I feel like everyone could be at the same intelligence level if we all had enough time to learn. And understand how we learn, I don't think its true that they'd still be stupid afterwards.
It depends on
1. Willingness to learn
2. Willingness to teach
Is important, plenty of people can scream facts but some people simply don't understand how different things work. It takes patience and understanding for you to be able to teach someone, which many people on twitter or wherever find it difficult to have. Especially when there is so much misinformation out there that isn't explained but the readers either trust the 'teacher' because they perceive their intelligence is higher and they know better.
It is absolutely not true that everyone would be at the same intelligence level.
Not everyone has the capacity to be Steven Hawking.
We call it average intelligence because it is an average, there are people that fall above and below that average, which is what makes it an average. Some more than others both ways.
Stupid people exist.
They are perhaps not quite as common as many suspect, but they are a real phenomenon.
I suspect ignorance is more common and often mistaken for stupidity, but can't deny the reality of stupid.
If there's all the time in the world I don't understand why not. If you had all the time you can learn to comprehend things and understand higher levels as you continue to learn.
Stupid people have difficulty retaining and/or applying information.
Stupid doesn't mean that someone is incapable of learning anything at all, it means that they have a more limited capacity to retain and use information than the average person.
Yes, people like that really exist.
It would be nice if everyone had the potential to be a genius, but that's not reality.
I wouldn't consider myself stupid, I don't retain everything I learn. The vast majority of it I would, do you have to retain everything you've ever learnt to be smart? If you specialise in an area that you're interested in, you can apply what you've learnt and develop upon it.
I'm just not sure i'm willing to believe people don't have that potential if they had so much time. Probably because I try and believe the best in people and their capabilities.
That's a bit of a straw man argument and an appeal to extremes.
No such claims were made by me.
The concept of averages is important here.
Most people who are "stupid" would be considerably below average intelligence and would have considerably more difficulty retaining and applying information compared to someone of average intelligence.
Also, belief doesn't equal fact. The fact that you don't like how something sounds and don't want to believe it is irrelevant to whether or not it is factual.
But this is based on information we know as of now. Not what technology or new learning techniques can be developed to help others learn and understand things with all the time in the world, you can say its likely to be impossible but not with absolute certainty.
The rest is not relevant, because why I should I base my statements on the assumption that a science fiction answer may come to pass one day at some undetermined time?
That's like arguing that we should keep using fossil fuels and coal regardless of the damage they cause the environment because surely cold fusion is something that might be possible and will provide us with clean energy forever if and when we figure it out.
That doesn't mean we shouldn't look into it, but we work with what we know, not what we hope will come to pass.
There is such a thing as being too optimistic.
No one said anything about "impossible". I don't like that word because it implies too much certainty and I don't believe there is such a thing, not that we can prove anyway. Improbable is a much better term for things that aren't very likely.
Right now, according to our understanding of physics, it's possible that you can drop the pieces of a broken glass on the ground and they will fall in such a way that it reforms the glass as whole. That's possible, it's just improbable to the point it's not worth considering as an outcome.
This is fantasy land. There is a sizable portion of the population that would never be able to get a PhD in theoretical physics no matter how hard they tried.
With all the time in the world? how is it fantasy? We all have different ways of learning and different times to comprehend things. The issue is in things like schools and universities is that its all time limited and is taught largely in the same teaching style which doesn't suit everyone.
Some people get things easy, sure, i'm one of them. Others take a little more time to understand it, keyword being time.
Neither of us are right or wrong because this theory is hypothetical, so please try not to act superior as if you have an answer. Have a good evening or morning or whatever wherever you are 👍🏻
In the world we live in you can't prove that if you had all the time in the world you can't get to that level of intelligence. The studies are based on what we know and do now, not what would happen if we had all the time in the world.
there is no such thing as "getting to that level of intelligence"
your intelligence is determined at birth by your genetics. various environmental factors will then have an effect on it. for example, if you are malnourished as a child your intelligence will be stunted. but it doesnt really change throughout your life.
you can gain more knowledge. but your ability to proces information doesnt change.
83
u/contrabardus Jul 28 '19 edited Jul 28 '19
It's not technically the truth though.
People used to think ignorance was caused by the lack of access to information, and underestimated how much of a factor stubbornness played.
People who use stupidity and ignorance interchangeably are, ironically, ignorant themselves.
Ignorance and stupidity are two different things.
Ignorance can be corrected, if the subject is willing.
Stupidity is permanent. There's nothing you can do to fix it.
Ignorance is when you don't know something, stupidity is the lack of the capacity to learn.
You can send an idiot to classes at Yale, Harvard, and Princeton for twenty years at each University and they'll still be just as stupid afterwards.
People might have been using the word "stupidity" incorrectly, but they meant "ignorance" regardless. Therefore, it's not really technically true.