What makes you think you’re not as intelligent as you’ve actually demonstrated?

Understanding Intelligence: You’re Not as Smart as You Think (And Neither Am I)…

The following contribution comes from the Eclectic Moose website, which describes itself as follows: The book “The Eclectic Moose” is by Jeremy Adams, PhD, who divides his time between working with athletes and other artists as a performance psychologist, general psychology, and running his own organizational psychology consultancy. For the past 25 years, Jeremy has also been a personal trainer and has taught aerobics, scuba diving, and rock climbing. In his free time, he enjoys mountain biking, combining it with yoga and meditation, or simply reading in coffee shops with too much coffee.

Jeremy lives in Hobart, Australia, after having lived for 10 years in the United States, France, and the United Kingdom. He is married to a wonderful Scottish veterinarian with whom he cares for a dog that, on occasion, behaves wonderfully…

Author: Jeremy Adams

 

 

Many of the things you learned about the brain during your childhood were probably wrong. In fact, over the last decade, most of neuroscientists’ knowledge about the brain has been shown to be incomplete or outright false. One of the things you think you understand is intelligence, but you’re probably wrong!

 

In our society, we place a lot of importance on intelligence. We often admire or envy intelligent people, but at the same time, we denigrate them (calling them nerds or stereotypical people with thick glasses). At the same time, we criticize obvious stupidity and then act incredibly stupidly ourselves (like driving drunk). We also have many misconceptions about intelligence. For example, we assume that more attractive people are also more intelligent (there is no correlation between looks and intelligence), we believe that intelligence is innate (and that we lose it with age; this is probably not the case, and we don’t lose it), and when asked to describe it, we tend to resort to IQ as the benchmark (it’s not a comprehensive measure, and most people have no idea what it really is).

 

Let’s begin, then, with a basic definition of intelligence. Many people smarter than me have already done this, so I’ll give you the Wikipedia version (taken from a treatise on intelligence):

 

“A very general mental capacity that, among other things, involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly, and learn from experience. It is not merely theoretical knowledge, limited academic ability, or the capacity to pass tests. Rather, it reflects a broader and deeper capacity to understand our environment: to grasp, make sense of things, or figure out what to do.” In other words, intelligence is the ability to interact effectively with the environment in real time and to learn quickly from experience. It also allows for complex thinking, correctly assimilating and processing a large number of variables.

 

If intelligence encompasses so many different abilities, why do we focus so much on intelligence quotient (IQ) as a measure of intelligence? The concept of IQ, which stands for intelligence quotient, has existed since the late 19th century and has been measured using various standardized tests. Currently, it is most commonly measured with the WAIS (Wechsler Adult Intelligence Test). If you don’t know what it is, you probably haven’t taken it. In fact, very few people take an IQ test, and even if they do, the results are usually kept secret. Tests like the WAIS measure around four dimensions of intelligence: verbal comprehension, perceptual reasoning, working memory, and processing speed. While all of these dimensions are certainly components of a person’s intelligence, there are many more, which makes IQ an imperfect measure.

 

 

 However, IQ is a reasonably reliable indicator of basic intellectual functioning.

 

Now, a brief statistics lesson. The average IQ score (in general) is 100, with a standard deviation (SD) of 15 (standard deviation is best described as the average distance of all the numbers in a sample from the mean). IQ is normally distributed in a human population. This means that the same number of people score above and below 100, and that the spread of scores is the same around the mean. A normal curve allows us to see that one standard deviation from the mean in either direction (in this case, IQ scores ranging from 85 to 115) encompasses approximately 68% of the population. At two standard deviations (70-130), we have 98% of the population. This means that only 16% of the population have IQ scores above 115 (mild intelligence) and only 1% above 130 (moderate intelligence). When we reach an intelligence level above 145, it represents less than 0.1% of the population, that is, 1 in every 1,000 people. This means that 50% of the population has an intelligence quotient (IQ) of 100 or lower, and another 16% has an IQ below 85 (very low intelligence). In other words, at least according to the IQ standard, most of us have average intelligence, many are below average, and only a few could be considered intelligent.

 

Of course, we all think we’re smarter than others (a statistical impossibility),

 

just as we think we’re more handsome, more elegant, better drivers, better conversationalists, funnier, and, in general, more competent than others. Of course, we aren’t; we simply fall victim to the Dunning-Kruger effect, an unfortunate human flaw that leads us to overestimate our abilities. Even worse, the less we know about something (or the less experience we have), the more likely we are to overestimate our ability to succeed in that area. This basically means that the less intelligent we are, the less likely we are to acknowledge our ignorance and the more likely we are to think we’re smarter than we actually are.

 

But who cares? Isn’t IQ just a fancy way of being a snob? It’s not without controversy.

For example, in the early 20th century, the scientific community widely believed that Black people were less intelligent than white people. Why? Because they scored lower on a culturally specific IQ test. In other words, the test was designed for white, affluent, and highly educated Americans, so when people with less education, from disadvantaged backgrounds, and from a different culture took it, they surprisingly scored lower. Fortunately, these biases no longer exist, but IQ remains a reasonable predictor of ability (in fact, around 70%). While it can’t predict how kind, how easy they are to get along with, whether they’re athletic, a good conversationalist, charitable, or compassionate, IQ does predict their ability to succeed on academic tests and in disciplines that demand a high level of mental acuity (such as medicine or theoretical physics).

 

But of course, a human being is much more than their ability to solve math problems. Those in a thousand who are capable of highly complex reasoning are undoubtedly important; they have given us technology, modern medicine, and an understanding of ourselves and the universe. But humanity is much more than discoveries. For most of us, daily life involves relying on the intelligence of others, but from our perspective, what’s important in life lies in our relationships with others and our ability to accomplish something meaningful. This leads us to the concept of multidimensional and variable intelligence, fundamental to everyone.

 

 

Some aspects of your intelligence are likely determined by your genetics (though they are certainly not immutable).

 

The aspects measured by intelligence quotient (IQ) can be trained, but only to a certain extent. This means that, with enough training, you could increase your IQ by up to 15 points, but you will reach a limit relatively quickly. It is difficult to increase basic processing speed. And, let’s face it, some brains are probably better “wired” than others, with greater “processing capacity.” But virtually everything else is dynamic and fluid. Much of your IQ is determined by your upbringing and education. For example, in general, babies who are exposed to more words during the first two years of life tend to be more intelligent (at least from a linguistic perspective). Unfortunately, this is one of those problems perpetuated by socioeconomic status. If you are highly educated, you will likely raise your children in a home with more complex conversations, and they will pass those on to them. Children raised in low socioeconomic environments often lack the advantage (among others) of being exposed to complex conversations during their language development. As a result, they don’t excel in reading at school and, consequently, often don’t continue their education, limiting their earning potential and perpetuating the cycle. In fact, the experiences we are exposed to from 3 months to 10 years of age have a tremendous influence on our intelligence. This works both ways: an enriched environment enhances intelligence, while an impoverished one diminishes it.

 

By the way, don’t be fooled by so-called “Baby Einstein” programs. They turn out to be complete nonsense, and leaving children in front of the television watching a video or using an iPad app (no matter what it promises) is an excellent way to stifle their intelligence. Developing human beings need complex, supportive, and loving interaction with other people.

 

Environment greatly influences intelligence.

Intelligence is likely much more complex than IQ. In fact, it has been suggested that there are many dimensions of intelligence (beyond those measured by IQ), including linguistic, spatial, musical, kinesthetic (such as that of dancers and athletes), interpersonal (sometimes called emotional intelligence), and intrapersonal (an effective model of oneself that enhances our ability to interact with and learn from our environment). Most of these dimensions are dynamic, meaning that while some people have a natural talent, most of us can improve it with effort.

 

 

The concept of intelligence becomes even more fuzzy when we try to estimate it in other species. Brain size isn’t always an accurate indicator (although brain complexity is likely correlated), and, as humans, we tend to anthropomorphize—that is, we attribute human characteristics to other species and evaluate them based on their humanity. Interestingly, researchers now admit that not only are many species substantially more intelligent than we thought (in ways very different from humans), but consciousness could be the result of a complex neural network (though self-awareness is a completely different matter). This suggests that many animals possess consciousness and that artificial consciousness could emerge long before artificial intelligence.

 

So now (finally) I’m going to say what I’ve been developing for 1,500 words. IQ aside, effective intelligence isn’t a fixed value. Instead, it’s the product of your conscious actions, not your unconscious processes. Sure, your innate processing ability is probably beyond your control, but an intelligent person is someone who has taken the time and effort to develop their capabilities across a wide range of attributes. Having a high IQ doesn’t make you immune to being a jerk; rather, it’s the things you consciously pay attention to and the areas you work to improve that make you a better person. With enough attention and effort, almost all of this is modifiable: we can build better versions of ourselves (we have the technology)…

 

So, at least in my opinion, intelligence is about working to become better people, paying attention to the world, acknowledging our shortcomings, and focusing on change. We can improve our ability to learn from events by increasing our tolerance for unpleasant experiences (see here). We can improve our control over our actions by learning to see our emotions as dubious information rather than absolute certainties (see here). We can improve our interpersonal intelligence by cultivating compassion for others. And we can learn to recognize that we’re probably wrong most of the time (even if we’re convinced we’re right).

 

Chances are, you’re not as smart as you think (and neither am I). Isn’t it time you started working on being a better person (and hopefully a role model for those around you), instead of blaming the world for your shortcomings? If intelligence lies in recognizing what you can change, then doing something about it (in a way that doesn’t harm anyone else) is your best bet for becoming smarter.

 

 

 

5 Signs You’re Not as Smart as You Think

The following contribution comes from the N2Growth portal, which defines itself as follows: Decades of global access, knowledge, and experience. Our team places exceptional executives in the world’s leading companies and prepares them for success. We offer a full range of executive search and leadership consulting services, providing top-tier talent solutions with unparalleled human touch.

Author: Mike Myatt, Founder of N2Growth | CEO Coach | Executive Search in Atlanta

 

 

 

5 Signs You’re Not as Smart as You Think: My question is: Is your intellect an advantage or a disadvantage? Just watch a very bright person defend their position to understand what I mean in this post.

 

Watching intelligent people lecture, manipulate, take sides, persuade, argue, rationalize, or justify their beliefs to “win” is often entertaining, but it can also be extremely frustrating.

 

I’ve encountered many self-proclaimed “intelligent” individuals who believe their intellectual acuity far surpasses that of their peers and colleagues. These self-proclaimed geniuses are not only usually mistaken, but unfortunately, by the time they finally grasp the truth, it’s often too late. In the following text, I’ll share the keys to harnessing your intellectual resources instead of letting your intelligence become an obstacle to your success.

 

 

While intelligence for leadership doesn’t have to be a contradiction, it certainly can be. When people begin to believe their own lies, they find themselves in a very dangerous situation. I believe there’s some truth to the statement, “A person can be too intelligent for their own good.” How many times have you seen a brilliant person fail to solve a problem that a younger, less experienced, and perhaps even less intelligent person solved with apparent ease? While pure intelligence is a valuable asset in itself, and excluding other traits and characteristics, relying solely on IQ can be an obstacle to professional growth and maturity.

 

Is your intellect getting in the way of your success? Are you so blinded by your intelligence that you can’t do anything about it?

 

Reflect on this: Is it more important to be right or to achieve the right outcome? I tend to respect those who know how to guide others toward the right outcome, as opposed to those who criticize others just to prove they are right. If your self-confidence overshadows your wisdom, perhaps you should temper it a bit…

 

Because of my profession, I often work with brilliant people. I’ve observed that highly intelligent people tend to get into trouble and miss opportunities very easily. Whenever I talk about intellect, ego, leadership, etc., the cartoon comes to mind: “Rule number one: the boss is always right. Rule number two: when in doubt, consult rule number one.” If you find yourself rationalizing or justifying positions based solely on intellectual reasoning, without considering culture, practical reality, timing, or other contextual factors, you may be too clever for your own good. Just as not believing in gravity won’t stop you from falling, believing an opinion or theory is a fact doesn’t make it so.

 

Often, the problem with intelligent people is simply that they enjoy being right. Brilliant individuals can quickly confuse ego with intellect and sometimes defend their ideas tooth and nail rather than admit they are wrong. Intelligent leaders fear being wrong more than being refuted. Winning an argument isn’t particularly difficult, but it can come at a very high price. This confusion between ego and intellect often stems from successfully defending erroneous positions for a long time. They have built their image around the idea of ​​being right and will defend their impeccable record of fabricated righteousness to the death. Intelligent people often fall into the trap of preferring to be right, even if it’s based on self-deception.

 

 

So, how do you know when you’ve crossed over to the dark side and can no longer distinguish between reality and fiction? The following five points will help you discern whether you’re using your intellect correctly or if you’ve been swayed by your own self-promotion:

 

1. Constant Conflict: Are you in a perpetual state of debate? Do you think, “Why am I the only one who understands this?” Is being right more important to you than finding the right solution to a problem, issue, or opportunity? Are you known as a bitter, pessimistic, or negative person? If you identify with any of these situations, perhaps you should reflect and do some self-evaluation.

 

2. Lack of Professional Development: I’ve always said that it’s impossible for stagnant leaders to sustain organizational growth. If you prefer to rest on your laurels instead of continually striving for improvement, you’re in for a big disappointment. Warning: Leaders who don’t develop professionally will be replaced by those who do.

 

 

[Tweet “Leaders who don’t develop professionally will be replaced by those who do.”]

 

3. Exclusivity vs. Inclusion: Do you use your intelligence to intimidate and suppress others, or to encourage, inspire, and motivate them? Do you wonder why you can’t retain top talent or why you lose key clients? If your brilliance polarizes rather than inspires, how smart are you?

 

4. Real Success: What would the feedback look like if an independent third party interviewed your colleagues and subordinates? Do others see you as a successful person, or do you just think you’re a legend? What I think of myself isn’t as important as what my family, friends, clients, and coworkers think of me. If those around you don’t hold you in high regard, then you have no reason to.

 

5. You’re Too Busy: Saying “I’m too busy to _________” is a way of saying you don’t value whatever __________ is. Smart leaders are never too busy to make good decisions, invest in people, listen, or learn. A leader’s job is to understand the value of creating and leveraging blank spaces, both personally and organizationally.

 

Bonus tip: If you’re not a good listener: Stop worrying about what you’re going to say and focus on what’s being said. Don’t listen to validate your opinions or flatter your ego; listen to be challenged and to learn something new. You’re not always right, so stop pretending you know everything and be humble. If you want to be heard, then have the courtesy to listen to others. It’s important to remember that you should never be too busy to listen.

 

Anyone can add value to your life if you’re willing to listen. How many times have you dismissed someone because of their position or title when you should have listened? Wisdom doesn’t just come from your peers and superiors; it can come from anywhere, anytime, but only if you’re willing to listen. Expand your circle of influence and learn from those with different perspectives and experiences. You’ll be glad you did.

 

In short, the gift of intelligence is an asset we should be grateful for and use productively. It’s not an excuse for laziness, arrogance, pettiness, or delusion. Don’t let your intellect be an obstacle, but rather a tool to develop the potential of those around you, thus increasing your chances of long-term success.

 

Winning an argument and leading an organization are not always the same thing. N2Growth’s executive coaching program helps senior managers prioritize judgment over ego, transforming intelligence into sound, well-informed decisions. Discover more about our executive coaching services and see how a coaching partnership can help you make the right choice.

 

 

 

Think Beyond Bots: How to Prevent AI from Atrophying Your Brain

The following article comes from the BBC website and is authored by Thomas Germain, a member of the team.

 

 

GPS ruined our sense of direction. Search engines weaken our memory. Scientists warn that AI could do the same to everything from creativity to critical thinking.

 

Years ago, I made a point of using AI as often as possible. If I was going to write about it, I also had to use the technology. But a number of recent studies have me worried: am I damaging my brain in the process?

 

These studies suggest that people who rely too heavily on tools like ChatGPT may have problems with creativity, attention span, critical thinking, memory, and more. Others express concern that AI users are giving up the cognitive friction that sharpens thinking, and that, as a society, we may have fewer original ideas. However, research in this field is very recent, and we don’t yet have all the answers. Should we be worried?

 

 

“Generally speaking, yes,” says Adam Green, a professor of neuroscience and director of the Relational Cognition Lab at Georgetown University. There are many nuances, but AI will perform tasks that previously required mental effort. “There is ample evidence that if you don’t do as much explicit thinking, the ability to think that way atrophies.”

 

Even if you don’t seek to use ChatGPT or Claude, there are AI answers on Google, and tech giants are rushing to integrate more of this technology into our phones. The technology is becoming difficult to avoid, but there are steps you can take to mitigate the greatest potential risks.

 

However, it’s not an all-or-nothing situation, according to Jared Benge, a professor and clinical neuropsychologist at the Dell Medical School at the University of Texas at Austin. Using AI doesn’t automatically mean it will be harmful. For example, if AI frees up space in your brain for other, more important things, that could be great for your cognition.

 

“Why do we think AI will be so different from other things our brains have already adapted to?” Benge asks. “It’s not inherent in the tool to be good or bad.”

 

As with any other technology, how we use AI will determine whether it benefits or harms us. But the concerns are serious enough that you might want to reconsider how you use these tools before it’s too late.

 

With that in mind, I spoke with some leading experts in this field to find out how they think we should use AI to ensure it doesn’t dull our minds.

 

What are we worried about? Twenty years ago, the idea emerged that over-reliance on technology could cause a kind of “digital dementia,” resulting in a decline in short-term memory and other cognitive processes. Benge recently co-authored a meta-analysis that examined 57 studies with more than 411,000 adults. Overall, he and his co-author found no evidence of digital dementia. In fact, technology use appeared to reduce the risk of cognitive decline.

 

But that doesn’t mean there’s nothing to fear.

 

Studies have shown that people who rely on satellite navigation, such as GPS, stop creating mental maps of their surroundings, and their spatial memory continues to deteriorate over time. A similar phenomenon, called the “Google Effect,” emerged when search engines became popular. Apparently, we remember information found through a search engine less easily because it requires so little effort. It seems that the brain gets worse at tasks when we delegate them. And AI is the most powerful delegation tool of all time.

 

 

 AI might be stifling your creativity, your analytical skills, and worsening your memory; but experts say you can still do a lot.

 

“What’s happening with AI is that, for the first time, it’s giving us a simple way to trade the process for the outcome,” says Green. The rehearsal might sound better. The presentation might look sharper. The retirement party joke might be perfect. But the mental work, the effort, the failed attempts, and that moment when it finally clicks is precisely what your brain needs. “It’s like being at the gym and having a robot lift the barbell for you,” he explains. “You don’t get anything out of it.”

 

So how can you use AI and, at the same time, exercise your brain?

 

Don’t trust AI.

A recent study revealed that the most frequent users of AI scored significantly worse on a standard critical thinking test, apparently because they’re used to delegating their thought processes to robots. They even trust AI more than their own thinking and intuition, even when the AI ​​is wrong. A phenomenon that researchers at the University of Pennsylvania in the United States call “cognitive surrender.”

 

The problem is exacerbated the less you know. A Microsoft Research study found that the risk is greater when you are less familiar with a topic. “If the user doesn’t have the experience to judge whether the result is good or not,” says Hank Lee, a doctoral candidate at Carnegie Mellon University and co-author of the study, “that’s the danger.”

 

The solution begins before you even open the app. If you wouldn’t trust a stranger’s answer, you shouldn’t trust AI either, Lee points out. It’s precisely in these matters that you need to apply your own judgment first. Try to form a general idea about the topic and use AI to challenge your perspective before getting the bot’s opinion. In this way, AI tests your reasoning ability, rather than replacing it.

 

Add complexity to your research. “If you observe something, have it right in front of you, and see it, you often assume it’s in long-term memory when it isn’t,” says Barbara Oakley, professor emerita of engineering at Oakland University, who studies how the brain learns.

 

Some preliminary research suggests that AI can affect your ability to retain information. A survey of 494 students also revealed that those who used ChatGPT more frequently were more likely to report memory loss. While self-assessments aren’t an exact science, other research, such as an unpublished 2024 study, reveals that preparing your brain with simple problem-solving exercises before using an AI chatbot can improve learning.

 

When you ask AI for the information you need to remember, it’s also worth taking the time to interact with it. Take notes—ideally by hand, but typing them works too. You can even ask AI to ask you questions or create flashcards. The effort helps the information stick. It may seem tedious, but the difficulty is precisely the key.

 

 

 AI is remarkably good at generating ideas. That’s the problem.

 

Research suggests that people who use AI for creative tasks produce more predictable and less original ideas than those who don’t. This could be weakening your creative ability.

 

Your brain develops creative ability by making unexpected connections, says Green. If you leave that job to AI, you’re saving yourself the exercise. “We’re concerned about losing your creative ability,” says Green. “AI tricks us in various ways into believing it’s actually making us more creative.”

 

One way to overcome this is to put your own ideas down on paper first, even if they’re just preliminary. Spend more time in front of a blank page and write down whatever comes to mind. The quality doesn’t matter. What matters is that your brain makes connections and draws on your experiences, memories, and knowledge to create something only you could have conceived. That’s the real exercise. Then, use AI to develop, correct, or refine what you have.

 

Pay attention.

You’ve made it this far in the article. Well done! But if your attention starts to wander, don’t worry, you’re not alone. My writing might bore you. However, some research also suggests that the deluge of technology makes it harder for us to concentrate. AI could exacerbate the problem: answers are readily available, and there are plenty of opportunities to avoid difficulty and discomfort.

 

But you can apply similar logic to the other tips: do things slowly on purpose. Don’t let ChatGPT summarize that long article. Tackle a difficult problem before asking a bot. Allow yourself to be bored. The goal is for it to be unpleasant. Your brain is learning to tolerate, and eventually enjoy, the friction that deep thinking requires.

 

The human brain matters. I’m not here to tell you to stop using AI chatbots like ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini. But I am forcing myself to be more thoughtful when I use them to try to keep my brain in control.

 

 

 

How to Reflect on Thinking

The following contribution comes from the Nautilus website, an online news outlet, and is authored by Kristen French, a senior editor at Nautilus. She has worked in science journalism since 2013, writing articles and news stories for publications such as Wired, Backchannel, The Verge, and New York Magazine. She holds a master’s degree in science journalism from Columbia University.

 

 

A conversation with neuroscientist Adrian Owen about the importance of executive function

 

After retiring from the NFL, football player Max began gambling compulsively, drinking excessively, and getting into bar fights that landed him in jail. Like so many other NFL players, Max had suffered dozens of blows to the head, lost consciousness numerous times, and fractured his skull at least once. When neuroscientists subjected him to an MRI to examine his brain in more detail and performed a series of tests, they found many seemingly normal findings. But what was wrong was very serious: a complete breakdown in communication between his frontal lobes and the rest of his brain.

 

 

Max was just one of a dozen NFL players studied by the team of neuroscientists.

 

They used a technique called diffusion tensor imaging to study the white matter pathways between different parts of the brain. In Max’s case, it was almost as if his frontal lobes had become isolated from the rest of his brain, explained British-Canadian neuroscientist Adrian Owen, who led the study and has spent decades researching executive function. Max couldn’t control many of his thoughts. A significant part of his executive function was impaired.

 

Max’s story is featured in Owen’s new book, “Think Before You Think: Understanding and Mastering Executive Function.” I spoke with Owen, who runs a lab at Western University in Ontario, about how executive function relates to intelligence, theory of mind, and free will, and what we can do to make the most of it.

 

The title of your book is “Think Before You Think.” Could you briefly explain what that phrase means?

 

I’ve always wanted to write a book about executive function, and I’ve worked extensively on this topic over the years. But the title didn’t become clear to me until I finished it. I realized that the main idea of ​​the book is that we need to encourage ourselves to step out of autopilot and reflect on the decisions we make, the plans we make, and what we pay attention to. In a way, it’s about thinking about thinking. “Think Before You Think” seemed like a good way to summarize it.

 

In the book, you write that there isn’t currently a single definition of executive function. Why has it been so difficult to define?

 

I think it’s because it includes brain functions that, in many ways, are very broad and overlap. Any memory task I give you will also involve attention, because you’ll have to pay attention to what you’re remembering, right? Many memory tasks also involve planning. If I tell you to remember the word “convenience,” you need to develop a plan to preserve it. These are high-level functions that encompass many aspects of our behavior, so the disagreement lies in where to draw the line.

 

After working in this field for many years, I set out to analyze some researchers I admired and how they defined it. I realized that even they couldn’t agree, so I basically devised some objective criteria for what I would call an executive function. And no one has complained yet. My operational definition is a brain function in which you control one or more subordinate processes. That’s where these two levels of thinking meet. Let’s say someone punches you in the face: you have an emotional response. You don’t control it; it just happens, right? But what you decide to do with that information is within your control. You can turn around and walk away, or you can fight back. To me, that’s a secondary control function.

 

 

 Psychology textbooks mention things like, “An executive function is problem-solving.”

 

But we don’t have a specific unit for problem-solving in our brain. We solve problems by combining a bit of planning, a bit of working memory, and a bit of attention. I focused on what we know actually exists in the brain, as opposed to what I would describe as popular psychological explanations.

 

I was surprised to read that you include theory of mind, or the ability to infer mental states in others, within executive function. I thought that ability was more closely linked to personality.

 

Theory of mind and emotional regulation were the two processes I decided to define as executive functions, since I imagine some people might struggle with them. There’s a whole movement that advocates for theory of mind and doesn’t mention executive function at all, but for me, it shares the same properties.

 

To understand and appreciate what another person is thinking, it’s necessary to activate several subordinate brain processes. It’s not something that happens automatically, like an emotional response. I have to decide what I’m thinking. I have to consciously make an effort to think, “Well, they’re interviewing me. I might be thinking this or that, or looking at what’s behind me.” It’s conscious control.

 

Is theory of mind associated with a specific part of the brain?

 

Yes. People with frontal lobe damage often have trouble with theory of mind tasks.

 

 

At the beginning of the book, you mention that executive function is a better measure of our mental abilities than IQ. While it’s true that IQ tests have been the subject of much criticism over the years, what makes executive function the better measure?

 

It’s a fact that you can’t reduce a person’s cognitive abilities to a single number. It doesn’t make sense, just as it doesn’t make sense to reduce someone’s physical fitness to a single number. If I were to say, “Your fitness score is 32 and mine is 41,” neither of us would understand what the other meant. Does that mean you’re a fast runner? Does it mean you can run marathons? Does it mean you can lift weights? Does it mean you can throw a discus? It’s pointless trying to reduce fitness to a single number. And we don’t try. We don’t say, “Usain Bolt is better than Mo Farah, the marathon runner.” We simply think they’re both fit athletes, each at their own level. For some reason, IQ proponents don’t believe the brain works the same way.

 

Why does the idea that IQ is a valid measure of intelligence persist? Why do we feel the need to rank people according to their intelligence?

 

It’s practical. We do it with many other things. Blood pressure is measured with a couple of numbers. Height with a single number. It’s a convenient way to compare two people. If we analyze the history of IQ tests, it’s clear that it all stems from Western conceptions of intelligence. It’s an extremely outdated idea.

 

In 2012, we approached the issue of IQ from a mathematical perspective. We took data from 44,000 people, measured all aspects of their cognitive function, and tried to reduce them to a single number that would explain the differences between them. And we never even came close to a single number. If your dorsolateral prefrontal cortex is slightly more active than mine, you’ll be a better planner than I am. But if the lower part of my frontal lobe is more developed than yours, then my memory will be better than yours.

 

This isn’t rocket science. We’re not even talking about people with brain damage. We have these different processes, and you can be good or bad at them for the same reason you can be very fast or an exceptional endurance runner.

 

 

So, you can’t say that one person has better overall executive function than another because there are too many different components, right?

 

Well, you can. You might simply have all the executive functions highly developed, but it’s equally likely that some of yours are better than mine and others not so much. We all know people who seem to be very perceptive. Perceptiveness isn’t an executive function, but many executive functions influence what we mean when we say someone is perceptive.

 

 

Can a person with generally poor executive functions still be considered intelligent in any way?

 

Yes, they could have an excellent education. I would say they probably won’t do very well in life overall, because I think having really strong executive functions gives you a competitive advantage, in a way that simply scoring well on traditional intelligence metrics doesn’t. It makes you much more mentally agile.

 

How much control do we have over our executive functions in our day-to-day lives?

 

That’s the central question of the book, and it was quite difficult to strike a balance, because I didn’t want to offend anyone. But my impression is that many of us choose the path of least resistance most of the time and live on autopilot. We pay attention to whatever comes our way. When our phone alerts us, we pay attention; when we hear a loud noise behind us, we pay attention.

 

And that’s just one aspect of executive function—what captures our attention—but it doesn’t have to be that way. We can have a lot of control over our executive functions, but most of the time we choose not to because it requires effort. We can all live like this because we live in a culture of comfort where things just happen, and generally, there’s no problem. But I don’t think life has to be like this.

 

One of the things you mention that has been shown to improve theory of mind specifically is reading fiction. Does this apply to all narrative, or is it a function of literary fiction? Is it an old thing or something new?

 

I think it’s probably a matter of style. I’ve read those articles, but I haven’t personally researched anything about it. What we have done—which is very related, and I think the answer is probably the same—is observe what happens when people watch movies. Something really interesting about film, something I hadn’t grasped until we delved into this area of ​​research, is the great variability in the degree to which films require logical reasoning.

 

That’s why, at various points in the book, I focus on Alfred Hitchcock, since many of our studies use his films. It turns out he was a master at directing our attention in a way that other films, like the Fast & Furious saga, don’t. In a Fast & Furious movie, so much happens. It’s easy to imagine it will be very entertaining, with all those flying cars and half-naked people, but the problem with these kinds of movies is that they don’t require you to think too much because they tell you everything. They give you all the information. You don’t have to guess what Vin Diesel is thinking because it’s right there. He says, “I’m going to see how fast this car can go,” or something like that. In most Hitchcock films, you have to make a bit of an effort to understand the characters’ motivations. If you don’t have a theory of mind, it’s impossible to understand them.

 

I think the same is true in fiction: the more you delve into a character to understand their motivations, their reasons, and their goals, the more likely you are to exercise concepts like theory of mind, compared to a simple, straightforward story, like a Bugs Bunny cartoon.

 

Reflecting on executive function naturally raises questions about free will. Your argument seems to be that it’s not essential to determine whether we have absolute free will or not. We have enough to live meaningful and morally responsible lives, and to choose how to use our cognitive abilities.

 

 

The reason the debate about free will continues is that there are perfectly valid arguments both for and against it. One might deduce that every decision we make, every direction we take, is due to something physical in the brain, implying that we have no control over it. But that’s a very reductionist view of the world.

 

The only point I was trying to make with the free will argument is that we have enough free will to consciously decide whether to exercise our executive function at any given moment. I don’t think this is really controversial. Someone might say, “Well, it was predestined that at that moment they activated their frontal lobes and tried to count the millions on the screen.” But ultimately, I believe we have free will to make those kinds of decisions about how to direct our thinking.

 

 

Can brain training help us improve executive function?

 

We conducted a brain training study in 2010 with 11,000 people. We trained them with a commercially available brain-training device and focused specifically on executive functions. We had them perform all sorts of working memory, planning, reasoning, and problem-solving tasks for six weeks. It’s still the largest brain-training study ever conducted, and no improvement was observed.

 

They did get better at the tasks they practiced. One of them involved counting the number of suitcases coming out of the airport X-ray scanner. If that was your task, after six weeks, you’d get pretty good at it. But as soon as you changed anything, even slightly—like asking them to count the number of oranges coming out of a basket—they didn’t improve. It didn’t generalize at all. That study has stood the test of time. It pretty much sums up the literature: you can train at the level of a single task.

 

What I try to explain in the book is that many things influence executive function: getting enough sleep, diet, socializing, even brain training makes small contributions, but it’s not going to change your life. What does make a big difference is simply reflecting on your own thinking, something we know from several experiments we’ve conducted. We conducted a comprehensive study analyzing all the lifestyle choices people make: playing video games, drinking, smoking, going to church or not—22 decisions in total. We didn’t consider age, illness, or anything beyond our control, only the choices we make in life: do they affect our executive function?

 

It turns out that, over the course of a lifetime, all these choices contribute minimally. There’s no magic bullet. However, I believe that simply taking control of the choices we make, what we pay attention to, and the plans we make can make a significant difference in a person’s life.

 

Are there any ways you apply this in your own life?

 

I’ve been researching executive function for over 30 years, and yes, I think I’ve changed during that time. I feel like I have a complex life. I run a lab with 25 people. I write books that require me to speak with journalists. I play in a rock band with my friends. I have a 12-year-old son who’s home right now and needs my attention. I wouldn’t say my life is more complicated than most people’s, but I feel like I manage pretty well to juggle a lot of things all the time. The only way I can do that is by carefully managing my cognitive functions.

 

 

I don’t have notifications on any of my devices. I have computers everywhere at work and on my phone, but I don’t have any notifications because I simply can’t function if someone can contact me spontaneously whenever they want. I never have my phone ringing. People can’t call me. They can leave me messages. And it’s been like this for years because I can’t function if I’m interrupted. For example, I spend a lot of time writing academic articles that require dozens of hours of reflection. I can only do it by concentrating completely on that one thing.

 

I also plan a lot, and I stick to my plans. I’m not one of those people who, without knowing what they’re going to do today, decide to go to the beach. This never happens to me because I get up early, so either I go to the beach or I don’t. My day doesn’t vanish at the beach.

 

Should we be concerned about the executive function of young people whose brains are still developing and who might have more difficulty filtering the constant notifications and distractions offered by technology and social media?

 

It’s a complex question. My lifestyle is perfectly fine because social media is only on my mind when I choose to include it. I think if you live a different kind of life, with Instagram, TikTok, or whatever, and you’re bombarded with information, it’s probably not good for you, but I’m speaking more as a parent than as a scientist. Social media isn’t my thing at all.

 

I say it’s a complex question because I think technology in general has many very useful aspects, and we can use it intelligently to expand the biological limits of our brains. It’s like when you and I wear glasses. We’re simply expanding the biological limits of our eyes. I think that’s what your phone does too, if you store your numbers there. You can store many more numbers and access them faster, and I think that’s good. There are many ways technology can enhance our executive functions. But it’s probably not good for you to look at a screen for more than two hours a day. We need to separate these arguments a bit because, in a way, much of the technology that allows us to use screens and social media is basically the modern version of the fax machine.

 

I spend a lot of time telling my son he needs to use his frontal lobes, which he finds quite funny. They’re probably still developing, but I’ve decided that if I keep telling him things like this, maybe it will help. When my son asks me, “How do you do that?” I don’t tell him how. I say, “Well, think about it. How do you think you could do it?” And he always finds the answer. It’s not that he couldn’t figure it out; it was just easier not to. It was easier to ask myself, “How long does it take to get to the soccer field?”

 

The important thing is that we should encourage those who are still developing not to take the easy way out. We have much more time for them to reflect on their own thoughts. Starting young is probably the solution.

 

 

People with a natural predisposition for success often possess seven habits of emotional intelligence

 

The following contribution comes from the online communication portal Your Tango Revolutionizing Your Relationships and is authored by Nick Wignall, a psychologist and writer who shares practical advice for emotional health and well-being. He is the founder of the newsletter The Friendly Minds.

 

 

 

Women have a natural predisposition for success.

 

This is my argument for this essay: Successful people tend to have a good relationship with themselves. When I meet successful people (and I use the term “success” in a broad sense), it seems to me that many of them have an exceptionally positive relationship with themselves.

 

Of course, there are many highly successful people who don’t have a good relationship with themselves. But the exception doesn’t prove the rule.

 

In my experience, if we look closely at people who have achieved and maintained significant success in their lives, one of the hidden factors behind that success is that they don’t allow themselves to be sabotaged or derailed by their thoughts, beliefs, and emotions.

 

People with a natural predisposition for success practice these 7 emotional intelligence habits:

 

 

1. They recognize their emotions early.

Woman recognizing her emotions. Christina Morillo / Pexels

 

It’s difficult to succeed in any area of ​​life if you’re constantly overwhelmed by painful emotions. Of course, we all experience difficult emotions like fear, sadness, or anger. But why do some people handle these feelings relatively well while others don’t?

 

The only way to overcome them? Research indicates that you have to accept them without judgment. It’s the only way to move forward. It’s easier to manage difficult emotions when they’re detected early.

 

Most people are overwhelmed by painful emotions because they ignore them or distract themselves when they’re mild. While this feels good in the short term, it usually causes those feelings to become much bigger and more intense over time.

 

On the other hand, if you can get used to recognizing your emotions when they arise (and then validating them instead of trying to eliminate them), you’ll have a much better chance of maintaining emotional balance and focusing on your most important work and goals.

 

2. They pay attention to their thought patterns

Woman thinking Perfect Wave / Pexels

 

Besides ignoring emotions when they appear, another reason they end up becoming huge and overwhelming feelings is because, without realizing it, we feed them. Specifically, thought patterns like chronic worry or negative self-talk lead to much stronger and longer-lasting emotions. If you want to control your emotions, you must learn to manage your thoughts.

 

Most people aren’t very aware of their thought patterns. As a result, they are at the mercy of all the emotions those thought patterns generate:

 

Chronic worry → chronic anxiety

Chronic rumination → chronic anger

Chronic self-criticism → chronic low self-esteem

 

On the other hand, successful people usually have the habit of reflecting on their thoughts and paying attention to them. They are aware of the role they play in initiating or maintaining harmful thought patterns; and, as a result, they are better at regulating those thought patterns and the emotions that follow.

 

3. They maintain compassion for themselves after making a mistake.

 

One of the things I’ve noticed when observing successful people is that there are two types:

 

One type is very successful externally, but unhappy internally.

 

 

The other type is externally successful and, in addition, has a relatively calm and secure inner life.

 

While many factors could explain this difference, there is one important one that I believe is not valued enough: it is difficult to achieve sustainable success when you punish yourself every time you make a mistake.

 

People who are externally successful but internally unhappy often have a habit of judging themselves very harshly after their mistakes. They constantly reflect on their past errors, worry about future setbacks, and are generally quite hard on themselves.

 

In contrast, those whose external success corresponds to inner peace almost always have a strong tendency toward self-compassion. They reflect on their mistakes and try to learn from them. But they don’t obsess over them or interpret them as something that defines their personality.

 

 

4. They listen to their emotions without blindly trusting them

 

Most people’s relationship with their emotions falls into two extremes:

 

They dismiss and avoid their emotions. As a result, they are largely unaware of their emotions and the influence these emotions exert on them without their conscious awareness (and they certainly exert it!).

 

They are obsessed with their emotions and focus excessively on them. Consequently, they frequently let their feelings guide them and make overly emotional decisions and choices.

 

On the other hand, people who tend to be successful take a middle ground with their emotions: they are aware of them and sensitive to them, but they don’t blindly trust them either.

 

Instead, they consider emotions as a potentially useful source of information, but not as absolute truth. And, when it comes down to it, they tend to rely on values ​​rather than emotions to make important decisions.

 

5. They Examine and Update Their Old Expectations

 

Expectations are powerful beliefs about the future or about what we think should happen. However, they often remain dormant in our minds, meaning we rarely examine or question them. As a result, we can end up thinking, feeling, and acting in ways that contradict our values ​​and desires, all because of old, unexamined expectations, whether for ourselves or others.

 

If you insist on having expectations, you must insist that they be realistic. Many people end up falling into patterns of self-sabotage and bad habits because they continue to act according to old expectations—often from childhood!

 

Successful people understand that to continue making good decisions in a constantly changing environment, it is necessary to regularly review and update expectations so that they align with reality and bring you closer to your goals and aspirations rather than further away from them.

 

6. They consider self-care as regular maintenance rather than a treat.

 

It is very difficult to manage difficult emotions, think clearly and precisely, update firm beliefs and expectations, handle mistakes and criticism well, and perform all the other psychological functions upon which success depends.

 

However, most people rarely do anything to support their minds in performing these functions well. It’s like being a professional athlete and having a terrible diet. Or owning a sports car and never bothering to change the oil.

 

 

 

Success depends on a healthy mind. A healthy mind depends on healthy habits.

 

The term self-care has a bad reputation because it’s been misinterpreted as superficial acts of comfort and pleasure. But in reality, self-care means establishing and maintaining habits and routines that promote health and emotional well-being.

 

Successful people understand that performing at their best depends on being emotionally strong and mentally agile. But, even more importantly, they know that this requires time and dedication. If you want your mind to work for you, you must take care of it.

 

 

7. They talk about how they feel

 

Emotional vulnerability is another one of those terms, like self-care, that seems trivial and superficial, and doesn’t deserve much attention. But that’s because most people don’t understand what it means…

 

Being emotionally vulnerable means that, when appropriate, you are able and willing to talk about how you feel, especially when it’s difficult. This is not only important for your emotional health and well-being (see point 1), but research shows it’s vital for maintaining healthy and effective relationships, on which almost every form of success depends (probably more than you realize).

 

From business to parenting, a successful journey depends on everyone involved feeling safe to talk about their feelings. Successful people understand that by showing their emotional vulnerability and being honest about how they feel, they empower others to do the same.

 

Nick Wignall is a psychologist and author who shares practical advice for emotional health and well-being. He is the founder of The Friendly Minds newsletter.

 

 

34 Clear Signs of Low Intelligence Backed by Psychology

 

The following contribution comes from the PsychMechanics website and is authored by Hanan Parvez, founder of PsychMechanics and holder of a Master’s degree in Psychology. He simplifies complex psychological concepts, transforming them into practical insights. His work has been cited by academics and therapists and has appeared in Business Insider, Entrepreneur, and the New York Post.

 

A Comprehensive List of Signs of Low Intelligence in Adults

 

I don’t know about you, but I like spending time with people smarter than me. To do this, I have to actively seek out people with low intelligence in my social circle and limit my interaction with them.

 

That’s why I thought an article listing the main signs of low intelligence would be a good idea. It’s important to clarify that when I talk about “low intelligence,” I’m not referring to people with learning disabilities or intellectual disabilities diagnosed in childhood. Nor am I referring to low IQ scores. I’m not very interested in IQ tests because they usually measure the speed of thought rather than reasoning ability.

 

Index

Intelligence Defined

Intelligence is the ability to learn, reason, and solve problems.

For a broader definition, intelligence can be simply defined as the effectiveness with which a person uses their brain. The effectiveness with which a person solves life’s problems is correlated with the effectiveness with which they use their brain.

 

Signs of Low Intelligence

The following signs of low intelligence are present in otherwise healthy, functioning adults.

 

Cognitive Limitations

1. Lack of Deep Understanding

People with low intelligence can only grasp things at a superficial level. They avoid trying to understand them in depth and limit themselves to trivial conversations and gossip. If you try to talk to them about something abstract, they’ll dismiss you as overly thoughtful. Reality is complex and requires a lot of reflection to solve problems. People who avoid deep, complex thinking cannot solve difficult problems. Often, the most difficult problems are the most important.

 

2. Difficulty Recognizing Patterns

To understand and navigate the world effectively, one needs to be a keen observer of reality. By observing reality carefully, patterns are detected. These patterns reveal the nature of reality. By understanding the nature of reality, one can solve the problems that exist within it. People with low intelligence either fail to detect patterns or ignore them.

 

 

3. Dichotomous Thinking

People with low intelligence often think in dichotomous terms. They seem to think only in terms of opposites, ignoring nuances. Reality is too complex to be interpreted solely in terms of opposites. As a result, they tend to oversimplify everything. While simplification is useful at times, not everything can or should be simplified. Knowing what requires simplification and what does not is a sign of high intelligence.

 

Overgeneralization is another way in which people oversimplify reality. Generalizations are justified in some situations, but in others, they overlook nuances. Knowing what to generalize and what not to is a sign of intelligence.

 

 

4. Jumping to Conclusions

Jumping to conclusions is often a sign of low intelligence. People who jump to conclusions don’t reflect enough or delve deeply into what’s happening. They’re in a hurry to reach a conclusion and can’t tolerate not having one. While drawing conclusions with minimal information can be intelligent, it’s often a trap that leads to flawed reasoning. Intelligent people are usually slow to draw conclusions and test them once they’ve reached them. People with low intelligence rigidly cling to quick, poorly substantiated conclusions.

 

5. Inability to Strategize and Plan

Strategy and planning require conscious mental effort. Humans aren’t naturally good at making conscious mental effort. Like other animals, we tend to live in the present and seek instant gratification. Strategizing and planning require thinking about the future and considering how current actions will affect future outcomes. People with low intelligence struggle to strategize, plan, and prioritize. That’s why they consistently fail to solve their problems or achieve their goals.

 

6. Poor Decision-Making

People with lower intelligence don’t reflect much on their decisions, even the most important ones in life. They let their feelings guide them. There’s nothing wrong with considering feelings when making decisions. But they shouldn’t be the only factor considered. The best decisions are made when both logic and feelings are used.

 

Intelligent people try to validate their feelings with logic. Feelings are initial information that requires reflection and analysis. Depending on the situation, they can be right or wrong.

 

As a general rule, the longer it takes to make a decision, the better. All the pros and cons will likely have been considered, which is the ideal way to make decisions.

 

7. Unrealistic Thinking

People with lower intelligence tend to think positively or negatively. The problem with these thinking styles is that they can create biases. Intelligent people think more realistically. They don’t focus on seeing things from a positive or negative perspective.

 

Learning and Adaptability Problems

1. Low Adaptability

Adaptability is fundamental for problem-solving and survival. When their problem-solving methods stop working due to changes, people with low intelligence have difficulty adapting to new circumstances. They become too accustomed to their old ways of thinking and acting.

 

2. Resistance to Feedback

Those with low intelligence perceive feedback as criticism. It wounds their ego and prevents them from assimilating criticism and improving. Intelligent people actively seek criticism and feedback. Of course, there are those who criticize out of pure hatred and enjoy doing so. Despite their hatred, their criticism may be valid.

 

3. Lack of Interest in Learning

People with low intelligence often see learning as a waste of time. They lack the ability to understand how it can benefit them. They stop learning after graduation. On the other hand, people with high intelligence accept that learning is a continuous process.

 

A lack of curiosity is characteristic of low intelligence. It keeps people stuck at their current level of knowledge. They know just enough to get by in the world. They don’t ask questions and seem satisfied with their intellectual level.

 

 

 

 

4. Closed-Mindedness

Reluctance to embrace new ideas, opinions, perspectives, and information keeps people with lower intelligence stuck. Closed-minded individuals tend to confirm their pre-existing beliefs, making it difficult to learn new things. Knowing when to be open-minded and when to maintain one’s position is crucial. As the saying goes, too open-minded can drive you crazy.

 

As a general rule, the frequency with which people change their minds indicates how often they learn new things. While intelligent people change their stance month by month or week by week, people with lower intelligence cling to what they learned years ago.

 

Having an overly firm opinion on any subject is often a sign that a person is only considering one side of the story.

 

 

5. Lack of Reflection

One of the greatest cognitive abilities of human beings is the capacity for reflection. It helps us understand the cause and effect of events. Careful observation and the ability to reflect have been the driving forces of human progress. People with lower intelligence do not take the time to reflect. They’ve been told that the only thing that matters is taking action, which isn’t true. Taking action and then reflecting on your actions will help you achieve your goals.

 

6. Lack of Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is difficult because it goes against what the mind readily does. The mind assimilates information as beliefs and then confirms them. That’s easy. Testing the validity of those beliefs consumes a lot of mental energy. However, it’s the only way to get closer to the truth. Reluctance to change beliefs in the face of new evidence that contradicts them is a sign of low intelligence.

 

Instead of assimilating new information, the mind tends to ignore it, dismiss it, and diminish its value.

 

7. Lack of Cognitive Flexibility

As mentioned earlier, changing your mind frequently is a sign of open-mindedness. This is about flexibility of opinion, that is, not being rigid in your own views. Similarly, cognitive flexibility means not being rigid in your thinking. Cognitive flexibility is the ultimate goal of cognitive behavioral therapy. Those who develop this skill can significantly improve their mental health. However, it requires considerable mental effort that people with low intelligence are unwilling to make.

 

8. Lack of novelty seeking

They seem to have an aversion to novelty in general. They are observed to avoid exposing themselves to new ideas and anything new: art, music, etc. In contrast, novelty is very stimulating for people with high intelligence. They seek novelty to expand their minds and see things from a different perspective.

 

9. Lack of creativity

Lacking a novelty seeking drive, people with low intelligence also lack creativity. Creativity doesn’t arise from nothing. The most creative people are constantly exposed to other creative people in their respective fields. In this way, creativity feeds on itself and produces wonderful things in the world.

 

Social and emotional deficits

1. Poor emotional regulation

They tend to be guided primarily by their feelings. As a result, they tend to be impulsive and irritable. Their emotions are very unstable. The more intelligent and mature a person is, the less they are controlled by their emotions. Inability to control emotions can have serious personal and interpersonal consequences.

 

 

 

2. Lack of Empathy

People with low social intelligence often have empathy deficits. They are unable to put themselves in another person’s shoes and don’t consider how their words and actions might affect others. They are egocentric and tend to have a win-lose mentality.

 

3. Ignorance of Social Cues

They don’t know how to interpret the environment. Because they can’t grasp the mood of the place, they say inappropriate things at the most inopportune moments. They don’t pay attention to the nonverbal cues that others emit in a social setting.

 

 

4. Easily Manipulated

They are easily manipulated because their emotions rule their lives. There’s nothing a manipulator likes more than seeing their victims dominated by emotions. Almost all manipulation is emotional manipulation. You won’t be easily manipulated if you learn to control your emotions.

 

5. Herd Mentality

Humans are a social species, and the herd mentality is fundamental to human nature. However, after a certain level of intellectual development, this should be overcome. People with low intelligence are easily influenced by others. They worry about appearances and blindly trust authority figures.

 

6. Excessive concern for status symbols

All humans want to project a good image to others. This is how we increase our social value and self-esteem. How do we gain social value? By doing something valuable for others. This is what intelligent people focus on. This automatically increases their value. People with low intelligence focus on the end result: money, titles, etc., that they can obtain by creating value. They look for shortcuts to appear valuable, such as scamming, cheating, stealing, etc.

 

7. Unfairly blaming others

People with low intelligence have an ego too large to admit their own mistakes. Concerned about their image, they unfairly blame others and avoid taking responsibility for their actions. They employ avoidance tactics and ego defense mechanisms to protect their fragile ego.

 

8. Lack of Intrapersonal Intelligence

In one study, when people with no training in intelligence were asked what behaviors represented intelligence, they mentioned “intrapersonal intelligence.”² A lack of intrapersonal intelligence implies a lack of self-awareness and self-understanding. If you don’t even understand yourself, others don’t expect you to understand them.

 

Behavioral Patterns

1. Propensity for Addictions

People with low intelligence are always looking for fun. As a result, they develop bad habits and addictions. The film Idiocracy portrayed this well. It presents a futuristic world where humans have degenerated into a group of idiots seeking instant gratification.

 

In most cases, addictions are unhealthy coping mechanisms. People seek pleasure when they experience some kind of emotional pain. Not understanding one’s own emotions, that is, having low emotional intelligence, has been shown to predict substance abuse problems.³

 

2. Ego Dependent on Intellect

A person can be highly intellectual, but if their ego is tied to their intellect, they are still not very intelligent. They use their intelligence to feed their ego. It is not a pure search for truth. They take offense when their opinions are criticized because their identity and ego are closely tied to their intellect. They are emotionally attached to their logic, which is far from logical.

 

 

3. Need for Instructions

Step-by-step instructions are helpful and make life easier. But sometimes you have to think for yourself. If you understand the principles behind things, you can develop your own instructions. You acquire the ability to adapt the application of those principles to different situations. Since people with low intelligence do not seek deep understanding, they want step-by-step instructions for everything.

 

People with low intelligence avoid thinking when they can. They always need to be told exactly what to do and don’t use their own judgment. They thrive in formal educational settings that require rote learning, but they lack resourcefulness. If you put them in a novel situation where they are required to think quickly, you’ll see them crumble.

 

Thinking and Judgment Problems

1. Prejudice

Being prejudiced is a sign of low intelligence. Often, judgments are based on little information, not the whole story. People with low intelligence expect others to be like them and see the world as they do. They don’t understand that every human being is unique, with unique experiences. It makes no sense to judge others for being different because they haven’t lived your life. Your past experiences haven’t shaped their lives, only yours.

 

2. Lack of Intellectual Humility

Intellectual humility is the ability to recognize the limits of one’s own knowledge and beliefs. Curiosity and intellectual humility are the driving forces of intellectual growth. Intellectually humble people are not dogmatic and tolerate ambiguity.⁵ They are comfortable not having all the answers. Their ego is independent of their intellect.⁶

 

3. Lack of attention to detail

Because people with lower intelligence tend to oversimplify things, they often overlook important details. They focus too much on unnecessary details, without seeing the bigger picture. Knowing when to pay attention to details and when to focus on the overall perspective is a sign of intelligence.

 

Practical difficulties

1. Poor money management

This relates to their inability to plan. They don’t consider budgeting or controlling expenses important. Unable to regulate their emotions, they make large, impulsive purchases and end up in financial trouble. They like to borrow money and spend money they haven’t earned.

 

2. Poor verbal communication

They cannot express their opinions or feelings clearly. They are vague and talk incoherently. They beat around the bush and talk about irrelevant things before getting to the main point, if they even get to it at all. Their conversation veers off in a hundred different directions instead of going from point A to point B.

 

3. They don’t grasp sarcasm or implied meanings.

They interpret words literally, so they struggle to understand irony and sarcasm. Furthermore, they have difficulty understanding what is being implied because they only focus on what is said.

 

4. Difficulty concentrating.

Being able to control attention is what makes us intelligent.⁷ This is because intelligence requires deep and complex thinking, which is only possible when one is focused and free from distractions. People with low intelligence are constantly distracted. They do nothing to overcome their distractions because they don’t think about the consequences of their actions.

 

This information has been prepared by OUR EDITORIAL STAFF