Unlearning intelligence as worth

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again.

I agree about it being counterproductive to label kids, and not ideal to compare siblings. But it is just true that some people are more artistic, musical, athletic, than others, and we don't generally consider that a value judgment, but we do consider it a value judgment to say that someone is less intelligent than someone else.

I would never tell my kids that one of them is more athletic than the other, even if it's true; I don't even say that one of them is a more visual thinker and the other is more abstract, because I don't want them to develop an "oh that's not who I am" attitude about things they haven't been exposed to yet. But...come on, there are people out there who are not intelligent, and in a perfect world saying that would be like saying "there are people who have no ear for music."

I disagree, the number one reason grade school boys are bullied, by other kids AND adults, is due to athleticism. In fact, segments of our society value athletics over intelligence and would consider the label unathletic a greater put down than not smart.

The athletic are far more capable of beating someone up for trying to bully them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Have you ever met someone who doesn’t think they’re smart? I never have.

My mother. My brother and I were academically advanced at a young age which was very different from her experience. She thinks she is not smart enough to understand what we do in our careers, which is ridiculous because she absolutely is. But that is her self-image and it is difficult for me as her daughter to convince her otherwise.

We emphasize curiosity, critical thinking, and self-improvement with our kids as well as effort over outcome. We do this for academics, arts, athletics and any of their other interests.

[Anonymous]

Ironically, the only way to accomplish this, is through the “elitization” of intelligence and it’s privileges.

People are ok with not being athletic or artistic because it’s “normal”, but in a world where we pretend that everyone is smart, nobody wants to be left out.

[Anonymous]

I think of intelligence as the capacity of a being to navigate a complex environment with awareness and skill of all the interdependent parts. So an animal could be intelligent. In that sense I don’t think it would be helpful to not value intelligence in individuals or in ourselves as a species, because it’s what helps us find our place in the world.

Re: being book smart, that’s definitely not the be all and end all. But intelligence in general is needed no matter what your path in life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think of intelligence as the capacity of a being to navigate a complex environment with awareness and skill of all the interdependent parts. So an animal could be intelligent. In that sense I don’t think it would be helpful to not value intelligence in individuals or in ourselves as a species, because it’s what helps us find our place in the world.

Re: being book smart, that’s definitely not the be all and end all. But intelligence in general is needed no matter what your path in life.

The problem is that children are contained in an environment where book smart/school smart is prioritized and other qualities or types of intelligence are deemphasized or overlooked. There are many highly intelligent people who for various reasons do not thrive in an educational setting, especially in the primary years.

[Anonymous]

I think it already is a thing, just phrased differently than how you put it. It is praising effort, not outcome. "I am proud of you for practicing/working so hard/studying so much/etc." Not "I am proud of you for being a star/getting all As/ making the varsity team/etc." In our house, we emphasize "doing your best" and that outcomes will be all over the place, for all kids. But if you did your best- both you and I can be proud of that.

And even then, we always account for days where our best looks different from other days- and that is OK too. Outside factors can impact our effort. And we shouldn't pretend otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have you ever met someone who doesn’t think they’re smart? I never have.

My mother. My brother and I were academically advanced at a young age which was very different from her experience. She thinks she is not smart enough to understand what we do in our careers, which is ridiculous because she absolutely is. But that is her self-image and it is difficult for me as her daughter to convince her otherwise.

We emphasize curiosity, critical thinking, and self-improvement with our kids as well as effort over outcome. We do this for academics, arts, athletics and any of their other interests.

A relative says she thought she was dumb, and her parents felt so, too. Hence she went to a vocational school, instead of college. My relative says it wasn't until she started dating her future husband, a student at a reasonably selective university, that she realized that she'd thought she was dumb because she -- and her parents-- thought of her older brother as the normal one, whereas he was actually a highly gifted intellectual powerhouse.

OTOH, I have a friend who is not very bright, but bright enough to realize his limitations. Nice guy, just not the sharpest tool in the shed. IQ somewhere around 90, at a guess, so not that much below average. Probably some sort of learning disability of the "FLK" variety. He does tend to hang out with a brighter crowd that shares a particular niche interest, so he probably found the contrast more glaring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think you should label kids that like that anyway. What's the point of telling a child they aren't athletic or aren't musical?

Also, there are lots of different types of intelligence. I think it's okay to say your child "Isn't really into math right now" or something, but just blanket saying "They're not intelligent" probably isn't correct.

Everyone has skills that come naturally and others that require more work. One of my sons is a natural athletes who is able to become proficient in whatever sport he tries rather quickly. It's not that he's faster, or stronger, because he's not, but for whatever reason, he can manage the basics of any sport he tries. However, his mental attitude isn't the best, so his natural athleticism only takes him so far before he is surpassed by less athletic kids who are hard workers.

Personally, I don't think there is anything wrong with recognizing individual strengths and weaknesses, although these should not be stressed at a young age. My other not naturally athletic son who is really slow has become a competent soccer player by figuring out how to use his understanding of the game, which includes recognizing his lack of speed, and his technical skill to be effective on the field. Obviously he's not going to play at a high level, but that won't stop him from playing despite not being a natural athlete.

Hard work, passion, commitment can overcome lack of natural ability in many cases. Lack of significant interest and lack of natural talent should not stop anyone from doing something they love, but sometimes as parents, it's better to manage expectations to steer your kids into the right environment where they will succeed and be happy.

Agree with this totally.

And agree with some of the previous PPs that it's not just with intelligence. Many people place their highest value on athleticism.

[Anonymous]

There are different kinds of smart.
There are different kinds of athletic.
There are different kinds of artistic.

The problem with issuing a proclamation about what a kid is it isn’t is that kids aren’t done yet, and also we (their parents, but adults in general) don’t know as much as we think we do.

The PPs mentioning ADHD or learning disorders (like dyslexia) are spot on. Those kids, even now, get labeled as “not smart”. Even if no one ever says that out loud, and even if the adults revognize the issue and pursue treatment, society will make that kid feel not smart because they may need something other than the boilerplate education in order to succeed.

The real underlying value judgement in all of these is “that kid does not conform to my expectations of smart/athletic/artistic.” I got labeled unathletic as a child because I was small and I didn’t like soccer (too much running). As an adult, I’m an avid hiker who teaches fitness classes as a side job.

I’m not saying that everyone is smart or athletic or artistic, but most adults are crap at evaluating those things. And a keen interest in school, sports, or the arts will go further towards success in any of those endeavors than the kind of natural talent that people like to point out in a little kid. Heck, I would bet cash money that a lot of kids who become interested in these things do so in large part because they’ve been told they have a natural affinity for it.

And that’s why you should tell kids they aren’t smart, or athletic, or artistic. Because you don’t know! Let the kid figure it out. That’s what life is for.

[Anonymous]

^ why you shouldn’t

[Anonymous]

Personally, I value hard work more than smarts. You can be smart and lazy. I'd take dumb and motivated any day.

Also, I never tell my kids they're smart. I tell them they've worked hard, or tried their best, or whatever. But not that they're smart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think of intelligence as the capacity of a being to navigate a complex environment with awareness and skill of all the interdependent parts. So an animal could be intelligent. In that sense I don’t think it would be helpful to not value intelligence in individuals or in ourselves as a species, because it’s what helps us find our place in the world.

Re: being book smart, that’s definitely not the be all and end all. But intelligence in general is needed no matter what your path in life.

The problem is that children are contained in an environment where book smart/school smart is prioritized and other qualities or types of intelligence are deemphasized or overlooked. There are many highly intelligent people who for various reasons do not thrive in an educational setting, especially in the primary years.

Agree — and that is a reason to reform education practices so that we develop various kinds of intelligence more deeply. Not to throw out the idea of intelligence altogether.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I recently read something that struck me at the time and stayed with me, and I'm curious for others' take on it. Essentially, it was pointing out that while we consider it totally acceptable and nonjudgmental to say "oh Larla isn't terribly athletic" or "Larlo isn't a very musical kid," it comes off as incredibly unkind to say that a child -- yours or someone else's -- isn't very smart. And yet of course there are a lot of people in the world who aren't very smart, and they're not less valuable as human beings than smart people.

Do you think it's a good goal, as parents or just as fellow people, to unlearn our notion that intelligence somehow equates to worth? How would you approach it?

Do you have a link to what you read?

It’s a review of The Cult of Smart. https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/book-review-the-cult-of-smart

Really surprised to see SSC/dcurbanmom overlap. Cool...

I’m surprised to see you.

I'm at [e-mail] if you want to like, fight or kiss or whatever.

I emailed you.