who can't communicate
faces a restriction in opportunities to learn solutions.
Therefore, the individual's overcoming of such obstacles
should be taken into account in measuring their intelligence.

Answer 5

intelligence, in psychology, the general mental ability involved in calculating, reasoning, perceiving relationships and analogies, learning quickly, storing and retrieving information, using language fluently, classifying, generalizing, and adjusting to new situations. Alfred Binet, the French psychologist, defined intelligence as the totality of mental processes involved in adapting to the environment. Although there remains a strong tendency to view intelligence as a purely intellectual or cognitive function, considerable evidence suggests that intelligence has many facets.
Early investigations into intelligence assumed that there was one underlying general factor at its base (the g-factor), but later psychologists maintained that intelligence could not be determined by such a simplistic method. Raymond Cattell argued that intelligence can be separated into two fundamental parts: fluid ability and crystallized ability. Fluid ability is considered innate, basic reasoning skill, while crystallized intelligence is the information and skills that are acquired through experience in a cultural environment. Other psychologists have further divided intelligence into subcategories. Howard Gardner maintained (1985) that intelligence is comprised of seven components: musical, bodily-kinesthetic, logical-mathematical, linguistic, spatial, interpersonal, and intrapersonal. J. P. Guilford tried (1982) to show that there are 150 different mental abilities that constitute intelligence.

It is generally accepted that intelligence is related to both heredity and environment. Studies done on families, particularly among identical twins and adopted children, have shown that heredity is an important factor in determining intelligence; but they have also suggested that environment is a critical factor in determining the extent of its expression. For instance, children reared in orphanages or other environments that are comparatively unstimulating tend to show retarded intellectual development. In recent years, controversy regarding intelligence has centered primarily around how much of each factor, heredity and environment, is responsible for an individual's level of intelligence.

Answer 6

Intelligence is a capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings. Someone who cannot / will not communicate may just choose not to but isn't necessarily not intelligent.

Answer 7

I think that question is way to deep to be posted here. If one cannot communicate then how can their intelligence be measured. . . . .or am I just not getting it?

Answer 8

conversation is A way but not the best way!
eg: someone who talks in conversations using a lot of He, she, i, they, her, ect are very simple minded humans...
one who talks about more of stories like things and actions and avoids the he, she, them they, I, .... one who asks follow up questions ...
most are more empathic and think more about things and actions...
one who talks that "deep talk" like really comes up with threorys and idea's and inventions and goes into details with all of this with another likeminded human they woud be considered more intelligent

over all this is just a guide line i know some people who can't get out of the selfish i phase but they are highly intelligent people and i know humans who try to be deep thoughted but they do so many drugs that's all they can do is think up crazy things! but they couldn't tell you what happend 20 minutes ago

so it's a cheap way of doing so but yes it can measure intelligence as well as having a vocabulary

Answer 9

I think we are all born with innate intelligence..........I think it a combination of both........we take in the information and give it out...........

For someone not able to communicate in the talking terms there are other ways that they can communicate...through physical hand gesters or writing....................

True intelligence can not be learned from a book it comes from within.................

Answer 10

i judge peoples intelligence based on conversation all the time. if i were to meet someone incapable of communication i'm sure i could find out another way to test their brain. if they can't communicate, just look at their problem solving skills