Based on the essay written by Isaac Asimov, he ponders the very idea of what truly defines intelligence and challenges it through societal expectations that have “normalized” IQ. Furthermore, he disapproves of aptitude tests arguing that “you’re answering questions written by people of similar intellect” therefore not truly measuring one’s capacity. He notes that if “he were given a test by a repair man or a farmer he would fail with a doubt”. Asimov states that “his intelligence is a small subsection of society” and that society influences intelligence based on an individual’s strengths and weaknesses. According to my definition intelligence; is one’s natural ability/gift in applying his or her skills in a subject or assessment at a significant level. An intelligent person generally yields higher test scores, GPAs, and can quickly grasp and understand material. On the other hand, Asimov acknowledges his statement on intelligence to be more abstract in context to be able to apply one’s ability to other fields of work and not simply one criteria. He gives an analogy to his lack of performance when it came to manual labor jobs and his “academic training” would be of no use. I wouldn’t say I have any particular strengths- I’m average in every subject more or less perhaps I’m a bit stronger in English academics than in other subjects. I’m interested in gaming, and I don’t have any talents currently.
My results from the survey reveal my top 3 choices(Visual/spatial) score of 66, (Intrapersonal) score of 62, and (Verbal/linguistic)score of 56. I don’t believe the results are an accurate reflection of my intelligence completely but I do agree with my verbal results and being able to “make sense of the world through language. You use words effectively when you are speaking and writing. Writers and editors have this intelligence”. My Intelligence type compares with my skills in reading/writing as one of my core strengths is in English.