Theory of Multiple Intelligences

Gardner’s theory is very relevant in a world that is becoming so specialized, but why hasn’t it been more influential in the scientific community? Who is more valuable~the jack of all trades or the master of one?

"Theory of multiple intelligences
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The theory of multiple intelligences is a theory of intelligence that differentiates it into specific (primarily sensory) ‘modalities’, rather than seeing intelligence as dominated by a single general ability. This model was proposed by Howard Gardner in his 1983 book Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Gardner articulated eight criteria for a behavior to be considered an intelligence.[1] These were that the intelligences showed: potential for brain isolation by brain damage, place in evolutionary history, presence of core operations, susceptibility to encoding (symbolic expression), a distinct developmental progression, the existence of savants, prodigies and other exceptional people, and support from experimental psychology and psychometric findings.

Gardner chose eight abilities that he held to meet these criteria:[2] musical–rhythmic, visual–spatial, verbal–linguistic, logical–mathematical, bodily–kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalistic. He later suggested that existential and moral intelligence may also be worthy of inclusion.[3] Although the distinction between intelligences has been set out in great detail, Gardner opposes the idea of labeling learners to a specific intelligence. Gardner maintains that his theory of multiple intelligences should “empower learners”, not restrict them to one modality of learning.[4] According to Gardner, an intelligence is “a biopsychological potential to process information that can be activated in a cultural setting to solve problems or create products that are of value in a culture.”[5]"

There are a lot of theories like this, I have my own favorites. I see nothing particularly appealing about his.

Are the intelligences separate and non associative, or are they able to form gradual higher unities? I am not really knowledgable of Gardiner.

Well Turdunia,

Mind answering my question? I’d like to know more about your favorites.

Jerkey,

Seems that they are separate, but it would make sense that they would be complimentary. What would higher unities accomplish exactly?

Complex ideas…

Networks built on networks.

No, I will not share with you, I share it all over the place. Your gonna have to pick it all up in bits and pieces.

He neither originated the concept nor expanded into novel territory. Lots and lots of that about.

Turdoodle,

Why are you cussing me out incoherently? My question remains unanswered and you rant on.

It is coherent at a higher level of consciousness. Beyond the Joker, beyond the expectations you’ve come to expect.

Rise

m.youtube.com/watch?v=g8evyE9TuYk

Now you’re just being mean. I don’t think many will appreciate your dark night of humor, at least I’m not.

Exactly, this answers your question.

You’ve made a statement about your being a jackhole, not a jack of all trades and definitely not a master (always the slave!). Don’t drop by if all you have to contribute is your inadequacies.

It is the combination of our inadequacies that make our strengths.

That’s how the mind generates consciousness.

The brain does not generate consciousness if that’s what your referencing.

Most certainly does, you need to research matters a bit more.

Your commentary of someone else’s commentary proves squat. The unsure people who write lots of books know squat.

Yet we know more than you.

Hey, I’m gonna watch the movie about Ramanujan “The Man Who Knew Infinity” so won’t be able to look or respond to you for awhile.

Just keep replaying inspiring Batman themes on repeat and respond negatively to that. I will pick up later.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=eHFA_wEK_00

[-o< Thank you!

Don’t be too thankful, your still fenced in by your limiting expectations.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=m2DLZkv4Yvg

Turdunkin,

You have my attention. Project away.