“raw computing power” or “adeptness at achieving ones’ desired outcomes”
If you go for the second one, then you’re essentially suggesting that sometimes we should explain a person’s success (failure) in terms of their innate tendency to succeed (fail). This sounds like a mysterious explanation. It’s like saying that sleeping medicine works because it has a dormitive potency.
I’m not saying the second definition is never useful, just not in this context.
I am not sure if I follow :) For starters, what is an “innate tendency to succeed”...? How is that even a thing? One might have a set of personal attributes that, given a bunch of challenges, might prove to be beneficial in increasing chances of getting what you want.. like charisma or being especially adept at detecting what people actually need, or when they are lying… but it would be a bit… irrational… to call that a innate tendency...? I mean I know there’s plenty of people who would do that (and in so doing, make into a reputation that then becomes feared and actually helps in being victorious when dealing with those who are aware of said reputation...) but it is still an irrational human construct.
Judging the intelligence of an actor based on his or her incidence of goal attainment seems to me a very pragmatic and unbiased way of ascribing overall success and understanding of the challenges in the situations being faced.
Also, in various places you seem to be moving back and forth between explaining events in terms of how smart a decision was, vs how smart a person was. These are different (though of course related).
If you go for the second one, then you’re essentially suggesting that sometimes we should explain a person’s success (failure) in terms of their innate tendency to succeed (fail). This sounds like a mysterious explanation. It’s like saying that sleeping medicine works because it has a dormitive potency.
I’m not saying the second definition is never useful, just not in this context.
I am not sure if I follow :) For starters, what is an “innate tendency to succeed”...? How is that even a thing? One might have a set of personal attributes that, given a bunch of challenges, might prove to be beneficial in increasing chances of getting what you want.. like charisma or being especially adept at detecting what people actually need, or when they are lying… but it would be a bit… irrational… to call that a innate tendency...? I mean I know there’s plenty of people who would do that (and in so doing, make into a reputation that then becomes feared and actually helps in being victorious when dealing with those who are aware of said reputation...) but it is still an irrational human construct.
Judging the intelligence of an actor based on his or her incidence of goal attainment seems to me a very pragmatic and unbiased way of ascribing overall success and understanding of the challenges in the situations being faced.
Also, in various places you seem to be moving back and forth between explaining events in terms of how smart a decision was, vs how smart a person was. These are different (though of course related).