The comments in this thread seem to have largely missed the point in my inestimable opinion.
The question was about intelligence, not about does speaking a different language or knowing a bunch of obscure facts make you cooler.
I know that intelligence is difficult to quantify and that’s because it’s hard to define. So I’ll define it - it’s my post it’s my rules (praise be to George Carlin).
To me intelligence comprises: mental flexibility, ability acquire and retain information, ability to integrate - not merely absorb - information, and thinking beyond the first step.
Both empirical and anecdotal evidence show that learning multiple languages causes a host of new connections inside the brain. I’m not a neuro-anything but it seems to me that more connections can only hope to bolster intelligence as I’ve defined it.
Further I’ve read numerous times that language is a worldview or “mental-map” that colours your perceptions etc. The more maps you have the more you have conceptual access to. Again this can’t be bad for the amount of information (in this case more conceptual than concrete) to be integrated.
Exposure to different cultures also adds to this information. A first-hand knowledge - even cursory - of Spanish, Dutch, and Greek cultures (I pulled those three from my ass, substitute any you like) can’t help but add to your available data.
As to general knowledge I’d have to - based on pure supposition - give the
Exposure to different cultures also adds to this information. A first-hand knowledge - even cursory - of Spanish, Dutch, and Greek cultures (I pulled those three from my ass, substitute any you like) can’t help but add to your available data.
As far as history goes since so much of it happened in/because of Europe I’d have to give the edge to Europeans just because they lived it and, in modern times, often some member of the family remembers either the event or tales of the event from those who lived it. The latter is subject to regionalization).
Based on what I’m told American schools consistently rank in the lower chunk of industrialized nations. Better schools seems to suggest more access to better information. I know this last statement is open to whacks of arguement and I’ll stipulate most of them.
Do Europeans beat Americans (and Canadians) I’d guess yes. But all of this is merely access to and potential retention of information.
To me the key is flexibility and integration. What can you do with all you’ve learned both “factual” and experiential?
Some of the most intelligent people that I know couldn’t tell you when D-Day and few could tell you why it mattered. If you want to know the dates and importance of historical battles these are, for the most part, not your people.
If on the other hand you need something actually done and need to know how to do it many of these troglydites are pure geniuses. I’ve known many academics (my Dad’s a prof I grew up around these people) who couldn’t bore assholes in wooden hobby horses - praise be to Dorothy Parker.
These people know what is relevant to them and they know it well. I know an unlicensed welder (means he doesn’t get Journeyman pay) that regularly engineers and designs stuff for our company. He’s brilliant.
That same welder couldn’t tell you if the Magna Carta was signed in England or Hollywoood.
“The ability to see and know and do” is the nutshell of my define of intelligence and in that respect I don’t think there is a “smarter” people. In any population you will have: the utter morons, the slavering horde, and the shining few.
In New York the smartest Calahari Bushman is dumber than a newborn. Drop your average Nobel Prize winning physicist into the Calahari and see how smart he looks.
Intelligence is what you do with what you have and I’d guess that per capita the global levels of intelligence (as I’ve defined it) are roughly the same: a few really dumb, most not so dumb, some kinda smart, and a few really smart.