A priori it seems that intelligence is something easy to define because everyone finds a definition, but it is really difficult to find an adequate and adjusted one and, above all, one that takes into account all the variables. For example, the definition of the RAE says that it is the ability to understand or comprehend, to solve problems; that is to say, he is talking about abilities and skills, but he is not saying that in order to develop those abilities, experience is needed. So that you can compare if when you do something you do it well, you need to start from an experience, a memory and a learning. And that definition of the RAE does not take into account these factors.
If we think of the whole range of living beings, how do you ask the question, we consider that a living being is intelligent, first, if it is capable of using tools to modify its environment. That looks great on chimpanzees using sticks to stick into anthills so they can eat the termites, although not only chimpanzees use tools. Second, if he uses language to communicate with other beings of his own species, such as humans; but it has been seen that this ability to communicate also occurs in dolphins and other animal species. In addition, it would be necessary to have self-awareness. Why? Because one has to ask oneself if what he is going to do is useful for what he wants to achieve. That is, one has to be able to reflect and search through their experience.
The fundamental problem when defining intelligence is that we are considering it as an entity, something with its own entity. People who don’t work in neuroscience usually ask you: And where in the brain is intelligence? And that question comes from the fact that intelligence is considered as something tangible. But that is not the case: intelligence is not something with the characteristics of an entity and, of course, it is not located in a specific place in the brain. In fact, intelligence is very difficult to quantify even using so-called intelligence tests. These tests only quantify a certain part of intelligence.
Now we have the theory of multiple intelligences, which I am in favor of because, for example, a person can be a total failure in social matters but can be an excellent musician. And thanks also to pathologies such as autism we ask ourselves more questions about intelligence every day. Many people on the autism spectrum do not consider themselves to be intellectually capable or have a high IQ, but there are many who are extremely good at calculus, geometry, or other math skills, and art as well. They have certain facets in which they excel in terms of their abilities. But intelligence is considered as a set of everything. I believe that intelligence should be defined from another question: what is it for?
The fundamental problem when defining intelligence is that we are considering it as an entity, something with its own entity
The purpose of every living being is survival and not individual survival but that of the species. So what is it that allows you to survive? That you are able to adapt to a changing environment. And how can you adapt to a changing environment? Certainly not from the physical point of view, because physical changes take many millions of years to take place, so it has to be a change of intellectual power, of mental power. And there intelligence is a little more defined, which would be what allows you to move in a changing environment and generate skills and attitudes that make it possible to survive in that environment.
Multiple intelligences are those aptitudes that one has for certain abilities: if you are very good in mathematics, or if you are very good at memorizing, planning or socializing, etc. That would be the different aptitudes that one presents. And then there would be general intelligence, which is how each person uses these skills to adapt to multiple circumstances.
Rocio Leal Campanile She is a doctor in neuroscience, professor and researcher at Pablo de Olavide University.
Question sent via email by Jose Maria de Azcarate Bang
we answer is a weekly scientific consultation, sponsored by the Dr. Antoni Esteve Foundation, which answers readers’ questions about science and technology. They are scientists and technologists, members of AMIT (Association of Women Researchers and Technologists), who answer these questions. Send your questions to us at [email protected] or via Twitter #nosotrasrespondemos.
Coordination and drafting: victory bull