Just because you can read a kanji doesn't mean you know the steps to reproduce it. if you know how to write, then it instantly improves your ability to recognize & read it. Also more importantly, handwritten kanji is much harder to follow if you don't know the basic strokes that make it up.

Edit: I didn't realize how old this topic was when I replied to the first post, lol.

Last edited by Daichi (2012 November 29, 8:25 am)

uisukii wrote:

Isn't the remit of intelligence measured by cognitive output conforming to recognized patterns, etc.? I don't really know how people measure "it", as a lot of educated people have commented on my "intelligence" based on how I speak... if this is even remotely the case then I don't put a lot of stock in the process of defining intelligence.

Not that I was making any definitive statements initially, nor do I have any interest in such, which is why almost all definitive like statements in that post were qualified by "perhaps" or "maybe".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority in a group environment. pretty much anyone who doesn't have a crippling self-esteem problem will assume that they(as well as their group of friends) are above average. By seeing someone who has a cognitive skill equal or superior to your own you automatically assume that they are of the same, or higher level than you, thus being intelligent. Something like that. I always find it weird how some people define others as intelligence after a few casual encounters, as long as they're positive. This could also be helped by the concept that intelligence is defined by the individual's expectations, so as long as someone is not a stuttering mess they are automatically not dumb=they are intelligent. The woobies in this equation are the people with obvious speech impediments, as they are thought to be of below average intelligence because of the bad impression they leave when they speak*.

*as someone with a stutter I've found it appalling how people with whom I've shown good diction have a way better impression of me than people with whom I've actually spent time talking, ergo were there when I had a stuttering fit. Despite both groups having witnessed the exact casual conversations which I doubt should show any person's intelligence.

Zgarbas wrote:

uisukii wrote:

[snip]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority in a group environment. pretty much anyone who doesn't have a crippling self-esteem problem will assume that they(as well as their group of friends) are above average. By seeing someone who has a cognitive skill equal or superior to your own you automatically assume that they are of the same, or higher level than you, thus being intelligent. Something like that. I always find it weird how some people define others as intelligence after a few casual encounters, as long as they're positive. This could also be helped by the concept that intelligence is defined by the individual's expectations, so as long as someone is not a stuttering mess they are automatically not dumb=they are intelligent. The woobies in this equation are the people with obvious speech impediments, as they are thought to be of below average intelligence because of the bad impression they leave when they speak*.

*as someone with a stutter I've found it appalling how people with whom I've shown good diction have a way better impression of me than people with whom I've actually spent time talking, ergo were there when I had a stuttering fit. Despite both groups having witnessed the exact casual conversations which I doubt should show any person's intelligence.

*That makes a lot of sense to me. Brings the Dunning–Kruger effect to mind. Honestly I think people place the veracity of communication far too high on the intelligence scale, which seems to be more often a boon for the people to pass themselves off as something greater than they perceive the audience as (smooth talker/con artists, etc.) and in the same respect the same individual may be judged as condescending, etc. by another group of people, regardless of intention, based purely on diction.

Spend a few years within the online (English speaking at least) creative writing/poetry community and this judgement is expressed even more than everyday life. People often take the words they are able to produce as the sum total of their raison d'être, hold on to them irrationality, and judge others accordingly. Learning a second language, ironically, has been instrumental in my experience at least in highlighting the flaws in clinging and defining yourself with language, and provided a sometimes humorous perspective on how even I find myself subconsciously judging people on their speaking ability.

Makes you feel a bit like a dick judging others while learning to crawl all over again in another language, lol. 

*Crippling self-esteem issues are rather relevant as they are part of my mental state, and have been for most of my life. Perhaps it is because of these mental health issues which has allowed to detach from language in a sense of being able to look at it as an organic thing, as opposed to the be all and end all definitive output of an individual. Or maybe not.