Security versus Intelligence

There are more and more voices wondering what happens to certain people who, although they have a high level of education and intellectual instruction (vocational training) have narrow, limiting, absolutist opinions, which deny other basic principles and clear information. It seems that they simply cannot see anything other than their own opinion, although the level of intellectual training should allow them a more complex approach.

One of the basic principles of science is that you cannot be completely sure of anything until you can unequivocally prove that it is. In other words, researchers, scientists, intelligent people are by definition moderate, reluctant. The question arises, what does it mean to be smart? Is it the same as "smart", "intellectual", "educated"?

What happens?

Here are three perspectives that I find interesting:

1. Maslow's theory, the one who "built" a pyramid (Pyramid of Needs) as famous as the Egyptian pyramid, says: "Although all needs are instinctive, not all are as strong. Thus, the strongest needs were placed at the base of the needs pyramid. The higher a need rises to the top of the pyramid, the weaker and more specific it is to the individual. It is thus observed that the primary needs are common to both humans and animals. They include physiological needs (such as biological needs such as food, water, air, hygiene), sleep, sex, and a relatively constant body temperature.

Once the individual meets this level of needs, he can focus on safety needs. These have to do with stability and consistency in a relatively chaotic world. They are more about physical integrity, such as home and family security. In some cases, the need for security motivates some individuals to become religious, with religion offering them the comfort of a promise of safety through a heavenly place. ”

In other words, when the security is threatened, the individual will do anything to regain that security. He will give up all the others (upper floors) to save himself; regresses to a primary level of functioning and: may become obsessed with hygiene, self-safety, physical integrity (will be isolated in the house), may become a religious fanatic, etc. Being very close to the instinctual level, this need for security takes control, despite thinking / reasoning.

2. There is a well-known mechanism in biology, psychology, but a bit forgotten by medicine, which says: "put in danger, the brain activates (through the famous amygdala, responsible for emotions) and triggers the mechanism FIGHT OR RUN". The mechanism is one for defense and will do anything to get the person out of danger. This defense mechanism works in all mammals. We notice that it is an instinctive, basal mechanism that transcends reason and is therefore extracted from conscious control. Simply put: when you're scared you don't think anymore, you just want to survive. And do whatever it takes!

3. Intelligence. For years, researchers have struggled to understand what this is, how to define it, and how to measure it. It is of many kinds, can you be called "smart" if you are brilliant in one field and in another not at all? Etc.etc. All sorts of tests have been designed to try to discover, measure, define, all of the above. At this point, things have come a long way, we have very important information about what it is and how it is, but we still don't have a definition that satisfies all directions. And yet, some basic ideas have emerged from all the research so far, as a result of which even the latest tests of intelligence are built as such (include evidence of many types, from many directions / fields):

- The truly intelligent man (which is not necessarily related to IQ), is the one who integrates more knowledge in various fields, who can juggle figures, facts and evidence, in a credible, demonstrable (arguable) form, that is, it does not contradict already proven theories. Simply put, if we were to compare a very good physicist with another scientist who knows physics, chemistry, biology, etc., the latter might gain, due to his greater ability to integrate information from several sources.

"The really smart man is curious." Search, study continuously and he will never say "I know". He "knows he doesn't know" and he's fine with that, but that's exactly what makes him: read the next point

- The intelligent man is ... reserved, reluctant. He avoids absolutism and is always open to other reasoned opinions. It urges tolerance, understanding, reconciliation, moderation.

How can we apply all this to our discussion? We can imagine any specialist in any field who claims that there is only his opinion. And his opinion contradicts other research, results, etc. He is very good in his field, but he simply cannot accept another point of view, although there are clear and demonstrable arguments. Usually they are also very fervent, fixed in connection with their opinions. On the other hand, there are specialists, with complex knowledge, which we will recognize after the fact that they are more moderate, more reserved and… calmer; they use information from several fields and integrate more perspectives.

Try to apply the proposed perspectives to what you see around you. It seems that "security" has suspended "intelligence".