Todays Psychology Lecture :-/
What a narrow view of intelligence. I've been called "simple" once before, and I guess it's because I meet only one quality of intelligence (according to the list), yet meet 4 of the 5 qualities of unintelligence. It could be that the most judgemental or outspoken people of the class composed that list. It's a shame that your professor didn't elaborate on this story about his PhD advisor and point out the perception bias demonstrated on that list. I enjoy it when professors point out new ideas to students. I would seriously consider leaving an anonymous note in his mailbox that shows him there are other ways of being intelligent and they should be discussed in class. It seems like basic material he should be covering.
I don't think we should take this personally. I don't think these people are singling out just AS or any other condition. You'd be giving them WAY more credit then they deserve. They're just reacting to what they find attractive and not attractive without thinking critically. They're basically operating on the psychological level of a 14 year old. And do you hold 14 year olds accountable for understanding their own behavior and motives? So basically, these people are idiots who physically graduated from high school, but psychologically don't realize high school's over. Pity them. And get used to it, because the world's full of idiots like that.
Wow. This is one of the best posts I've ever read that sums up "normal people" very well.
Good job.

In a very very very broad and generalized definition, I'd say intelligence may be best defined as: The ability to cognitively adapt in multiple environments using diverse means.
This of course is about as detailed and specific as the words imply since there's LOADS of different abilities we all have or don't, often LOADS of ways to use them, and finally, it all depends on what the particular environment is requiring of the individual at any given time.
At best, it's probably an "average of cognitive adaptability". But even then, an average still ignores the individual intelligences within any given person and isn't necessarily a good predictor of overall adaptability. After all, that's usually the purpose of trying to measure intelligence isn't it? To predict an outcome of "success"?
But I think the main reason intelligence is precisely undefinable though is because its a measurement of behavior and no two behaviors are exactly the same; therefore, it's symbolic and subjective.
In effect, the psychological and philosophical worlds have been trying to define it and pin it down for centuries. But it all ends up being mental masturbation in the end.
_________________
My Science blog, Science Over a Cuppa - http://insolemexumbra.wordpress.com/
My partner's autism science blog, Cortical Chauvinism - http://corticalchauvinism.wordpress.com/
I'm generally judged to be not "there" at all based on my appearance, and then people are startled when they realize I do understand what's going on around me. Not sure what's up with that.
_________________
"In my world it's a place of patterns and feel. In my world it's a haven for what is real. It's my world, nobody can steal it, but people like me, we live in the shadows." -Donna Williams
Fogman
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2005
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,986
Location: Frå Nord Dakota til Vermont
Being that this is a Psychology class, I think that what the professor may have been doing is taking a poll of all the students to see what the students believe constitutes 'intelligence'. This professor will most likely get into the details that 'intellect' is a much differant thing than 'popularity', which is what appears to be what the other students believe.
If the professor knows that you have an ASD, you may have to prepare yourself to be Exhibit 'A' to help the professor prove the point that intellect and popuarlity are not necessarily one and the same.
_________________
When There's No There to get to, I'm so There!