No.

define intelligence.

In what context used? That if he's willing to knock me up, then he must consider me to be an equal on some level? So you think a man would just go and get a girl pregnant if he didn't love, respect, and consider her an equal???? What planet are you from, anyway??

Happens all the time.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh
Don't let him bully you, sacX! You're not gonna let him off that easy, are you? Tell him, "hell, yeah" that's how you want to define it and then question his own ability to define intelligence. Hold on- I'll bump a thread and help you. :)

I think it happens every day...of the week...you must live a sheltered life.

How much do you get to listen to before making your decision? A bunch of one word questionaire type answers or do you get to hear the reasons why they believe certain things?

If all you get is one word, probably not.

The hell you say! :ticking

You're right. I should try and get out more.

:girl

grin.. too much effort :).. I definitely don't want to define intelligence but it would be ridiculous to judge someones intelligence without taking their background (which obviously includes when they lived) into account.

http://www.minimumeffort.com/images/logo.gif

Like I said, beliefs aren't single points. Someone isn't just a "pro-capital punishment Muslim", those are only 2 belief points that do not represent the belief webs. As long as you don't know someone's arguments and thoughts about his web of beliefs, you can't really say anything. However, when the web is tested, it can become painfully clear.

For instance, a while ago I talked to some girl. She was a very fanatic christian and, just for the fun of it, I decided to launch a full-scale attack on her beliefs.
In the beginning, she held up pretty well. She knew all the common christian dogma's, had read the bible dozens of times, and was studying to become a minister. If she had managed to keep up the strong defense, and supply enough arguments in favor of her beliefs, she probably would have been intelligent.
However, after a while the discussion went a little deeper, and more and more often I found contradictions between her beliefs, points she had never even thought about (we were talking about the most important thing in her life, mind you), and points she just assumed without any further thinking. At many points in the discussion, I had to help her out with possible arguments, simply because she didn't have any herself.
In the end, she was forced to admit that with her own premises, her entire belief system was inconsistent, contradicted itself and led to bizarre conclusions. However, it didn't cross her mind to drop it or even alter it.

She was stupid. Not because she was a christian, but because she had taken her entire life to build up a belief system which could be refuted in a matter of hours by someone who hadn't spent nearly as much time contemplating the subject. Even worse, while she realized her belief system was inconsistent, she didn't see that as a reason for it to be wrong.

An intelligent christian would have given a far stronger defense, and would have been able to recognize and solve weak points in his belief system.

So, it's not the single points that indicate intelligence, but rather the entire web of beliefs. A conservative christian, a moderate muslim and a progressive atheist can all be intelligent, their intelligence is not indicated by the single points of their beliefs, but rather by their entire belief systems, and the arguments of which they are built up.

The original question only considered the beliefs themselves and not the arguments for them. So maybe you are saying you can't make such a decision from just the beliefs themselves. Or ...?

:1orglaugh agree :thumbsup

I can. I do it alot and am very good at it.

You go ahead and do this.:1orglaugh Where/How did you come up with this poor example. Or is this logic 2 you.:Graucho

There are no "beliefs by themselves". Beliefs by themselves are summaries for the lazy. However, every belief includes a large number of premises, arguments and reasons.

If you use beliefs by themselves, you are saying that essentially, the positions of a teen rebelling against his religious parents and Nietzsche are the same.

His original premise was not that deep and that is why I answered as I did.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Colin
Can you get an idea of someone's general intellectual ability from their political views or religious beliefs?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Yes...you can "get an idea" but it does not mean that your "idea" is accurate...because it would be a subjective "idea"...based upon your own biases.

It would also depend upon which definition of intellectual you are looking at...the "rational" definition or the "capacity" definition.

Regardless of whether there are or are not "beliefs by themselves", what is meant by the original question is that you only have the ability to obtain the beliefs by themselves and have to make an evaluation with that information alone.

Do you believe your evaluation is subjective or that there is something deeper to it than that?

That most intelligent people will have a mastery of third grade grammar?

Your right. Their's probably no more truth to that, then any of the other crazy shit I post. There probably just typing to fast. For the record- I really didn't won't to post that last part. Me and Colin was talking and he thought it would be funny. :winkwink:

100!!!

No offense, but in that case the question is rather silly. If you don't use a context ("christians are stupid"), that means it should be valid in any context (e.g. in world X where christianity has just been proven correct, "christians are stupid" would still have to hold up). Thus, this would lead to absurd conclusions.

Now, reasons and arguments are just as contextually important as the physical world, so if you neglect those you will also come to absurd conclusions.

So, if your original question didn't take context into account, it's pretty much a non-question.

Have you taken up smoking hash? You don't seem like yourself today.

Above are 101 GFY reasons why it is not a a "non-question". Why are you belittling everyone like that? It is a question. It has one of those curvy little symbols at the end. See? -> ?

Sometimes questions are asked to prompt further responses and Q and A. Do I really have to explain this all to you? ;-)

There are some really interesting responses in this thead. Like LudeDude's question; "What do you say about someone who's obviously well educated who believes in creationism? "

I've always found it strange when Doctors, or scientists I know are Xtian. I don't know that many of them would go as far as believing in creationism though.

I went to a catholic high school and I don't think many/any of the priests there actually believed in creationism.

my opinion of someone who had a good education and believed in creationism would be that they are weird, and probably simple.

All the 101 GFY reasons why it is a question do take context into account. For instance, LudeDude's question is heavily connected with contemporary scientific theories.

You asked a question which, in my opinion, used a wrong premise. I responded using a broader definition of "beliefs" because I thought that was the only way to come to a better understanding of the matter at hand. Now, by saying "the original question is limited to..." you were effectively cutting off further Q&A.

That's like asking the question "How did God create the world?" and blocking out any theories that say God maybe didn't create the world at all. By sticking to your first premises no matter what you may well make it impossible to ever find a satisfying answer.

Personally, I don't see how disagreeing with the premise from the original question is belittling anyone.