NancyLebovitz comments on What Intelligence Tests Miss: The psychology of rational thought - Less Wrong

35 Post author: Kaj_Sotala 11 July 2010 11:01PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (53)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: JanetK 12 July 2010 05:00:56PM 7 points [-]

Or the other way around - sometimes the 'book smart - street smart' is a put down of the geek as well, not just used against the non-geek.

People said of my brother 'How can someone so smart be so dumb?'. He was both book smart and street smart. In fact he lived to 60 without having a wife, a house, a car, a permanent job, more belongings then he could carry and so on. He was never an alcoholic, addict, gambler or anything like that. He spent his life as a nomad and came to no harm. He knew his streets. He was almost saintly in the way he treated others. I never heard him say something unkind in his whole life. He had a very high IQ and knew a great deal fact-wise. His memory was good. He played an excellent game of chess. What he didn't have was any sense of perspective or way of making plans that would work out or way of accurately judging others and so on. He had no way of using his book smarts or his street smarts. I have often wondered if there was a word for what his was missing in his makeup. Anyone have a word?

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 12 July 2010 05:33:22PM 9 points [-]

Two words: He had no worldly ambition.

Comment author: CronoDAS 12 July 2010 06:45:15PM *  6 points [-]

[missing the point]
That was five words.
[/missing the point]

Comment author: Larks 12 July 2010 10:49:53PM *  15 points [-]

<witty and insightful> I like the implication that if you'd missed off the second set of tags, everything you wrote from now on on LW would be irrelevant.

Comment author: DSimon 13 July 2010 04:03:17PM 9 points [-]

Whoops, I think you forgot your closing ta-... </not paying enough attention> Ah! I get it now. I should've closed that tag years ago.

Comment author: Divide 14 July 2010 12:15:05AM 1 point [-]

That's not particularly well-formed, is it now?

Comment author: DSimon 14 July 2010 05:04:31PM 6 points [-]

I'm very strongly tempted to respond with a "Yo mama" joke here.

Comment author: thomblake 11 August 2010 08:10:56PM 0 points [-]

Not to worry, a user-agent will usually add closing tags as needed, except where it's ambiguous. Most likely the error would not have proceeded past the end of the current block-level element.

Of course, that's assuming those bbcode-style tags are being rendered straight into html...