Is a wet sponge the equivalent of water?

[Mirc]

Well, I went together with the other 92% of the voters.

 

[Grisu]

They're just kidding themselves... I don't have anything further to say...

(Also, education => intelligence. I don't know what "equate" means in this context, but that's what I took it to mean.)

I'd say in this context equate would mean not only that but also the reverse: intelligence => education, and that's most definately not true.

 

[Mise]

Hmm.

Given that, depending on which way you view the question, the answer is plainly obvious (and in opposition to one-another), I guess the poll is REALLY asking, "What is your interpretation of the following question: Does education equate with intelligence?"

1. Education => intelligence
2. Education <=> intelligence

Actually, thinking about it, it isn't the word "equate" that I had issues with, it was the word "with". Had it been "equate to" rather than "equate with" I'd have gone for option 2

 

[Catharsis]

The general concensus seems to be that education does not equate to intelligence; indeed, some seem to think it detrimental to intelligence. However, most posters seem to think that logical thinking equates to intelligence. That is not surprising, as most CFC OTers are logical-types - one would expect them to muck about with the definition in order for it to suit them - but I'm still unsure. Under this definition, while a logician or a mathematician (note: only pure, not applied, that's easy ) would be classed as intelligent, a doctor, or my previous example, an art critic, would not be. Of course, reason and logical thought are one aspect of intelligence, but in my opinion, they are not the only aspect.

(And just to clarify: I am quite well-educated, yet I am as intelligent as pondweed, so I think that closes the book on Option 1. )

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Well, at least now we know that educated people say 'equate to', and not 'equate with'. My work here is done. [/shuts briefcase]

 

[Mise]

However, most posters seem to think that logical thinking equates to intelligence. [...] Under this definition, while a logician or a mathematician (note: only pure, not applied, that's easy ) would be classed as intelligent, a doctor, or my previous example, an art critic, would not be. Of course, reason and logical thought are one aspect of intelligence, but in my opinion, they are not the only aspect.

You think Doctors don't use logic and reason in diagnosing patients...?

 

[Catharsis]

Alright, but that's not the only aspect of his job. Ergo (under warpus's definition of intelligence) he is not intelligent.

And no-one's said anything about the art critic yet.

 

[Mise]

Alright, but that's not the only aspect of his job. Ergo (under warpus's definition of intelligence) he is not intelligent.

I must have missed warpus's definition, is it this?:

To be intelligent means something else entirely; it means that you're able to reason very well, even if you don't have a lot of facts at hand (or memorized).

I think that fits a Doctor better than anyone else in the world actually!

And no-one's said anything about the art critic yet.

My personal opinion is that there is a level of analytical thought present in art. However, I'm not arguing for or against the intelligence of artists/critics.

 

[Catharsis]

Yes, that's warpus's definition.

Like I said before, it's not the only aspect of his job. He does need to know what Flaming Bowel disease looks like before he can diagnose it. He would obtain that knowledge at an educational facility. (And yes, I did just make up a disease for humour value. What? )

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Theres nothing at all humorous about Flaming Bowel Syndrome, young man. There are over 28 million FBS sufferers in the country today, from all walks of life. Together, we can stamp out FBS, once and for all. Shouldnt we call the Flaming Bowel Association of America, now?

 

[Mise]

Yes, that's warpus's definition.

Like I said before, it's not the only aspect of his job. He does need to know what Flaming Bowel disease looks like before he can diagnose it. He would obtain that knowledge at an educational facility. (And yes, I did just make up a disease for humour value. What? )

Just because he also needs to know something not covered in the definition to perform his job doesn't mean that he doesn't fit that particular definition by performing his job.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you. The definition presented by warpus may or may not be sufficient, and it may or may not be necessary. But nevertheless, a Doctor fits that definition, so by that definition is intelligent.