<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Smart Start
Review: I own this book and it's a smart start to learning about intelligence. P.S. The boy from the Phillipines has a good assessment of this book. As to the reviewer who said he needed to go to college before he spoke or wrote--well at least HE can spell and type!
Rating:
Summary: Smart Start
Review: regalman@usa.netThe author spends way to much time on error, sometimes his own. His facts are wrong about Copernicus - Copernicus was not an astronomer-he was a mathematician. See the web page - university of florida - history of science. I am afraid if he can't a simple fact right about Copernicus, where else is he wrong. He studied astronomy, but was a mathematician. Ptolemy used mathematics (equants) to prove his theory not idealism. He did not just a patch a leak. Talk about intelligence, the author should stick to terms and definitions and stay away from poetry like-patch a leak. That doesn't sound to scientific to me. Before he talks about science, he ought to study history of philosophy. This author must have relied on unreliable sources, he certainly didn't look up information himself. He ought to have given up in the chapteron telescopes and intelligence. Ohhh, boy... P.S. as to the other review of the boy in Phillipians I hope you go to college and study before you speak or write.
Rating: 
Summary: too much too much
Review: regalman@usa.net The author spends way too much time on error, sometimes his own. His facts are wrong about Copernicus - Copernicus was not an astronomer-he was a mathematician. See the web page - university of florida - history of science. I am afraid if he can't a simple fact right about Copernicus, where else is he wrong. He studied astronomy, but was a mathematician. Ptolemy used mathematics (equants) to prove his theory not idealism. He did not just a patch a leak. Talk about intelligence, the author should stick to terms and definitions and stay away from poetry like-patch a leak. That doesn't sound to scientific to me. Before he talks about science, he ought to study history of philosophy. This author must have relied on unreliable sources, he certainly didn't look up information himself. He ought to have given up in the chapter on telescopes and intelligence. Ohhh, boy... P.S. as to the other review of the boy in Phillipians I hope you go to college and study before you speak or write.
Rating:
Summary: too much too much
Review: regalman@usa.net The author spends way too much time on error, sometimes his own. His facts are wrong about Copernicus - Copernicus was not an astronomer-he was a mathematician. See the web page - university of florida - history of science. I am afraid if he can't a simple fact right about Copernicus, where else is he wrong. He studied astronomy, but was a mathematician. Ptolemy used mathematics (equants) to prove his theory not idealism. He did not just a patch a leak. Talk about intelligence, the author should stick to terms and definitions and stay away from poetry like-patch a leak. That doesn't sound to scientific to me. Before he talks about science, he ought to study history of philosophy. This author must have relied on unreliable sources, he certainly didn't look up information himself. He ought to have given up in the chapter on telescopes and intelligence. Ohhh, boy... P.S. as to the other review of the boy in Phillipians I hope you go to college and study before you speak or write.
Rating:
Summary: Great book presenting a theory of learnable intelligence
Review: What is the nature of intelligence? How and to what extent can intelligence be developed? What aspects of intelligence can de identified and what aspects especially demand attention? While the classic view of intelligence implies that intelligence is a fixed, genetically determined characteristic of individuals this book presents a different perspective: a theory of learnable intelligence clarifying to what extent and how our intelligence can be amplified. Three dimensions of intelligence are identified: 1) neural intelligence: neurological speed and precision; in large part genetically determined, 2) experiential intelligence: extensive common knowledge and skill and specialized knowledge and skill; learned, 3) reflective intelligence: strategies for memory, problem solving, mental self-monitoring, meta-cognition; learned. Perkins argues that reflective intelligence offers the best opportunity for improving intelligent thought and behavior. Perkins identifies important pitfalls in human thinking and reasoning and shows how to avoid them. The author acknowledges that intellectual talent is a real phenomenon and does not deny any intellectual differences in intellectual talent. He argues that most people can learn to use whatever intellectual talents they have much better than they normally do. This book, which reminds of the work of Robert Sternberg, is a true must for anyone interested in theories of intelligence.
<< 1 >>
| 
