Intellect and Violence

47MartialMan

Could it be said that a person with a higher degree of intellect have a lower degree of violence?

Respectfully awaiting replies

cowzerp

No-there is nothing intelectual about being a walk over.

cowzerp

Violence for the sake of violence is stupid though.

Colm_OReilly

Violence is based on intent, not on actual actions, as decided by the courts. Hence you can assault someone in a sport and suffer no consequences despite the law saying you can't consent to assault.

As regards intellect being a key factor I'd very much doubt it. The whole notion of intellect being higher than emotion is false anyway.


Colm

47MartialMan

As so far to facilitate such a notion, suppose someone with such intellect, procure a sumptuous job and salary, could they change their environment, thus so to not be in an situation of violence-percentage wise?

This is not to completely emblematize that they will not ever be violent or subject to the plight violence.

What maintains people of a structured society to not seek and have such percentage low?

cowzerp

47MartialMan wrote:

As so far to facilitate such a notion, suppose someone with such intellect, procure a sumptuous job and salary, could they change their environment, thus so to not be in an situation of violence-percentage wise?

This is not to completely emblematize that they will not ever be violent or subject to the plight violence.

What maintains people of a structured society to not seek and have such percentage low?

Right you sound great but are very hard to take serious while using these unneccesary words-chill out man!!

cavedave

Could it be said that a person with a higher degree of intellect have a lower degree of violence?

It is hard to measure intellect. IQ is probably the best standard judgement we have and that is not very good.
There is a correlation between low IQ and criminal behaviour.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ
Between 40-50% of prisoners are functionally illiterate. My opinion is that worrying about intellect is unwise and more effort should be made in factors that can be changed like education.


Practical validity
Evidence for the practical validity of IQ comes from examining the correlation between IQ scores and life outcomes.
Economic and social correlates of IQ Factors Correlation
School grades and IQ 0.5
Total years of education and IQ 0.55
IQ and parental socioeconomic status 0.33
Job performance and IQ 0.54
Negative social outcomes and IQ −0.2
IQs of identical twins 0.86
IQs of husband and wife 0.4
Heights of parent and child 0.47

el tel

47MartialMan wrote:

Could it be said that a person with a higher degree of intellect have a lower degree of violence?

If it were true, we had fewer of those 'evil geniuses'.

Dragan

I don't think you can look at violence as being purely a product of circumstance or environment. No doubt in lower payscale area's violence is far more profound…but that is no indicator that the people in these area's lack intelligence.

Base intelligence is very different to apparent intelligence…where people have the chance at school, and college and therefore make it into high paying high profile jobs. This does not mean however that they are more intelligent that people who don't. It just means they got a shot and took it.

As for being intelligent meaning you will be less violent…I don't believe so at all. As Colm said, violence is an inherently emotive thing. People do not look at things from a pacifistic point of view because they are clever and have reached a certain level of understanding….it is simply there own beliefs that mean they do not regularly do violence.

For example, many of the posters here fight in competitions. They do not fight in the street. This is not because there are all vastly more intelligent than people who do….they simply feel that violence is not required in everyday life.

The Bored One

Someone's likelyhood to commit violence is affected by three factors, and intellect only affects two of them.

Capability - The persons ability to commit an act of violence, as in are they in a position to? Intellect affects this because a person can choose to alter their capabilites through training, or isolating themselves from other people etc.
However, factors such as some people's innate abilities, or else the situation around them, over-ride intellectual decision making.

Empathy - How much a persons cares about others, and how their actions affect them. Someone with little empathy for others could be commit acts of violence against others easily, whereas someone with more empathy would avoid it.
There is NO link between intelligence and empathy, so this one is right out.

Necessity - How likely is violence to be in their situation? Some situations and surroundings will require violence for survival, wheareas others it can be avoided easily.
Intellect does have a bearing on this, as one can to a degree can affect ones circumstances.
Howver at the end of the day, there's too many outside factors for intellect to ensure safety.

So the answer is, intellect can affect affect your level of violence, but it can eithe rmake it higher, lower, or not effect it all depending on your personality and circumstances.

Roper

Hey, did you all know that half of the population have a below average IQ?

Khannie

cowzerp wrote:

Right you sound great but are very hard to take serious while using these unneccesary words-chill out man!!

HAHA.

OP, in answer to your question: No (IMO). Violent people are intelligent and intelligent people are violent. I don't think there's any propensity one way or the other.

FiannaGym.com

Wow, so much is worng with this. First I'll kick off with my pet hate.

IQ has long been disregarded by respectable social and behaviour scientists. Usually it is clinged to by those who can score well in it, like it means something. In any eve, study after study has shown that IQ favours white middle class males. So those demographics that fair poorly in tests (i.e. Working / Under class of Afro-Caribean decent) also have a high crime statistic. So it can be manipulated (by the same structures that make the circumstance in the first place) that there is not just a correlation but a causation, when in fact there is not. Done.

Violence and intellect are completely subjective and abstract. This question is a complete waste of time.

And while I'm at it
"As so far to facilitate such a notion, suppose someone with such intellect, procure a sumptuous job and salary, could they change their environment, thus so to not be in an situation of violence-percentage wise?"
Is not a sentence or a question.

Peace out dudes, don't get bogged down!

The Bored One

FiannaGym.com wrote:

Wow, so much is worng with this. First I'll kick off with my pet hate.

IQ has long been disregarded by respectable social and behaviour scientists. Usually it is clinged to by those who can score well in it, like it means something. In any eve, study after study has shown that IQ favours white middle class males. So those demographics that fair poorly in tests (i.e. Working / Under class of Afro-Caribean decent) also have a high crime statistic. So it can be manipulated (by the same structures that make the circumstance in the first place) that there is not just a correlation but a causation, when in fact there is not. Done.

Violence and intellect are completely subjective and abstract. This question is a complete waste of time.

And while I'm at it
"As so far to facilitate such a notion, suppose someone with such intellect, procure a sumptuous job and salary, could they change their environment, thus so to not be in an situation of violence-percentage wise?"
Is not a sentence or a question.

Peace out dudes, don't get bogged down!

And of course you have the communication barrier. Working class individuals for example might score badly, not because of a lack of intelligence, (personally Ive found working class blokes to have more practical intelligence than any other group), but because they are used to thinking in different terms. The only real way you could measure their intelligence would not be how they perform on the IQ test, so much as how well they perform on tests within their frame of reference and environment.
Which would constantly make comparison even more difficult and stupid than it is now.
Huzzah!

Odysseus

FiannaGym.com wrote:

Wow, so much is worng with this. First I'll kick off with my pet hate.

IQ has long been disregarded by respectable social and behaviour scientists. Usually it is clinged to by those who can score well in it, like it means something. In any eve, study after study has shown that IQ favours white middle class males. So those demographics that fair poorly in tests (i.e. Working / Under class of Afro-Caribean decent) also have a high crime statistic. So it can be manipulated (by the same structures that make the circumstance in the first place) that there is not just a correlation but a causation, when in fact there is not. Done.

Violence and intellect are completely subjective and abstract. This question is a complete waste of time.

And while I'm at it
"As so far to facilitate such a notion, suppose someone with such intellect, procure a sumptuous job and salary, could they change their environment, thus so to not be in an situation of violence-percentage wise?"
Is not a sentence or a question.

Peace out dudes, don't get bogged down!

I'm not fan of I.Q. tests myself, and I think you absolutly right about the subjective nature of violence, but though I think the question was'nt formulated strongly, it is imo a valid question.

I suppose we have to be careful with questions like this, and acknowledge the difference between the general and the specific, that is we can develope all types of theories about the psychology of violence, however, these may or may not be applicable to a person who commits an act of violence. There is no such thing as a ultimate answer, each discipline will develope its own understanding of the psychology of violence, but they will all differ.

47MartialMan

Are we to surmise that if a person is in a violent environment, their intellect, which I differ from intellegence, would not have it to where they would have understood what to do and acquire the means to better their environment as they had done so for said intellect?

Dragan

47MartialMan wrote:

Are we to surmise that if a person is in a violent environment, their intellect, which I differ from intellegence, would not have it to where they would have understood what to do and acquire the means to better their environment as they had done so for said intellect?

I might be wrong....I'm on a viciously low carb diet and my brain is running on ketones right now....but does that even make sense?

Dyr

FiannaGym.com wrote:

IQ has long been disregarded by respectable social and behaviour scientists.

im intrigued by the idea that there social/behavioural scientist's who might not be respectable. "dont collate data with that chap godfrey old boy, they still believe in IQ test's where he's from!"

Odysseus

47MartialMan wrote:

Are we to surmise that if a person is in a violent environment, their intellect, which I differ from intellegence, would not have it to where they would have understood what to do and acquire the means to better their environment as they had done so for said intellect?

Maybe its just me mate, but your question seem to be badly formulated, can you clarify it? It is difficult to see what you are asking.

BobbyOLeary

Bambi wrote:

"dont collate data with that chap godfrey old boy, they still believe in IQ test's where he's from!"

Thats brilliant!

Seriously though, I don't think there's a real correlation between intelligence and violence. I've known plenty of people who would be of below average intelligence (in terms of academic progress) who wouldn't hurt a fly and vice versa. Violence is a subjective term anyway, I'm considered violent by some people because I study MA. I do believe there is a correlation between Empathy and Violence though, hence why psychopathic individuals (lack of empathy and remorse) are known to be quite violent.

Dragan wrote:

but does that even make sense?

No, I can't see it anyway!

The Shane

47MartialMan - Is english your first language? Or are you trying to jazz up a redundant question by adding flowery words around it?

In answer to the original question so that people say I'm not off topic - eh, no intellect no make man angry smash monster


Shane, The

47MartialMan

Simply-lower intellect-higher chance violent behavior

Low intellect is not to say low/no intelligence

Odysseus

So how are you defining intellect?

meepins

It's the Chicken ****er from South Park, if that character were infact dyslexic.

TwoKingMick

I know 8 year old Korean children, with English as their second language, who make more sense than this guy.

As a side note: I reckon it's Columok.

columok

I barely have an internet connection at home these days so...

Shaggy wrote:

!It wasnt me

My internet time is devoted to finding new stuff out about the Nintendo Wii

47MartialMan

Odysseus wrote:

So how are you defining intellect?

IQ, Intellect, and Intelligence

INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENT-an intelligence test score that is obtained by dividing mental age, which reflects the age-graded level of performance as derived from population norms, by chronological age and multiplying by 100: a score of 100 thus indicates a performance at exactly the normal level for that age group.

INTELLECT-the power or faculty of the mind by which one knows or understands, as distinguished from that by which one feels and that by which one wills; the understanding; the faculty of thinking and acquiring knowledge. The ability to think abstractly or profoundly. The ability to processing of data for achieving greater versatility.

INTELLECTUAL-developed or chiefly guided by the intellect rather than by emotion or experience. Guided or developed by or relying on the intellect rather than upon emotions or feelings. A person given to activities or pursuits that require exercise of the intellect.

INTELLIGENCE- capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc.

Intelligence is an abstract concept whose definition continually evolves and often depends upon current social values as much as scientific ideas. Modern definitions refer to a variety of mental capabilities, including the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly, and learn from experience, as well as the potential to do these things.

As methods developed to assess intelligence, experts theorized about the measurability of intelligence, its accuracy, and the field known as psychometrics, a branch of psychology dealing with the measurement of mental traits, capacities, and processes.

Part of the problem regarding intelligence stems from the fact that nobody has adequately defined what intelligence really means. In everyday life, people have a general understanding that some people are "smart," but when they try to define "smart" precisely, they often have difficulty because a person can be gifted in one area and average or below in another. To explain this phenomenon, some psychologists have developed theories to include multiple components of intelligence.

Since about 1970, psychologists have expanded the notion of what constitutes intelligence. Newer definitions of intelligence encompass more diverse aspects of thought and reasoning. For example, American psychologist Robert Sternberg developed a three-part theory of intelligence which states that behaviors must be viewed within the context of a particular culture; that a person's experiences impact the expression of intelligence; and that certain cognitive processes control all intelligent behavior. When all these aspects of intelligence are viewed together, the importance of how people use their intelligence becomes more important than the question of "how much" intelligence a person has. Sternberg has suggested that some intelligence tests focus too much on what a person has already learned rather than on how well a person acquires new skills or knowledge.

Intelligence tests
There are many different types of intelligence tests, and they all do not measure the same abilities. Although the tests often have aspects that are related with each other, one should not expect that scores from one intelligence test that measures a single factor will be similar to scores on another intelligence test that measures a variety of factors. Many people are under the false assumption that intelligence tests measure a person's natural or biological intelligence. Intelligence tests are based on an individual's interaction with the environment and never exclusively measure natural or developed intelligence.

47MartialMan

TwoKingMick wrote:

I know 8 year old Korean children, with English as their second language, who make more sense than this guy.

The greater the feeling of inferiority that has been experienced, the more powerful is the urge to conquest and the more violent the emotional agitation.