there’s a section in here that talks about differences between crystalized intel and fluid intel.
Not sure u know anything abt this does remind me of the 3 kinds of memory in recent piece
Conversation
Oops forgot to paste link theatlantic.com/magazine/archi
1
Yup, crystallised and fluid intelligence are core components of IQ research. Good catch!
1
(IQ research happens to be a big interest of mine, but I don’t usually write about it — mostly because it’s useless for the individual practitioner).
1
How so? And does the two intel type any relation to the three memory type? If so how?
1
Can’t speak definitively about the relation of the 3 types of memory to the differences in intelligence.
But IQ research in general doesn’t map well to individual outcomes. It’s a population level statistical predictor. Not useful to pay attention to it as a practitioner.
1
1
So as a practitioner, you look at memory research. What criteria you use to look at fields useful for practitioner? From the above, I can only form 1 criteria which is don’t look at population level statistical predictors
1
Actually, look at learning research. Memory research can be very very distracting.
What I've learnt is that you *shouldn't* read neuroscience. You want the right level of abstraction. So: neuroscience is too low level, whereas brain function is often useful.
2
1
I hesitate to say that one should avoid 'population level statistical predictors'. The truth is that psych is filled with such predictors. (Sosci can only discuss correlations, after all). I've written more about this here: commoncog.com/blog/putting-m
I recall reading this as one of the best stuff you’ve ever put out. I probably need to do some progressive summaries on it to make the material sink in.
The density of insights is high hence not easily absorbed.