Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Verbal intelligence is the ability to understand and reason using concepts framed in words. More broadly, it is linked to problem solving , abstract reasoning , [ 1 ] and working memory . Verbal intelligence is one of the most g -loaded abilities.
The Verbal Comprehension scale subtests are described below: Similarities – (primary, FSIQ) asking how two words are alike/similar. Vocabulary – (primary, FSIQ) examinee is asked to define a provided word; Information (secondary) – general knowledge questions. Comprehension – (secondary) questions about social situations or common concepts.
An illustration of a weasel using "weasel words". In this case, "some people" are a vague and undefined authority. In rhetoric, a weasel word, or anonymous authority, is a word or phrase aimed at creating an impression that something specific and meaningful has been said, when in fact only a vague, ambiguous, or irrelevant claim has been communicated.
Socratic questioning (or Socratic maieutics) [1] is an educational method named after Socrates that focuses on discovering answers by asking questions of students. According to Plato, Socrates believed that "the disciplined practice of thoughtful questioning enables the scholar/student to examine ideas and be able to determine the validity of those ideas". [2]
Insofar as verbal reasoning is used to create and analyze arguments of language, while at the same time arguments (using language as their vehicle) are used to exercise and analyze reasoning, there will be some inevitable degree of circularity between the two. This point offers a fitting conclusion to the current section, and serves to ...
Evidence for the complexity of the task includes procuring and combining raw materials from various sources (implying they had a mental template of the process they would follow), possibly using pyrotechnology to facilitate fat extraction from bone, using a probable recipe to produce the compound, and the use of shell containers for mixing and ...
In contrast, empirical support for non-g intelligences is either lacking or very poor. She argued that despite this, the ideas of multiple non-g intelligences are very attractive to many due to the suggestion that everyone can be smart in some way. [85] A critical review of MI theory argues that there is little empirical evidence to support it:
Communication theories vary substantially in their epistemology, and articulating this philosophical commitment is part of the theorizing process. [1] Although the various epistemic positions used in communication theories can vary, one categorization scheme distinguishes among interpretive empirical, metric empirical or post-positivist, rhetorical, and critical epistemologies. [13]