Free Sample: Perception of Intelligence Across Different Cultures paper example for writing essay

Perception of Intelligence Across Different Cultures - Essay Example

There Is significance In the consideration of the conceptual differences of Intelligence among various cultures. Members of society create meaning and understanding from the cultural environments in which they embrace. Intelligence can be best understood in cultural context. In this sense, behavioral actions that are considered to be intelligent in one culture may be unintelligent in another and vice versa.

Researchers In Africa, Asia, and other international cultures found that people In on-western cultures Ideology about Intelligence differs fundamentally from those In Western culture (Insistent, 2004; Benson, 2003). N Gibbets (2004) reveals that people In Western countries have a tendency to view intelligence as a means for people to create categories and engage in rational debate. In contrast, people in Eastern cultures view intelligence as a way for members of community to recognize contradiction and complexity; to include playing their social roles in successful manner (Insistent, 2004).

This paper will discuss Your and Korean (Confucian) ultras and how each perceives Intelligence, cultural factors that Influence how Intelligence Is viewed: to Include how intelligence may be measured and why. Your and Korean (Confucian) Cultures Intelligence Perception The African continent has a common cultural structure, it consists of thousands of ethnic groups and different cultures. Within the country’s wall there is mixture of tribes that have their own unique culture. This Includes a diversity of beliefs, language, food, religion and social organization.

Africans, In particular the Your tribe, Is considered to be rich In terms of culture and tradition. The Your people live mainly In Southwestern Nigeria. Their tradition is to organize themselves into networks of connected villages, towns and kingdoms; directed by an Bob (King) and/or Bale (a nobleman or mayor) (Tot & Anyone, 2013). Africa as whole hold basic similarities and differences regarding their conception of intelligence; although within each culture lies a subculture who has values and concepts of intelligence that may differ.

In this Gabon which means sensible behavior. In the Your culture there is expectation that Gabon and lord sensible behavioral actions is a characteristic in which everyone assesses and should exercise this on a regular basis (Acadia, 2014). In most African communities, such the Your culture, members do not separate intelligence from social competence. African communities tend to view intelligence inclusive of all social relationships. This is considered highly significance because of family and the extended familial system.

Parents in countryside of Africa perceive cognitive ability and social responsibility as interwoven (Acadia, 2014). Research provides substantial evidence in differences in the perception among African culture’s notion f intelligence. Cultures such as Zambia and Your emphasize, cooperativeness, obedience and social responsibilities as an important contributor to one being considered as intelligence; children who are intelligent are expected to show respect to adults (Acadia, 2014;Benson, 2003). Sais’s continent consists of a diversity of cultural differences and beliefs.

India is located in South East Asia, and has over 200 different languages. However, Hindi is the official language and is considered one of the most commonly spoken languages in the world, next to the English and Chinese language. In the Asian Culture language, religion, food, and total ways of living can vary from one cultural group to another; concepts of intelligence may differ as well (Acadia, 2014). These variances on perceptions of intelligence may occur when a particular subculture conceptualize certain behaviors as intelligent; while another subgroup may not view such behavior as intelligent.

East Asian cultures do bear some similarities. Traditions such as Confucian, Taoist, Buddhist and Hindu are reflective of the East Asian cultures. As such these traditions may influence perception of intelligence (Acadia, 2014). In contrast to Your African culture, Asians conceptualize intelligence differently ; in that it is governed by culture and traditions. This is, Eastern conceptions of intelligence are described as rooted in traditions. In this regard, East Asian cultures embrace Taoist, Hindu, Buddhist and Confucian ideologies (Acadia, 2014).

These philosophies encourage religious and moral attitudes; including the belief that intelligence is interwoven and considered part of moral and religious behaviors. For example, Korean culture who practices Confucian tradition would consider an intelligent as a person who spends their life alluding character to act in accordance with what is right. Intelligent people spend a great time and effort acquiring knowledge, they enjoy being a life time learner. The intelligent person practices what is learned through a process of self-cultivation (Acadia, 2014).

Similar to Your culture people are perceived as intelligent when they are able to maintain social relationships. Within Korean Confucian culture, scholarly people are highly revered. The core teachings of Confucius includes self- cultivation; as well as educational attainment. Those educated is perceived as intelligent in comparison to one who is uneducated. Education is highly valued. The Korean culture perceive certain professional people as highly intelligent.

These professions include court Judges, university professors, high-ranking civil servants and teachers; they are highly regarded (Acadia, 2014). Cultural factors that can influence how intelligent is perceived. In both Your and Korean cultures, significant influence is related to the ideologies and lord beliefs that have been embedded in how to think about what intelligence is. Members of both cultures are socialized to perceive intelligence in accordance with how one behaves ND interacts within their social relationships and environment.

The ideology of solicitation is not always to organized to teach children for academic pursuit or to become individuals that are outside the inherited culture; rather solicitation is about teaching social competence and shared responsibility within the familial system and their ethnic community (Acadia, 2014;Amounts, 2001). In this regard, Koreans cultural perception of intelligence is influence by social, culture norms and Confucian traditions, religious and educational factors. In the Confucian traditions, here is an expectation for cultural members to seek knowledge, cultivate themselves to be viewed upon as intelligent.

Being perceived as intelligent encompasses a process of self-cultivation; this is a core concept of the Confucian way. Characteristics of benevolence, to include doing what is right is taught early in life (Acadia, 2014). In the Your culture, perception of intelligent is influenced by cultural norms that are related to having social relationships; the cultural environment and/or familial systems embraced are influential as well. Parents tend o place more emphasis on practical intelligence and less on academic intelligence.

Research has shown that similar to East Asian (Korean), the Your and other African communities’ cognitive skills and abilities serve as important descriptors as to what an intelligent person is (Acadia, 2014). This is inclusive of one’s ability to make decisions, problem solve, verbal accuracy, inference and perceptual skills are all essential characteristics of intelligence within both cultures. In this respect, both cultures contend acquiring knowledge is a product of intelligence (Acadia, 2014) How Intelligence Might Be Measured

There is complexity in measuring intelligence arcos cultures. People in different cultures perception and structure of their world vary in many ways. Some researchers are making efforts to understand, interpret and reveal differences in intelligence based on cognitive behaviors of individuals and/or groups related to culturally shaped or formed experiences. While other researchers and lord psychologist are attempting to rate intelligence according to cognitive ability (Amounts, 2001).

There is significance to understanding the underlying cognitive construct that is involved in intellectual development. In this respect, measuring and [or approaching intelligence based on cultural experiences seems plausible (Acadia, 2014). There are differences and similarities in the perception of Your and Korean culture in what is deemed intellectual. However, the approach to measuring both culture’s intelligence would be the same. Amounts (2001) reveals that cultural factors prescribe what should be learned and at which age.

The cognitive style approach is selected as it can provide insight to the Your and Korean culture; this is, how intelligence is acquired, perceived and should be assured. In this sense, the cultural environment can lead to different patterns of ability. In that the interrelationships patterns in cognitive performance relates to how the culture members intellectual abilities are developed; this is a result of the life (Amounts, 2001). There is importance when using the cognitive style approach in assessing intelligence of Your and Korean Culture that exploration is not based on observation of their performance.

This requires a deeper analysis, such as examining the cultural life of the groups, behavior competencies in their trial cultural settings; to include how nurturing influenced individual development (Amounts, 2001). In line with the application of Howard Granger’s inutile intelligence model, numerical or statistical expressions of intelligence does not reflect a full and accurate representation of Your and Korean culture abilities. Garner describes eight distinct intelligences that are based on skills and abilities that are valued within different cultures (Smith, 2008).

In this sense, cultural based experiences that influence intellectual development of the Your and Korean group affords various intellectual abilities to emerge. For example, since both Your and Korean culture groups deem intelligence as those who have mastered competence in their interactions in social relationships; interpersonal and interpersonal intelligence may be high. Interpersonal, reflects one’s ability to bonds and interact with others, form social relationships; relates to others in a variety of ways in accordance with their cultural norms.

Interpersonal one has a strong personal ethical and moral code; aware of beliefs and values that motivate them in manner that is applicable to behavior of their given culture (Smith, 2008). This includes the other multiple intelligences as well; Garner addition to list, spiritual Intelligence may be reflective to be high in Korean (Confucian) culture. Intelligence is not a one entity structure; therefore intelligence testing of these groups should include a sound Psychometric instrument that is modeled towards Granger’s multiple intelligence test; one that is modified and translated in appropriate word and language format.

Alternate methods would accompany intelligence testing that can provide qualitative insight, as well as quantitative measures of intelligence to formulate realistic depiction. Summary There is an ongoing debate related to if intelligence testing in the current format should be used or continued; in this regard, testing can provide benefits in ways of improving learning and assist with making necessary changes to enhance growth and development when needed. However, evaluating test results only to reflect the cognitive abilities in groups is problematic and for many reasons (Benson, AAA).

Different cultures do not Just think differently about things, but their perception differs. The meanings of the word intelligence does only include a particular set of mental functions but also includes some value-based conceptions; good relationship with others, acting sensibly, good moral conduct and educational factors (Acadia, 2014;Benson, AAA; Amounts, 2001) There is importance in understanding that assumption should not be made that cognitive skills perceived, valued, and/or labeled in one culture as intelligence are fixed across all cultures.