It’s Relative
Genetics & Intelligence debate
My philosophy professor once asked me, “What is wrong with the nature vs nurture debate when it comes to understanding genetics and intelligence scores.”
Of course I knew what I wanted to say.
Colloquially, we tend to focus on intelligence and try to better understand it as if there is one definitive answer. Yet, there is no invariably correct answer on explicitly what it is. It’s often represented by a number, or a score. Sometimes it’s in the form of a clever comment or compliment. There are brilliant ideas involving convoluted concepts, and still there is genius in simplicity. The definitions of intelligence are ever changing in varying circumstances to every individual.
And yet, there is so much more depth to this question.
Intelligence is relative. It is not confined to this or that. It may or may not be contagious. It is learned. It can be second nature, automatic. It may never show itself. Or it may surprise you when you least expect it. Intelligence can be found. In every life form other than humans. It’s searchable. It can be toxic. It can be worked for, earned, and it can be taken away just as quickly. Historically, intelligence was often judged, ridiculed, and dismissed as “different,” “crazy,” or “misinformed.” Intelligence can be active in times of mania, or depression, caused by genetics. It can be also be caused by perfectionism, or enhanced by drugs. It’s hard to tell, unless we understand how and why it’s always relative to some other thing. You can chose to use it, or chose not to. Intelligence doesn’t need validation. It simply exists whether you have the proof or not. It is not always inherited. Nor is it a guarantee that if you are intelligent your offspring will be. It all depends of course.
And ironically, I did not tell my professor all of these things. I second guessed my own intelligence…wondering if my thought sounded intelligent. Because although intelligence is not a sound, it can be heard.
Intelligence is seen as an advantage. As humans, we intrinsically desire for our offspring to be gifted with the best our own genes. The best of our intelligence. Sadly, we do not all have the same educational or social experiences yet, some perform better than others in different subject matters and hobbies despite the personal obstacles. By this logic, we don’t all have the same intellectual advantage. There is no distinct connection with heredity and intelligence as there is with education and often socioeconomic status. It seems, to me, that we have created intelligence as another way to further classify people, and segregate them. We inadvertently limit our full intellectual potential by mere comparison alone. Yet, not many of us forgive ourselves for factors that influence our intelligence that are out of our control.
In my opinion, intelligence developed into something we compete for; it was shaped by this idea that some people ’are’ better than others in some intellectual sense. We used it as intrinsic motivation to be better. Score better. So we can hide behind it, and use it to our advantage. Intelligence became a self inflicting weapon, that feeds human insecurities when disappointment and poor performance set in.
But….are they… are they better? What exactly are they better at? And what causes them to be better at these things? What are the circumstances? It alway involves relativity. We can change and improve in different areas of intelligence, and also we can ruin areas of intelligence by damaging certain portions of the brain permanently.
People express and exhibit their intelligence in different ways. Some may not be able to articulate it with words, or it may not be accurately represented by a standardized IQ score. We may never know how intelligent a person expressing aphasia possesses. Some people are better at writing than others. Others are more coordinated physically. My question is: “Is it possible to test all modes of intelligence through an IQ score that humans invented?” Can we test ourselves for intelligence? Is it fair to use a numerical score as a reflection of our intelligence?
How can we even begin to isolate intelligence and translate it as a universal measurement? Why did we want to? Ultimately, our genetics are not our destiny yet our intelligence often paves a path to who we become and what we do with our lives. As individuals we learn and experience things in different orders in our lives. Environmental influences may influence genes on a molecular scale, but our destiny of “who we are'' and our “intelligence” is not determined. At the end of the day, intelligence is performed and humans found a way to measure it. Thats exactly the problem.
Just my thoughts,
