Argumentative essay: the idea of intelligence being multiple in nature instead of unitary

The Nature of Intelligence - Argumentative Paper

The ensuing paper looks at intelligence and at the competing notions that intelligence may be unitary and/or multiple in nature. Are there different types of intelligence? Or should intelligence be understood as something that wholly holistic, with no ability on the part of experts or researchers to distinguish pieces or parts from the whole? Overall, there are compelling cases to be raised on behalf of both schools of thought. However, the mere fact that people otherwise dismissed as "dull" can possess talents in specific area that can only be described as prodigious (for instance, the musical prodigy who cannot spell or who struggles with logic-based examinations) seems to suggest that intelligence really is nuanced and that generations-old IQ tests simply do not adequately measure human intelligence in all its manifold manifestations.

To begin this study, a review of the notion favoring unitary intelligence is in order. It may be said that unitary theories about human intelligence cohere around the idea that IQ tests can definitively prove who are intelligent and who are not nearly so bright. Guenther (2002) insists that IQ tests are strong proof of the idea that intelligence in humans is unitary. He notes, for example, that different subtests in IQ examination inventories that measure similar competencies in human beings have shown themselves to possess powerful correlations when examined using factor analysis; such correlations are seen as evidence that IQ tests have internal validity and should not be dismissed outright. Additionally, Guenther (2002) writes that IQ tests have proved quite adept at measuring human proficiency and performance in a wide array of different contexts and situations. In essence, the fact that IQ tests are persuasive and efficacious at capturing high levels of human performance under different situations and in the face of different exigencies is proof that people who have a high IQ (as defined by conventional testing) have widely transferable proficiencies and competencies that must be associated with global intelligence instead of with proficiency only in limited, specific areas (Guenther, 2002, p.784). The best way to sum it up is that smart people are smart people, and IQ tests are strong predictors of an individual's capacity to thrive in a host of different circumstances and when confronted with a diverse array of challenges or problems. However, such thinking may not stand up to cross-examination.

Proceeding from our discussion of unitary intelligence, it is worthwhile to look at the concept of multiple intelligence. Not least of all, there appears to be rather compelling evidence that multiple intelligences exist in all individuals. In some respects, this appears to be rather intuitive: different parts of the brain do different things, and - to the extent structural differences and divergences exist within the human brain - it may be argued that no one should be surprised if the brain also bequeaths diverse intelligences. According to Armstrong (2009), Howard Gardner challenged the idea that intelligence can be simplified to a single, unitary IQ score. For him, human intelligence comprises at least eight dimensions or categories: linguistic; logical-mathematical; spatial; bodily-kinesthetic; musical; interpersonal; intrapersonal; even naturalist. For Gardner, his entire conceptual framework is informed by the fact that people can be exceptionally talented in different things while relatively struggling in other areas. Simply because one is not proficient in one area of intelligence, he argues in his work, does not mean that one is "stupid" (Armstrong, 2009, pp.7-8). For instance, one can struggle with mathematics, but be a talented writer; one can struggle with words when writing, but be a talented architect or engineer. Since the diversity of human beings is vast, and since the structure of the human brain is not unitary itself, it stands to reason that human intelligence should not be conceived of in unitary terms.

It would appear as though the scholarship, increasingly, sides with the idea that humans possess the capacity for multiple intelligences. Researchers sympathetic to Gardner's work emphasize that the brain is broken into discrete sections that house specific functions (Parker, 2007, p.47). Chiefly, the brain is now recognized to be a structure comprised of innately specialized modular structures that are integrated in ways which appear dynamically linked to the vagaries or experiences of individuals (Parker, 2007, pp.47-48). To give one example of different areas specializing in specific functions, consider emotional intelligence and the capacity to abide by the rules of society both appear linked to the processing areas of the cerebral cortex and temporal lobes (Parker, 2007, p.48). This insight by Parker (2007), is actually a useful entrée into more detailed explorations of how different parts of the human brain perform different tasks.

Notably, the midbrain contains the tectum, which is devoted to auditory and visual processing. It is the area of the brain that gives one the capacity to orientate oneself in space and is the part wherein control of eye movements is housed. For its part, the Middle Frontal Gyrus is noteworthy for supporting higher level cognitive functions such as personality, insight and foresight. Moving along, the Interior Parietal Lobule is characterized by being the location wherein visual, auditory and somatosensory functions are integrated for the purposes of written language. The Inferior Frontal Gyrus, as an addendum, is the place that makes possible the production of spoken language. Furthermore, the Hippocamus is the region of the brain that controls learning and memory, emotional behaviour, and regulates the autonomic nervous system. Lastly, the Cerebellar Vermis is where attention, motivation and autonomic activities are controlled (for the contents of this paragraph, please see Orrison, 2008, pp.7-20). As far as the cerebral cortex is concerned, it is noteworthy that the superior middle and inferior frontal gyri are both locales that are responsible for executive functions such as abstraction, cognition, language and emotion (Ikezu & Gendelman, 2008, p.11). If different parts of the brain are connected proximately to different functions, and if human beings are astonishingly diverse as thinkers and learners, then it is a small step to conclude that different people will have different levels of development in these different parts or structures of the brain. Ultimately, human intelligence - like the human brain - cannot be conceived of in a simple unitary fashion.

Many academics are beginning to discern that human intelligence cannot be lumped together as a holistic, unitary phenomenon. After all, a child that struggles mightily in one academic area - to the point of being perceived as "slow" or "backward" - may be prodigiously gifted in still another area. Particularly, savants are noted for having extraordinary talent in one specific area while having only average abilities in other areas of human endeavor; additionally, autistics are characterized by having exceptional talents in specific areas (writing, or mathematical skills) but sub-standard competencies in other basic areas (Baum et al, 2005, pp.12-13). In a telling passage, Baum et al (2005) report that many autistic children exhibit great talent in the areas of calculation and musical performance, but possess severe impairment in the realms of communication, language, and sensitivity to others (p.13). A single IQ test subsumes qualitative differences in various intellectual endeavors into a single clumsy number that fails to differentiate between those who may actually not be intellectually acute and those who have exceptional talents - but who happen to lag behind their peers in other certain critical "scholastic" subjects or areas. To put it another way, a child who is an exceptional writer - which does require higher-level thinking - may be dismissed as "dull" because he or she struggles with mathematics or logic-based problem-solving. To the extent that teachers convince themselves that failure in one area is indicative of global intelligence, an otherwise gifted child may spend his or her formative years being convinced that he or she is "dumb". What Gardner's research does, as much as anything, is give back to unconventionally gifted children their potential and dignity.

The mere fact that children can be strong in some areas - including areas demanding considerable creativity, lateral thinking, organizational prowess, and insight - while being deficient in other areas, argues in favor of the idea that there are different types of intelligence. Of course, our capitalist society does tend to value some skills more so than others: financial wizards are more cherished and desired than brilliant writers - and are usually paid substantially more. Individuals blessed with unique muscle memory and kinesthetic talents which allow them to dominate in athletic competitions are usually far better paid than those who possess exemplary interpersonal skills. This basic inequality may explain why so many people associate one's intelligence with how well one is paid: the presumption is that the free market distributes goods in accord with one's actual merits, and those who can barely eke out a living (because they are artistically inclined) are somehow not as intellectually acute as those who are math whizzes working in a prominent financial house or brokerage firm. A staunch belief in unitary intelligence assumes that, because some skills are more suited to the capitalist system than are others, those that possess those specific skills must, de facto, be brighter than people whose talents lie elsewhere. Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences suggests that there is a more nuanced way of looking at human intelligence and capability.

In the end, it does appear as though many different types of intelligence can exist in the same human mind, or that some people can have one type of intelligence while others possess another type. The focus on global intelligence overlooks the fact that many talented people can flourish in one environment but struggle in another one; it is entirely possible to be a genius in the creative arts but be deficient (or only ordinary) in the mathematics or sciences (the reverse can also be true). To suggest that a simple IQ test can capture all dimensions of human intelligence overlooks the rich diversity of the human mind and the breathtakingly varied ways in which humans can interact with their environment or milieu.

References

Armstrong, T. Multiple intelligences in the classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD Publications.

Baum, S. Viens, J. & Slatin, B. Multiple intelligences in the elementary classroom: a teacher's toolkit. New York: Teachers College Press.

Guenther, R.K. Individual differences in cognition. In D.J. Levitin (ed.), Foundations of cognitive psychology: core readings (pp.779-816). Boston, MA: MIT Press.

Ikezu, T. & Gendelman, H. (eds.). Neuroimmune pharmacology. New York: Springer.

Orrison, W. Atlas of brain function. New York: Thieme Medical Publishers.

Parker, C. An examination of the interrelationship between social demographic factors and multiple intelligences among college students. Ann Arbor, MI: ProQuest LLC.