Stephen Lajoie (
Wed, 8 Feb 1995 20:09:33 GMT

In article <3h545d$>, J Lopez <> wrote:
>In <> (Stephen Lajoie) writes:
>>In article <3h2nip$>, J Lopez <> wrote:
>>>Again, if they were ignorant, on what basis do you call them "intelligent?"
>>>Maybe they seemed to be smart, but were missing Aces out of the deck, so
>>>to speak.
>>Ignorant does not equal "not intelligent". Intelligence makes it easier
>>to not be ignorant, but simply having intelligence does not endow a
>>person with knowledge of all things.
>I'm still wondering on what basis you called those fools intelligent...
>>>So, is "hardworkingness" a part of intelligence?
>You sound awfully sure of that. I think it is.

And I think you're wrong. One is a personality trait that is learned. The
other is an ability that is influenced by environment and genetics.

>>>Let's not forget that "stupid" and "lazy" often go together.
>>An interesting stereotype. I have found many hard working people that
>>were not particularly bright. And many bright people that were lazy.
>Intelligence is "problem solving ability," more or less. Correctamundo?


>How are you able to solve a problem if you're unable to divert any effort
>towards it? You know that other old aphorism about genius--?

You wount. That doesn't mean you couldn't solve the problem if you tried.

>>I'd have to say that stupid and lazy don't go together. Work smarter, not
>That has nothing to do with laziness. Laziness is a disinclination to work.
>The "harder" in that old chestnut involves working hard, not because one is
>inclined to, but because one doesn't know any better. I'd say MOST lazy
>people wind up working harder at what they actually need to accomplish
>than they would have done if they had worked "smarter" in the first place.
>Look at yourself in grad school. I'll bet you had to work twice as hard
>to "catch up" to the people who already had learned good study habits in

Lets' just agree to disagree about lazyness and intelligence.


Steve La Joie