Yes, this is one of mine also. When people don’t get certain jokes, you know they’re probably shallow and not too bright.
Yeah, I pretty much base it on how much someone agrees with me. If we’re lock step, then obviously they’re brilliant.
I have to admit, I won’t get a lot of pop culture references. If you utter a catch phrase that has been made popular because of a TV show or commercial, I probably won’t get it, unless I’ve come across it in other media.
What was her name?
I’m going to have to say openness. I value emotional intelligence probably as highly as anything else. Open people can take on board opposing views, and frankly own it, when they are mistaken, behaving with maturity and tact, as required. Humour is related to openness for me, as are facial expressions and eyes. Openness to the new and the challenging, in life, whatever comes. You have to be open to see anything with new eyes, which so much learning and, ‘thinking outside the box’, depend on. I also believe openness and any form of creativity, to be very closely connected. And truly open hearts, have magnetic charm, whenever you encounter them.
I immediately assume someone is stupid if they are a fan of Sarah Palin, Rush, Glenn Beck, and the like.
It was a he. My company was housed in the same office building as his election committee. All tenants shared common restroom facilities.
One was not impressed. I rather think he believed that common public hygiene was something for the little people to worry about.
Humour is also a huge indicator for me, though not necessarily of intellectual depth so much as attentiveness and sharp wits. If you can drop something subtle in a deadpan manner and the other person picks it up easily, you know you’re probably dealing with a sharp person.
For example, at work last week several of the women in the admin department called me over to see a funny notice that one of them had been directed to include with strata minutes. Someone was a little too dependent on spell-check, because it read: “CARPORT RECYCLING – Owners are reminded that they must completely break down their carport before placing it in the carport bin.” I deadpanned, “That’s a natural mistake – after all, the carport recycling is usually right beside the garage.” One of them (a desk away,) let out a little “Ha!” and when it went unacknowledged by the three that were right in front of me, she interrupted to explain it to them.
It wasn’t an intellectual joke, or one dependent on some arcane knowledge… but I think that the effortless way she picked it up is a reliable indicator of quick wits. In the tiny space of time that elapsed between its being spoken and that “Ha!” and without any obvious “Here comes a joke!” cues, she had to 1) recognize that the statement didn’t make sense if parsed literally. 2) infer that it might therefore be a joke 3) look at the significant word that has been introduced and detect the word-play in the analogy – carport/cardboard – garage/? All in about a second.
I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the one that emitted the laugh (even if it was only a lame pun) is also the Rock Star AA with the reputation for never missing anything. If you quickly pick up on wordplay without a lot of attention being drawn to it, I’m going to assume you’re a real clever-clogs.
The minute someone says, “I seen” I think they’re a dolt. I know a person who has her MBA from a prestigious school and, while I know she must be intelligent, I can’t get past the grammar.
Note: She also says Valentimes…
I put most of my stock in verbal intelligence, so I have to agree. I just can’t get past bad grammar.
Getting back an email from the MBA in charge of my entire department that says “Your welcome” tempts me to respond “My welcome what? I think you hit send too early.”
I like this. I don’t always follow it so my own intelligence may not be high but I do apreciate those who do. One hallmark of intelligence is not resorting to denigrating anothers intelligence in an argument but patiently leading them to see the truth. I would say that understanding there are plenty enough jerks in the world so one shouldn’t resort to being another is one of the smartest things one can do.
This rings true for me as well. Enduring humor–that is, humor which endures–usually seems to rest squarely on the person’s ability to take things in and express what’s funny about an aspect of daily life. On the other hand, I don’t believe that smart people are necessarily funny.
This reminds me of a joke by Steven Wright, the frizzy-haired deadpan comic from the 1980’s.
I can’t go quite as far as this. Sometimes reading or otherwise learning about a discredited belief system is interesting just for the sake of knowing how they imagined it was supposed to have worked. Similarly, you don’t have to believe the book of Genesis verbatim to wonder what, if any, actual events in remote prehistory might have been the inspiration for the Noah story, or the “Land of Nod”, and so on. Which isn’t to say that I necessarily consider Judaism or Christianity to be discredited, but I do assert that most believers consider the Genesis story to be of symbolic rather than historical importance.
And some of the alien chariot books are fun to read for the sheer ridiculousness. If I ever find a copy of Lost Worlds by Robert Charroux, I’m buying it.
Allowing of course, for differences in the way it is used in different English speaking countries.
As for “proper” or “correct” speech, I agree with ruken. It’s certainly true that the grammar of a language, as linguists use the term, does not rest on a set of “rules” that you have to learn in primary school. But in using a language we still need to agree on most of the key points, and IMO this goes for usage as well.
For the grammatical aspect of this, though, context is a factor, and it isn’t always cut and dried. Most of us, for example, have an idea when to whom for the objective case of who, and when not to use it, even in situations where the “rules” say we should.
I was gonna say sense of humor, but I know a few people who are dumber than football bats that are still a lot of fun to be around. Meaning, I still laugh WITH them, not AT them. I also want to say humorless people are morons, but I think the truth is that they’re just no fun to be around. I know a few self-absorbed, humorless and very bright people. A good sense of humor just means someone likes to play.
As far as how I assess another person’s intelligence, I’d have to say I just watch them and see how many mistakes they make and how often they repeat them. Lots of mistakes is a good thing because it means they’re comfortable taking on something beyond their experience–they’re sure they can figure it out because that’s how they roll. Repeated mistakes, however, rolls that assessment back and replaces it with overconfidence and lack of reflection–idiot.
Oops, I see now that I totally misread Ruken’s statement. Let me rephrase that: I disagree with his or her statement -
Obviously this wouldn’t apply to non-native speakers, and I’d also make allowances for street smarts and social perceptiveness. But otherwise, intelligence does correlate with near-mastery of your preferred language’s grammar and usage. (Spelling, less so IMO.)
The natural inquisitiveness and intellectual eagerness of smart people usually means they’ve read extensively from material which, itself, is characterized by a similar command of the language. But it’s merely a correllation. One doesn’t cause the other, it’s more a case of things just working out that way.
I’ll backpedal a bit, then. If someone is reading a Twilight book, let’s say, and will tell you that this series is absolutely the best set of books ever written, then my assessment goes down. Way down. If they say that the books are cheesy fun, then they’re probably OK. Same with the Janet Evanovich books. And yeah, sometimes one has to read the source material to see if the criticism is valid.
My sneering is mostly at people who take those things seriously. I’ve had people tell me, in all sincerity, that these books are proof that there were ancient astronauts who visited Earth. Now, I like my science fiction as much as the next person. In fact, I generally like science fiction a great deal more than the next person. But I don’t confuse fact with fiction.
If someone is reading ANYTHING* on public transportation, I tend to think they are smarter than someone who is just zoning out with the earphones.
OTOH I am never reading anything. My book is just a clever ruse so I can appear intelligent while surreptitiously people-watching; I couldn’t make out a word with sunglasses this dark.
Probably the really smart people are stuck in traffic in their BMW convertibles.
*Excluding comic book and/or The Denver Post.
Trying to find out why we’re all so twitchy.