People are often said to possess Street Smarts or Book Smarts. Much ado is made about which type is superior, and, conversely, alot of bustas be runnin' they mouth. I propose that there is a third catagory of smarts: Google Smarts. This is a person who has limited knowledge, but uses Street Smarts to appear to have Book Smarts.
Google Smarts is the ability to talk knowledgeably about a subject until someone asks you a question.
People don't care about how smart you are. They only care what you can do for them.
I mind my own business smarts and take my vitamins smarts.
Other:
Maxwell Smarts
OK, if you have book smarts you can read and comprehend street smarts assuming you get your hands on said book.
If you have street smarts, no amount of street learnin' is gonna give you book smarts, therefore you will be really street smart while you live in the street.
'Nuff said.
Whichever smart is most appropriate for what you are seeking to do/be at any given time.
Emotional smarts. That whole distance from the head to the heart thing. I used to be pretty book smart, but I was never emotionally very intelligent. I make really dumb decisions about people that give me nothing but grief, either sooner or later.
PS what's 1337 smarts?
I would say a combonation of street smarts and book smarts. But the most important "smart" of all is common sense. Seems like too many are lacking common sense.
Oh, and I voted other.
This is the theory I prescribe to when I consider the intelligence of another person. Many of you will probably be familiar with gardner's theory, but for those of you who aren't, this is the abstract for an article about employing Gardners theory for educating blind children.
Abstract: Howard Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences has provided educators with a new view of intelligence. It emphasizes that science, math and language are not the only ways to exhibit intelligence. People exhibit intelligence in many different ways. Each type of intelligence is as valuable as the others. Gardner classifies these intelligences into eight different areas: bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, linguistic, logical-mathematical, musical, spatial and natural intelligence. This paper reviews studies done for enhancing multiple intelligences in children who are blind. It also presents findings from brain research that supports the Theory of Multiple Intelligences and their implications in the field of teaching and learning. In addition, this paper provides a guide to modify curricular activities in the glance of the Theory of Multiple Intelligences. These activities are designed to improve different talents in children who are blind such as imagination, creativity, cooperation, social skills, self reflection, linguistic abilities, critical thinking, scientific thinking and attitudes towards nature. Examples of the teaching methods that are used to enhance these talents are: cooperation learning, guided imagery, brainstorming, questioning, scientific inquiry, projects-based learning, learning cycle, and some others. Sample lesson plans are provided in this paper.
Chameleon smarts
I'm with Ibram on common sense *smarts* though, problem is its all perception
I rely on books and gut instinct(intuition) whatever. I can't really tell you what is better per se. Just what I need.
I've also been mulling over wisdom being kindness- not IQ. Just thinking about it. Or maybe I just need to be kinder in general and it has nothing to do with IQ. See how smart I am? See- I have no idea. Don't use my methods you'll be just as confused as I am and make sense about everything.
*Note: Common sense is only for the common.
How about the 'smatering of everything smarts'? If you're stuck squarely in only one catagory you're unlikely to come out ahead of someone who has mediocre abilities in many. Take the book smarts for example, if you can't interact with others or make good social decisions then at best you're going to be the bumbling professer who can't even keep his tie straight. If you're stuck in street smarts then you can't do anything that requires a complex skill.
What's wrong with bumbling professors who can't keep their ties straight?
Sexual smarts
mmm.... if it smarts, you're probally doing it wrong.......
.... but I digress...
When Flint enumerated 'Google Smarts' I thought he had finally caught up with my father always used to say......
You don't need to know everything, just where to look for what you need to know.
What's wrong with bumbling professors who can't keep their ties straight?
Nothing at all! Some of my favourite history professors can't keep their ties straight....their laces done up, or their studies in any semblance of order. One of the professors who teaches our historical skills module is like something out of a book, he really aught to be an Oxford don. I went in to his study for a consultation and had to move a cup of tea (with saucer) off the one and only chair so I could sit down.....having moved the cup and saucer I then had to find a place to put it.....the desk and small table were overflowing with books, journals, photographs of medieval manuscripts and assorted other stuff. He was however, utterly charming in a very old fashioned way.