A More Realistic Fred And Ginger Problem

[soon2bepro]

Yeah, I think Ginger is smarter.

[recondite7]

Seems like fred would crush sngs, but Ginger would be much better at deepstacked NL cash.

[PairTheBoard]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm skeptical if it's possible [that someone like Ginger] exists.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

There are people who have difficulty performing under time constraints of a test and fair poorly in such competition. But they solve the most difficult homework problems, ones that sometimes none of the other students can solve. This is sometimes recognized in the grading of qualifying exams for the PHD program where consideration is given to the quality of the student's overall work.

You can be a "slow thinker" and go a long way in mathematics. Some people are not "quick" but they can go slow and bore deeply into mathematical concepts, gaining a more powerful understanding than someone quick to pick up the surface details. In fact, I've often thought this is a major reason why so many smart people give up their study of mathematics when the concepts start to get more abstract.

Their "quick" intelligence which has provided them such easy success in the past is no longer adequate to the task. They need to "slow down" their thinking to allow deeper understanding to develop. Many "quick smart" people catch on to this fact and learn to adapt. However, most just give up the study of math and go on to other things. It's debatable what they would do with a gun to their head. Even with such motivation the talent may just not be there.

PairTheBoard

[CrayZee]

[ QUOTE ]
I have never met anyone like Ginger, so I'm sceptical if its possible she exists. I can't see how she would struggle with concepts and be able to anticipate proofs: they seem like such closely linked attributes of the same type of intelligence to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most people hit roadblocks, too. I haven't met anyone that doesn't struggle a bit at least here and there w/ some concepts.

I side with Ginger because I value creativity more than rote memorization, but it's possible that Fred is smarter if he is constantly researching new material. Ginger has more skill with the material she's absorbed because she's both knowledgeable and creative; Fred is really just knowledgeable.

Ginger really just needs more time and effort to grasp some concepts. I'm unsure to what extent someone can train for creativity, but I doubt Fred will ever get as creative no matter how much research on creativity he does.

Fred and Ginger should get married because their skills overlap nicely.

[Taraz]

[ QUOTE ]
'Smarter' (to me at least) is too crude a distinguisher. Instead, I would say that:

Fred is likely to have a good career as a stockbroker, quantitative analyst, or some other such post in a place like a bank or financial services company

Ginger is likely to have a good career as a professor of mathematics at a university.

Fred would be terrible at Gingers career, and Ginger would suck at Freds.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this. Nobody agrees on what the definition of intelligence is, so the best you can say is that they are each better at some things.

Ginger would clearly be the better academic and is more likely to make a meaningful contribution to the advancement of a field. Fred on the other hand would make a much better "worker" and would clearly outproduce Ginger in terms of the work he can accomplish in any given set of time.

[tame_deuces]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
'Smarter' (to me at least) is too crude a distinguisher. Instead, I would say that:

Fred is likely to have a good career as a stockbroker, quantitative analyst, or some other such post in a place like a bank or financial services company

Ginger is likely to have a good career as a professor of mathematics at a university.

Fred would be terrible at Gingers career, and Ginger would suck at Freds.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this. Nobody agrees on what the definition of intelligence is, so the best you can say is that they are each better at some things.

Ginger would clearly be the better academic and is more likely to make a meaningful contribution to the advancement of a field. Fred on the other hand would make a much better "worker" and would clearly outproduce Ginger in terms of the work he can accomplish in any given set of time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not protesting your post, but Fred would be an awesome academic too. For example he would make an excellent peer reviewer of material.

[Siegmund]

If I had to give a one-word answer I would say Ginger. My justification would be "Ginger has potential to do something new, Fred can only understand all that has come before." The better answer, as already noted by several in the thread, is that they are suited for different careers - Fred as a 'technician' (accountant, broker, limit poker grinder, editor, whatever) and Ginger as a 'creator' (researcher or author or whatever.)

Somebody asked, are there really Gingers in the world? Yes there are - and, I have to say, from my time as a mathematics student, I thought much more highly of the people who grasped the concepts and could "see where we were going next" than I did of the people who wrote the best proofs. Writing the proof is the necessary evil that comes AFTER the flash of insight of what you want to prove.

[bovine_boat]

I'm not sure where the break even point is (in terms of Ginger taking 3x as long as Fred to get through things). But practically, problems given to smart people are almost never simple enough that being able to fully research a problem is better than having a good intuition.
I think Ginger would nearly always be perceived as smarter than Fred, though Fred would be more useful in some circumstances.

[Jcrew]

This is related to a subject I've been thinking about for the past few days. Breaking down different aspects of intelligence. To me, it looks there are three broad disjoint categories:

1.) Short term and long term memorization. How many iterations of exposure does it take to commit to memory.
2.) Size of working memory. How many different thought objects you can juggle at once in your mind.
3.) Permutation speed. How fast can you permute through different scenarios.

So to place Fred and Ginger in this framework, it seems like Fred's strength would be 1 and 2 while Ginger's would be 3?

[Siegmund]

I don't think so, jcrew -- none of your three points address the ability of Ginger to look in a *new direction*, as opposed to her or Fred's ability to remember and recombine facts they have already covered.

Or, if you prefer, you can say you've chosen to treat creativity and intelligence as two separate abilities. But I would prefer to say that your 1-2-3 all are connected specifically to memory, and not to intelligence (what use you make of your memories and your information about the present.)