Questions directed at "intelligent people" always feel like iamverysmart bait just waiting for cringe. Defining yourself as a smart person is like defining yourself as atheist, if that alone has given you a sense of superiority it can get kind of embarrassing pretty quickly. I don't believe intelligence is the sole measure of importance of a person or even myself, and then IQ tests only demonstrate an even narrower application of intelligence, but I do typically score 2.5-3 standard deviations above average in IQ tests.
you pick up any book, read it, and understand the gist with minimal repetition?
Short answer, more or less yes, as long as it's not heavily reliant on foreign concepts not defined or inferable within the book itself.
Can you infer solid and accurate conclusions based on a small amount of evidence?
Sometimes. Some situations just need more data to understand accurately, sometimes you can come up with creative ways to get there with less evidence, sometimes you miss those creative solutions and only realise them after you brute forced it with more info gathering. Creative problem solving isn't quite as consistent as solving a straightforward logic problem, just being smart doesn't mean you're guaranteed a eureka moment.
Is any subject or discipline up for grabs or do you have to have a keen interest in a particular field in order to flourish?
Motivation and conscientiousness are separate from intelligence and no field is completely effortless to flourish in no matter how smart you are, so yeah interest is necessary. But switching lanes is definitely easier if you're more intelligent.
What is something you are able to do that you know is because of your intelligence -- the proverbial 1,000 pound deadlift of the brain
Interdisciplinary work is definitely the realm where having a high general intelligence has the greatest advantage. Intelligence alone is not enough to just automatically make it work, you still need the right foundational knowledge of each discipline to make it work. Hence despite being old enough that I'm not as plastic and my straight logic processing speeds are slowing slightly, I find interdisciplinary work easier than ever, as my repertoire of foundational knowledge has continued to expand. But trying to introduce concepts from other subjects and synthesizing that with knowledge from our own discipline to solve a problem is definitely where I start losing some of my more studious than naturally intelligent colleagues.
Questions directed at "intelligent people" always feel like iamverysmart bait just waiting for cringe. Defining yourself as a smart person is like defining yourself as atheist, if that alone has given you a sense of superiority it can get kind of embarrassing pretty quickly. I don't believe intelligence is the sole measure of importance of a person or even myself, and then IQ tests only demonstrate an even narrower application of intelligence, but I do typically score 2.5-3 standard deviations above average in IQ tests.
Short answer, more or less yes, as long as it's not heavily reliant on foreign concepts not defined or inferable within the book itself.
Sometimes. Some situations just need more data to understand accurately, sometimes you can come up with creative ways to get there with less evidence, sometimes you miss those creative solutions and only realise them after you brute forced it with more info gathering. Creative problem solving isn't quite as consistent as solving a straightforward logic problem, just being smart doesn't mean you're guaranteed a eureka moment.
Motivation and conscientiousness are separate from intelligence and no field is completely effortless to flourish in no matter how smart you are, so yeah interest is necessary. But switching lanes is definitely easier if you're more intelligent.
Interdisciplinary work is definitely the realm where having a high general intelligence has the greatest advantage. Intelligence alone is not enough to just automatically make it work, you still need the right foundational knowledge of each discipline to make it work. Hence despite being old enough that I'm not as plastic and my straight logic processing speeds are slowing slightly, I find interdisciplinary work easier than ever, as my repertoire of foundational knowledge has continued to expand. But trying to introduce concepts from other subjects and synthesizing that with knowledge from our own discipline to solve a problem is definitely where I start losing some of my more studious than naturally intelligent colleagues.