Intelligence
In comments to my recent post on dolphins, I asked the question what exactly "intelligence" is.
Some theories of intelligence allow for different kinds of intelligence. According to Howard Gardner, for instance, intelligence is about having certain kinds of abilities. When we say someone is intelligent, we mean that s/he has some (or all) of these abilities. Gardner gives a taxonomy of intelligence comprising seven types: namely, (1) linguistic, (2) musical, (3) mathematical-logical, (4) spatial, (5) bodily-kinaesthetic, (6) interpersonal, and (7) intrapersonal. Each type is separate and persons may have some or all of them in various combinations.
In order, these "intelligences" involve (1) language and how we use it; (2) musical appreciation, and the performing or composing of music; (3) calculation and logical reasoning; (4) art and design, and the ability to orient oneself spatially or find one's way around; (5) physical skills such as those required in sport or dancing; (6) interacting with others socially and sensitively; (7) understanding oneself and one's abilities.
According to Gardner, most tests for intelligence -- IQ tests, and so forth -- measure only (1) the linguistic and (3) the mathematical-logical sorts.
It seems to me that there is something correct about this way of thinking about intelligence.
Being such as we are, of course, we philosophers naturally tend to emphasize (1) and (3). But on Gardner's account, an "intelligent" philosopher (or physicist, or linguist, etc.) could be miserably "stupid" in certain other ways, for example either intra- or interpersonally. Likewise, persons with high kinaesthetic "intelligence" -- who are, for example, exceptionally good at field games such as soccer, and who always seem to know where to be on the field, or who display an uncanny ability to read the flow of the game -- may perform poorly on IQ tests.
This raises a further issue.
If there are really such different kinds of intelligence within the category "human", then I should think it hardly surprising that there may be different sorts -- perhaps radically different sorts -- of intelligence across species. In his book on dolphins, Thomas White utilizes EQ (encephalization quotient) in order to try to give a comparative analysis of human and dolphin intelligence. EQ is based on the relation of a species' average body weight to brain weight. Roughly, we subtract the part of the brain required to operate the body, and what remains is supposed to indicate more or less purely cognitive ability. The supposition, then, is that EQ correlates with a species' capacity for cognitive or behavioural complexity, and thus it is a convenient way to make comparisons across species in terms of their intelligence.
According to the formula used by this measurement apparatus, humans come in at 7.0, dolphins at 4.1 to 4.9, chimpanzees at 2.3, and gorillas at 1.6.
[I'm not sure how these figures are calculated, or how exactly the EQ apparatus works; White cites the following paper, which may give details: Lori Marino, "Convergence of Complex Cognitive Abilities in Cetaceans and Primates", Brain, Behavior and Evolution 59 (2002): p. 26.]
In any case, according to White dolphins display especially high levels of (6), interpersonal intelligence. Indeed, he cites various research which supports the thesis that dolphins' brains have the capacity to process more limbic or emotional information than can human brains.
Controversially, White also argues that dolphins possess more of type (3) intelligence -- the ability to reason logically -- than we had previously thought. The many anecdotes and studies to which he refers suggest that dolphins have the ability to handle abstract notions well enough to be able to grasp the causal structure of their environment, and -- as a consequence of this -- they can solve puzzles in complex situations and can understand such problems well enough to be able to develop innovative behaviours and strategies as solutions.
And of course dolphins are also able to understand and use artificial languages (created and taught to them by us) in both meaningful and novel ways.
Questions:
Are there different sorts of intelligence?
Are there different sorts of intelligence across species?
Are dolphins (or other non-human animals) intelligent?
Are dolphins perhaps more intelligent (in at least some sense or senses) than us?
Bernie R (not verified) on June 22nd 2008
Hi Oisin,
You said:
According to Gardner, most tests for intelligence -- IQ tests, and so forth -- measure only (1) the linguistic and (3) the mathematical-logical sorts.
It seems to me that there is something correct about this way of thinking about intelligence.
Being such as we are, of course, we philosophers naturally tend to emphasize (1) and (3). But on Gardner's account, an "intelligent" philosopher (or physicist, or linguist, etc.) could be miserably "stupid" in certain other ways, for example either intra- or interpersonally. Likewise, persons with high kinaesthetic "intelligence" -- who are, for example, exceptionally good at field games such as soccer, and who always seem to know where to be on the field, or who display an uncanny ability to read the flow of the game -- may perform poorly on IQ tests.
...................................................................................................................................
However, people who perform well in standard IQ tests also tend to perform relatively well in any other field of human activity. There is much variation and obvious exceptions, but that's the general tendency, and it's not at all difficult to see why that should be so.