I have found members here to be...

[Procrustes Stretched]

I have found members here to be a mixed bag. Some are obviously well trained in fields they've worked in. Learned.
Experienced on different levels.

Some use the lingo and technical jargon that has them stand out. But is education proof of intelligence, intellectual capacity..?

Does experience in a field transfer into knowledge of and the ability to grasp things outside their fields of experience/education/work?

apologies: Writing on the fly here as I'm actually writing something on this to share elsewhere with others.

 

[jotathought]

I have found members here to be a mixed bag. Some are obviously well trained in fields they've worked in. Learned.
Experienced on different levels.

Some use the lingo and technical jargon that has them stand out. But is education proof of intelligence, intellectual capacity..?

Does experience in a field transfer into knowledge of and the ability to grasp things outside their fields of experience/education/work?

apologies: Writing on the fly here as I'm actually writing something on this to share elsewhere with others.

No .. education is not proof of intelligence and intellectual capacity, as has been demonstrated by many, including college instructors/professors, politicians, and others. Clearly evident that a piece of paper doesn't make you smarter, nor does a lack of education make you less intelligent.

 

[shockedcanadian]

I have found members here to be a mixed bag. Some are obviously well trained in fields they've worked in. Learned.
Experienced on different levels.

Some use the lingo and technical jargon that has them stand out. But is education proof of intelligence, intellectual capacity..?

Does experience in a field transfer into knowledge of and the ability to grasp things outside their fields of experience/education/work?

apologies: Writing on the fly here as I'm actually writing something on this to share elsewhere with others.

Intelligence as an arbitrary, even subjective term for me boils down to one key concept: curiousity.

If people are curious they will ask questions regardless of the field. The internet in this respect has been both a blessing and a curse. I find it far more of an asset than a liability. This doesn't narrow down ones expertise to one subject.

Intelligent people are flexible, not rigid. Some questions they suspect they can never hope to answer, maybe the question is even unanswerable by mere mortals, but they ask anyways. The questions you ask, the more you try to seek answers, the better rounded you will be. Hence "intelligence".

With intelligence you can also see the future in a sense. Ever play poker and you feel you can put your opponent on exactly one hand? It's a powerful quality when money is on the line. You can apply this deductive reasoning to any field of interest of social problem.

I've miscalculated many times in life, not due to a lack of intelligence I don't think, but a lack of appreciation for how diabolical and dishonourable some people are. It's why I've said "you can't negotiate with the unreasonable be they a terrorist or a ideologue". If people are reasonable, logical and live life with character, you can reason with them. They aren't focused on hurting others but simply finding their own peace. When your adversary wants that, you should grant it.

So, remain flexible to arguments and different answers unless it's a question of a hard science. You can have someone who has a Phd in math and can run circles around you in that field, but they don't know how to change a tire on a car, they don't understand civics and how decisions have a dominoe effect if certain civil duties are abandoned etc. They can't see beyond one ideology that may have been forced upon them as a kid even, "my parents always voted ______ so I will too" as an example.

I'd much rather sit with someone who can look at every angle of a problem than someone arrogantly, absolutely certain of the answer. When you do reach certainty on an issue, it has to be after vast assessment of the issue, or vast personal experience. You still may be wrong, but you can at least support your argument one way or the other.

So, of course technical experience in one field is valid information but only in the limits of that field.

 

[leftwinger]

I have found members here to be a mixed bag. Some are obviously well trained in fields they've worked in. Learned.
Experienced on different levels.

Some use the lingo and technical jargon that has them stand out. But is education proof of intelligence, intellectual capacity..?

Does experience in a field transfer into knowledge of and the ability to grasp things outside their fields of experience/education/work?

apologies: Writing on the fly here as I'm actually writing something on this to share elsewhere with others.

and then the board has the likes of you to endure.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I have found members here to be a mixed bag. Some are obviously well trained in fields they've worked in. Learned.
Experienced on different levels.

Some use the lingo and technical jargon that has them stand out. But is education proof of intelligence, intellectual capacity..?

Does experience in a field transfer into knowledge of and the ability to grasp things outside their fields of experience/education/work?

apologies: Writing on the fly here as I'm actually writing something on this to share elsewhere with others.

“Information is not knowledge.
Knowledge is not wisdom.
Wisdom is not truth.
Truth is not beauty.
Beauty is not love.
Love is not music.
Music is THE BEST.” -- Frank Zappa

 

[Woodznutz]

The best evidence of intelligence is how a person manages their own life i.e. "all the right moves".

 

[whitehall]

Actually it's mostly left wingers that cruise the left wing blogs to find something that they can post and run without having to explain it.