unfortnately, There has been little study of real-time processing. Heuristics are important to intelligence because they let one find deep sequenced ideas per unit/time. without a heuristic profile of an person there are a lot of assumptions being made based on iq alone. creativity is about access more than analyzing stuff.
Thanks for link Danzel. I think as it was shown associative memory is as good predictor of general intelligence as working memory ,Kaufmann's publication, then their was a drive to move towards 'dual process'. Unfortunately, Dual process will probably be just be a way for (let's just say) 'those who run the show' , to impose a theory which stresses the importance of analysis over empirical thinking. I'm sure in the end, they'll end up associating complex reasoning, hypothetical thinking, creativity, problem solving, with system 2, and refer to system 1 as some as a slave system, over-prone to errors, and reserved only for irrationality and reflexive decision making. But I'll l agree with you that in reality system 1 is the source of creative thought and much complex reasoning through (reductive) heuristics and relational/associative thinking. System 1s motto should be, before one flaunts analysis as demonstration of intellection, it would be nice to have something worth analyzing.
Mc Mciahl your probably right about why they want to implement Dual process, but it's better than the glorified short term memory test known as IQ. I was personally tortured through my entire adolescent and academia, based on the theory we know as iq. I can't be more literal in saying that it felt like i could pretty much solve any problem all the way up until i was about 23 year olds, except for one that would be found on a standardized test. Growing up I intituively new there was something seriously wrong with iq tests - i even conjected the idea of some type of (i envisioned as a network) relational system that the tests were overlooking. I found out my intuitions were backed by theory when finding out my associative scores (5% percentile and including a perfect score on the WJ3 delayed-associative memory), compared to IQ of 75% - it made me curious if the scores had something to do with my obvious realworld vs iq discrepeancy. sure enough i found out about the kaufman study and then dual process theory. i won't disrpescept analysis though, because it's often extremely important in dealing with many complex problems, but as they are iq tests are biased.
unfortnately, There has been little study of real-time processing. Heuristics are important to intelligence because they let one find deep sequenced ideas per unit/time. without a heuristic profile of an person there are a lot of assumptions being made based on iq alone. creativity is about access more than analyzing stuff.
Thanks for link Danzel. I think as it was shown associative memory is as good predictor of general intelligence as working memory ,Kaufmann's publication, then their was a drive to move towards 'dual process'. Unfortunately, Dual process will probably be just be a way for (let's just say) 'those who run the show' , to impose a theory which stresses the importance of analysis over empirical thinking. I'm sure in the end, they'll end up associating complex reasoning, hypothetical thinking, creativity, problem solving, with system 2, and refer to system 1 as some as a slave system, over-prone to errors, and reserved only for irrationality and reflexive decision making. But I'll l agree with you that in reality system 1 is the source of creative thought and much complex reasoning through (reductive) heuristics and relational/associative thinking. System 1s motto should be, before one flaunts analysis as demonstration of intellection, it would be nice to have something worth analyzing.
Mc Mciahl your probably right about why they want to implement Dual process, but it's better than the glorified short term memory test known as IQ. I was personally tortured through my entire adolescent and academia, based on the theory we know as iq. I can't be more literal in saying that it felt like i could pretty much solve any problem all the way up until i was about 23 year olds, except for one that would be found on a standardized test. Growing up I intituively new there was something seriously wrong with iq tests - i even conjected the idea of some type of (i envisioned as a network) relational system that the tests were overlooking. I found out my intuitions were backed by theory when finding out my associative scores (5% percentile and including a perfect score on the WJ3 delayed-associative memory), compared to IQ of 75% - it made me curious if the scores had something to do with my obvious realworld vs iq discrepeancy. sure enough i found out about the kaufman study and then dual process theory. i won't disrpescept analysis though, because it's often extremely important in dealing with many complex problems, but as they are iq tests are biased.
+Danzelblock A more basic objection is that IQ tests provide you a set, (EG: 2,4,6,8), and intelligence requires the formation of those sets.