The magic Number (g)

While reading the assigned papers I was reminded of my first attempt to define intelligence. I was taking an independent study course in artificial intelligence, and I had decided to find out what intelligence was before I attempted to create it myself. The definitions I found were very vague. It seemed everyone had their own idea of intelligence. Needless to say, I did not find a concrete definition.

Perhaps my inability to find a definition was the reason that E.G.Boring’s proposal to define intelligence stood out. While I don’t agree with defining intelligence by the measures used in standard IQ tests I do feel that a more fleshed out definition would help focus our efforts to create intelligence. The proposed notion that intelligence is both “the ability to adapt to one’s environment” and “the ability to learn from one’s experience” is one that I generally agree with. However, as revisionists have noted this definition does not address certain factors (such as speed) that we associate with intelligence. Furthermore, there are many ways in which people can adapt or learn. Who is to say that one of those is better than any other?

Sure, defining intelligence, and using that definition to create assessments, would have some advantages. With this information we could identify students who may need help and provide them opportunities that may otherwise not be available to them (remedial classes etc). Unfortunately, anything that can be measured seems to bring with it elitism. If a standard definition for intelligence were to be established today I’m not sure our society would be altruistic. From a employer’s perspective it may seem easier to fire an employee who has a low intelligence score and higher another more “intelligent” employee. From a school administrator’s point of view it may be very tempting to add an intelligence requirement to the admission process. I believe that for many this magic number would be terribly influential. The test would not only measure whatever we defined intelligence to be, but could also determine one’s fate.

Perhaps a single number that embodies intelligence wouldn’t bring about such a dystopia. Still something doesn’t sit well when boiling a person’s cognitive ability down to a single number. For that reason I see myself gravitating towards Gardner’s idea of multiple intelligences. Einstein and Van Gohg are generally seen as geniuses in their own domains. Is there a magic “g” that would have declared them destined for greatness? To me it seems more likely that each had different set of skills that while different were equally impressive.