The Brain and Intelligence

Read and discuss the following text.

Study Habits to Maximise your Potential

Read and discuss the following text.

Explain the words and word combinations in bold in the text.

It is of the utmost importance for students to be meticulously organised in the way they occupy their time. They should avoid squandering their hours on trivia, while not devoting enough time to tasks which are of prime importance to their studies.

One aspect of time management is the making of lists. Students should acquire the habit of making detailed lists of the things they need to do and indicating, where possible, when they need to be done by. Such a list might include, for example, the written assignments which have been set for a particular week or certain books and journals which have been recommended by tutors.

While on the subject of books and journals, it is worth mentioning that effective learning inevitably means effective reading. Reading is a skill which needs to be developed. Many students are very ineffective readers and this is ultimately reflected in their poor performance in exams.

Note-taking is another area where students may need help. If students are not in the habit of keeping organised notes which cover all points, most of what they read or hear in lectures will be forgotten or not clearly understood later.

All of which brings us to the question of exams. Success in exams can only be achieved if their preparation is approached in a systematic way. It is so important for students to start this well in advance of exams – so many students have failed exams or done badly because they have not spent enough time going over their notes beforehand.

2) Find the English equivalents for the following in the text:

крайне важно, тщательно/скурпулёзно, посвящать достаточно времени чему-л., приобрести привычку делать что-л.; стоит упомянуть, что…; конспектирование, заранее просмотреть/прочитать записи.

3) Fill in the correct preposition or particle, then make sentences:

1) to be … the utmost/prime importance; 2) to squander hours … trivia; 3) to devote (enough) time … smth; 4) to acquire the habit … doing smth; 5) to be reflected … smth; 6) success/poor performance … exams; 7) to be … the habit … doing smth; 8) to approach smth … a systematic way; 9) to start smth well … advance … smth; 10) to go over the notes beforehand.

4) Which of the recommendations are quite reasonable to your mind? What would you add to the list?

Human intelligence is an elusive quality. We all think we know it when we see it, but try to pin down that quality to a firm, testable definition and suddenly, even for the most experienced researchers, the concept disappears. But now a team of British and German scientists believe they have firmly nailed down at least part of the notion of intelligence. They claim to have found a location for intelligence, whatever it is, in the brain,

For many years researchers have believed that intelligence is a quality which is spread throughout the whole human brain. Traditional psychologists such as Benjamin Martin believe that this accounts for incidences where physical damage to the brain need not affect intelligence at all. By using advanced scanning equipment, however, researchers led by John Duncan of the Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit in Cambridge now think that it is much more localised, and at the front of the brain in particular.

Duncan and his team have attempted to link intelligence to the activity of nerve cells in the brain by giving subjects a series of problem-solving tests. These tests are of the standard sort used to test and measure intelligence. They resemble puzzles, where sequences of numbers or letters have to be rearranged or continued, or patterns of shapes have to be inverted. While subjects are carrying out these intelligence tasks, their heads are scanned to see where electrical activity and blood flow in the brain are concentrated. It turns out that activity was concentrated in the frontal cortex and so, Duncan and his team presume, intelligence is situated there, too.

This new idea has not been met with universal acceptance, however. The usual definition of intelligence was set by Charles Spearman 100 years ago. This was the quality that allows some people to be very good at a whole variety of things - music, mathematics, practical problem solving and so on – while others are not. He called this quality general intelligence, or the 'g factor' for short. It was a contentious idea even at the time, but still no-one has come up with a better definition. Nonetheless, because the notion of intelligence is imprecisely defined, the idea that there is a fixed location for intelligence has to be questioned.

The questioning comes in an article in the prestigious journal Science, the same edition as Duncan's own article. Yale psychologist Robert Sternberg points out that many people who are clearly intelligent, such as leading politicians and lawyers, do very badly in intelligence tests. Conversely, one might argue, there are plenty of academics who are good at intelligence tests but who cannot even tie their own shoe laces! Sternberg implies that the idea that being a successful politician or lawyer does not require intelligence flies in the face of reason. Rather more likely is the idea that so-called intelligence tests can have little to do with many practical manifestations of intelligence. The skills of verbal and mathematical analysis measured by these tests can tell us very little about the skills of social interaction and people-handling which are equally essential for success and are, therefore, equally valid qualities of intelligence.

Sternberg makes a further criticism of the conclusions drawn by Duncan's team. The mental-atlas approach really does not tell us anything about intelligence. The fact that we know a computer's 'intelligence' is produced by a computer chip and that we can say where this chip is, does not tell us anything about the computer's intelligence or ability. We could easily move the location of the chip and this would not change the computer's 'intelligence'. As Benjamin Martin points out, this may be what happens in reality when, following physical damage to one area of the brain, knowledge and ability appear able to relocate.

Notes:

to account for smth – объяснять что-л.

cognition – познание.

cortex [‘ko:teks] – кора головного мозга.

frontal cortex – передний отдел коры головного мозга.

to presume [pri’zju:m] – предполагать, полагать.

contentious [kən’tenSəs] – спорный.

conversely [‘konvə:sli] – наоборот.

2) Scan the text and find the English equivalents for the following:

неуловимый, дать точное определение, уловить (значение), механическое/физическое повреждение мозга, связать что-л. с чем-л., нервные клетки, испытуемый/подопытный, последовательность чисел, переставлять/менять порядок (2 варианта), быть общепризнанным, предложить лучшее (более корректное) определение, иметь неточное определение, точное местоположение чего-л., издание (книги)/номер (журнала), показывать плохие результаты при решении тестов, завязывать шнурки, противоречить здравому смыслу, иметь мало общего с чем-л., применение интеллекта в практических целях, социальное взаимодействие, необходимые составляющие (части) чего-л., сделать вывод, перемещаться.

3) Paraphrase the following using the words and word combinations from the text:

This notion doesn’t have a clear definition.

Many politicians aren’t good at solving intelligence tests.

That idea wasn’t accepted by all scientists.

It’s wrong to explain the child’s behaviour only by his genetics, there are other factors that can be involved.

What you are saying is not reasonable.

Some plants are able to move to another place: to get more sun or shadow, for example.

4) Fill in the correct preposition or particle, then make sentences:

1. The scientists can’t still pin … intelligence … a clear definition.

2. Intelligence is believed to be spread … the whole human brain.

3. Careless driving accounts … a lot of road accidents.

4. Physical damage … the brain does not necessarily lead … serious consequences.

5. Some scientists believe that intelligence is localized … the front of the brain.

6. The police link him … the Friday burglary.

7. You should carry … this task before doing the test.

8. It turned … that their plans had little to do … the reality.

9. Your suggestion flies … the face of reason!

10. He pointed … that that idea hadn’t been met … universal acceptance.

11. He did badly … math tests, but was good … painting and writing stories.

5) Answer the questions:

What kind of quality is human intelligence? Why?

What has been found by a team of British and German scientists?

What is the traditional belief as for the intelligence location? What can support this idea?

What did Duncan and his team do to find the location for intelligence? What did they find out?

Is this idea universally accepted?

What is the traditional definition of intelligence? Is it a precise definition? Is there a better definition?

Who questioned the results of the experiments carried out by Duncan and his team? What is the first argument against this experiment? Do you agree with this argument?

What does the scientist want to prove speaking about a computer chip?

What can it explain about the human brain?

1) Read the text below and fill each blank with one suitable word:

Lionel Mendax: Curriculum

I was a 1) ___________ prodigy and went to the most expensive and most academically demanding schools in the country. I was a model student and was popular both 2) ___________ my teachers and my classmates. I was elected class president for six years and I passed every exam I 3) _____________ for with flying 4) ________________ and came 5) ______________ of my class in every subject I took. I also excelled 6) _______________ sports. In my final year at school, I 7) ________________ a scholarship to Cambridge University. Cambridge was child’s play and I sailed 8) ________________ every exam I took, finally getting a first class honours degree 9) ____________________ natural sciences. On graduating 10) _____________ Cambridge, I went on to Oxford to 11) _________________ research 12) _________________ atomic particles. 13) _________________ completed my research, I took 14) _______________ a teaching post at Harvard, where I lectured 15) _______________ astrophysics. I’m presently teaching post-16) ___________________ students everything they do not know about nuclear physics at the Sorbonne University in Paris. Oh well, it keeps me occupied, and it’s a job.

Дата добавления: 2014-12-29