 |
 |
We seem to be running into difficulties about what intelligence is. For every two people there seem to be three opinions. To me intelligence has nothing to do with social perceptions, acquired knowledge, opinion or attitude. What it means to me is the ability to interpret and correlate disparate information, and with itextrapolate new and original thought and ideas. The ways people have tried to measure this ability has always suffered from the limitations of trying to quantify rationally something which by its nature is subjective. It gives room for all the garbage we see when people try to quantify the artistic value of a painting or define the taste of a wine. Have a good time, rgds John Mairian Corker wrote: > > >>Barbara wrote- > >>>Have you ever thought to examine your attitudes towards one another: i. e. > >>>attitudes of persons with physically disability toward persons who are > >>>cognitively impaired, which include some with barely any intelligence. > > Well, I think many of these attitudes are learned and uncontested, and the > work I'm doing with disabled young people in schools at the moment backs > this up. But I think the issue of being able to articulate ideas and > thoughts, rather than intelligence itself, is important for an oppressed > social movement. However, people who are intelligent in some areas can be > remarkably thick in others. > > Phil replied: > > >>Intelligence ain't a thing; it's socially constructed/created.This in the > >>same way that ability/disability is culturally created. > > I don't agree Phil. Attitudes towards intelligence and knowledge may be > socially created/constructed but intelligence itself can be innate in > exactly the same way as impairment can and knowledge can come from social > isolation (unless you count books as 'social'). It's important to hang on > to the fact that disability (in the social sense) and impairment can > themselves produce philosophers who are driven 'into their heads' by > society's barriers and attitudes. > > So when Susanne writes that: > > >Intelligence is measured by the amount of "right" answers you give to > >questions. These questions are not only biased to fit the "norm - being" > >they are also questions to which we already know the answers (or at least > >think we do). I cannot help but feel that this is just another way of > >upholding the present authority or to give credibility to the ruling power > >structure. > > Many so-called 'gifted' people have historically been objectified and > maligned because they've asked different questions which have different > answers and so they've shattered the safety of existing hierarchies. In > some cultures they've been killed or imprisoned for it. Equally there are > cognitively impaired people who do exactly the same thing (though sometimes > without realising it). I think the problem we have is sometimes that the > questions, and the answers, are both simplistic and totalising ones which > don't allow these different 'voices' to be heard. Leaders don't always seek > to 'play God' but they are very frequently pushed into the positions of > spokespeople by a combination of social pressure and very strong beliefs > and values. As those who ask difficult questions, they get the flack. I > don't feel at all comfortable with all this generalising. > > Best wishes > > Mairian > > ********* > > "To understand what I am doing, you need a third eye" > > ********* > > Mairian Corker > Senior Research Fellow in Deaf and Disability Studies > University of Central Lancashire > > Postal Address: > 111 Balfour Road > Highbury > London N5 2HE > U.K. > > Minicom/TTY +44 [0]171 359 8085 > Fax +44 [0]870 0553967 > Typetalk (voice) +44 [0]800 515152 (and ask for minicom/TTY number) -- [InternetShortcut] URL=http://proxy.networx.com.au/ %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%