Memorization is a lower level skill. Anyone can be trained to memorize.

So can you be trained to have a photographic memory?

Anonymous wrote:Memorization is a lower level skill. Anyone can be trained to memorize.

Anonymous



Memorization is a lower level skill. Anyone can be trained to memorize.

Anonymous wrote:

Actually, I suspect you would not know intelligence if it bit you in the ass. Solving problems is what being smart is. Taking apart a mechanical device to see how it works, and putting it back together in a manner where it works is a sign of problem solving skills, i.e., intelligence. Memorizing the order of the answers, C B A A B A, in a standardized test is not. Now, a real intelligence test is to give someone a standardized test where one does not know anything about the subject, but logically, only one set of answers worked. (I had a professor do that, in a logic class; I never learned anything but got an A -- I could take his tests; he figured if anyone could notice that, they deserved an A...)

Sorry, one is not even in the conversation of intelligence or smart without memory. Without this ability, simply follow the dotted line back to GO...if you can remember.

Actually, I suspect you would not know intelligence if it bit you in the ass. Solving problems is what being smart is. Taking apart a mechanical device to see how it works, and putting it back together in a manner where it works is a sign of problem solving skills, i.e., intelligence. Memorizing the order of the answers, C B A A B A, in a standardized test is not. Now, a real intelligence test is to give someone a standardized test where one does not know anything about the subject, but logically, only one set of answers worked. (I had a professor do that, in a logic class; I never learned anything but got an A -- I could take his tests; he figured if anyone could notice that, they deserved an A...)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The publishers have information to use so that kids will be familiar with the instructions and have an idea of what to expect.

Being taught how to do the questions and practicing how to do do them certainly helps a child with memory tasks. Kids can be trained to memorize methods and steps to solve puzzles and problems. Kids who can quickly solve problems they have never seen before are obviously intelligent.

Here's a good example. You give two kids each a Rubik's Cube and a book of instructions. One kid picks up the cube, examines it, and in a short time, solves it. The other one picks it up, plays with it, is not sure how it works and reads the instructions and solves the cube. They each have solved the puzzle, but one used his own intelligence, the other relied on the directions from someone who had done it before. Both kids are intelligent, but the one who can solve the problem without help is exhibiting a different type of intelligence than that needed to memorize steps from an outside aid(in this case, the instruction booklet).

What about the kid that takes it apart and reassembles it so it is solved?

That kid would be in the first category. I had a kid who took apart toasters and remote controls, fixed them and put them back together. No one taught him how to do it, he just figured it out on his own.

This argument of how intelligence should be determined is so cockamamy. toasters, remotes? Gives rest of us gifted parents a bad name. No wonder people are tired of hearing from us.

+1 Reminds me of when parents say their kids read Harry Potter in kindergarten. Nails on a chalkboard...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The publishers have information to use so that kids will be familiar with the instructions and have an idea of what to expect.

Being taught how to do the questions and practicing how to do do them certainly helps a child with memory tasks. Kids can be trained to memorize methods and steps to solve puzzles and problems. Kids who can quickly solve problems they have never seen before are obviously intelligent.

Here's a good example. You give two kids each a Rubik's Cube and a book of instructions. One kid picks up the cube, examines it, and in a short time, solves it. The other one picks it up, plays with it, is not sure how it works and reads the instructions and solves the cube. They each have solved the puzzle, but one used his own intelligence, the other relied on the directions from someone who had done it before. Both kids are intelligent, but the one who can solve the problem without help is exhibiting a different type of intelligence than that needed to memorize steps from an outside aid(in this case, the instruction booklet).

What about the kid that takes it apart and reassembles it so it is solved?

That kid would be in the first category. I had a kid who took apart toasters and remote controls, fixed them and put them back together. No one taught him how to do it, he just figured it out on his own.

This argument of how intelligence should be determined is so cockamamy. toasters, remotes? Gives rest of us gifted parents a bad name. No wonder people are tired of hearing from us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The publishers have information to use so that kids will be familiar with the instructions and have an idea of what to expect.

Being taught how to do the questions and practicing how to do do them certainly helps a child with memory tasks. Kids can be trained to memorize methods and steps to solve puzzles and problems. Kids who can quickly solve problems they have never seen before are obviously intelligent.

Here's a good example. You give two kids each a Rubik's Cube and a book of instructions. One kid picks up the cube, examines it, and in a short time, solves it. The other one picks it up, plays with it, is not sure how it works and reads the instructions and solves the cube. They each have solved the puzzle, but one used his own intelligence, the other relied on the directions from someone who had done it before. Both kids are intelligent, but the one who can solve the problem without help is exhibiting a different type of intelligence than that needed to memorize steps from an outside aid(in this case, the instruction booklet).

What about the kid that takes it apart and reassembles it so it is solved?

That kid would be in the first category. I had a kid who took apart toasters and remote controls, fixed them and put them back together. No one taught him how to do it, he just figured it out on his own.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, but not all people with good memory capacity are intelligent. Memory is a trainable, lower level skill. It is completely possible for someone to be great at memorizing but not be intelligent. A less intelligent person can be trained to memorize.

Intelligent people have good memories, but not every person with a good memory is intelligent.

To add to this, there is a big difference between being able to figure out the solution to a problem on your own without outside help and being taught how to solve a problem and memorizing the steps. The first takes intelligence, while most people can be trained to do the second. Lots of people can be trained to solve typical problems, but a smaller number have the ability to figure out a solution without being told how to do it.