The idea that people are born with, are able to or are likely to reach differing levels of mental capability seems pretty uncontroversial to me. The conflict is between the definition of the word "intelligence" (which is usually a single measure of the "general" mental capability of the individual) and the fact that a person has different individual mental capabilities for different mental functions. When it comes to "summing" those different capabilities the weighting we give to them is ultimately arbitrary and/or dependent on value judgments. Excuse my lack of medical knowledge.scarybunny said:Heh this topic comes up again just as I look at intelligence in my course.
Intelligence is no longer widely accepted because it implies that people are born with a certain level of ability or potential to reach this level.
And how true is this, really? How many of the indicators of intelligence are just developed from favourable circumstances and greater experience in particular ways of thinking?