Can highly Intelligent person be illiterate?
Artona
Member Posts: 1,077
It's like in the title. Let's say we are creating a barbarian and give him 15 Intelligence. Is it plausible to role-play him as illiterate, or would it be as unreasonable as making 18 Charisma character stutter?
Yeah, it's one of those "what stats really" mean topics, but for me non-physical stats are very troubling, and Int isn't even the worst. Is Intelligence some kind of social skill, or some raw feature of the person like strength? I can see guys like Conan, Hercules or Gregor Clegane from aSoIaF being born bigger and stronger than other people, just like Phelps having better Constitution, but I'm not sure with Intelligence. Or, let's say, Charisma, the most vague stat in my opinion.
So, whatcha' think?
Yeah, it's one of those "what stats really" mean topics, but for me non-physical stats are very troubling, and Int isn't even the worst. Is Intelligence some kind of social skill, or some raw feature of the person like strength? I can see guys like Conan, Hercules or Gregor Clegane from aSoIaF being born bigger and stronger than other people, just like Phelps having better Constitution, but I'm not sure with Intelligence. Or, let's say, Charisma, the most vague stat in my opinion.
So, whatcha' think?
1
Comments
However, 18 CHA and stutter is highly unlikely in my opinion (and that's the main problem, we all will probably have our own =D), unless done consciously to achieve a result. Imagine stuttering Hitler, he would have never been able to rise in power.
Also often we concentrate on just one stat, whereas usually it's combination of number of them that's important. Would a high CHA, but low(ish) INT and WIS make a good leader?
I had pretty similar thinking.
And I *assume* that barbarian of 22 Int could figure some kind of alphabet on his own, I guess.
Given how much Cha represents... I don't know. Have you seen "Kingsman"? Bad guy from that movie has some form of speech impediment, yet seems to be convincing for people. Charisma means social skill, but also how pretty you are, and how easily you threaten people, and how easily you can lead them (if I understand correctly). Those are many separate things, that seem to come from different sources. Guy like Gregor Clegane from aSoIaF could easily intimidate people given just his size, but he is not *charismatic*, right?
I imagine some kind of Prince Charming, loved by his man, but easily manipulated by his advisors.
Literacy rates in the Forgotten Realms are well above Medieval Europe.
From my personal experiences I see no connection between dislexia and Intelligence. I havent seen research that suggests such connection (but I freely admit that I hadnt taken the time to look for it).
So imo you could easily apoint an 18 Intelligence score to an illiterate.
*One definition is that literacy level is significantly behind what would be expected, based on the outcome of an IQ test. So if a person fairs badly on an IQ test they are unlikely to be diagnosed as dyslexic.
Of course many, like myself, are dyslexic but still literate, so it could be considered a bit of a red herring.
So... what's the nature of connection between education and intelligence? Is there any? Can you be highly educated, but have low Intelligence? What kind of person would that be?
And how would you roleplay high Int person with no formal education?
I agree with you both, @Artona and @Balrog99, examples given by you are great. Though, last thing I mentioned in my previous post applies here nicely I think - would those characters be as charismatic if they weren't as intelligent? What I mean, they overcome their shortcomings with intellect and thus seem more charismatic. What do you think?
I think that answer is: yes, and I see no reason why any other stat wouldn't grant you additional layer of persuasivness, depending on what you do. For an instance, higher Dex makes you mare swift and graceful, so it affects your dancing skills. Great dancing skills would make you more desirable, right? At the same time, battle prowess and experience in time would make you trusted leader in times of war. I mean, using examples from aSoIaF again: Jeoffrey would probably have high Charisma due to his looks (IIRC, he is described as handsome in books), while Barristan Selmy due to leadership skills, his fame as honourable and great warrior. They could both have Charisma of 15 (let's say), but yet they don't seem to share any core feature that would explain the same stat. On the other hand, two people with Strength of 15 seem to be able to do roughly the same things, unlike Selmy and Jeoffrey.
Man, it's getting complicated.
And to ponder more about your point, @Shikao - let's make some kind of chart:
High Cha, low Int, low Wis: can convince people to ride into sea to reclaim Atlantis. Drowns.
High Cha, High Int, low Wis: can convince people to ride into sea to reclaim Atlantis, and will try to create submarine.
High Cha, low Int, High Wis: probably won't know where Atlantis is or how submarine works, but will have enough common sense to see that idea was stupid in the first place.
High Cha, High Int, High Wis: Octavian August, I guess?
Intelligence represents your ability to assimilate education. Someone of lower intelligence will take longer to learn something than someone with higher intelligence, and may not be able to achieve as high a level due to diminishing returns.
Someone with high intelligence but little or no access to formal education (e.g. a peasant farmer) would still learn from exposure to the world around them, so, whilst being illiterate, with no knowledge of history or science, they would have a good understanding of the word around them: the habits of birds and animals, weather patterns, and so on.
Or, to put it another way, Intelligence is the hardware, education is the software.
A character with little intelligence but high education would be an upper class twit like Bertie Wooster (who, having attended Eton, could just about manage to quote Shakespeare at you, but he might mangle it a bit).
Intelligence isn't just a score on an IQ test. There are many facets that make up intelligence. The ability to turn a phrase may not help you to design a better way to manufacture carbon fiber.
I did a good bit of hunting and fishing in my youth, and it requires a lot of knowledge, analysis, planning, etc. You have to know how to read tracks andother signs, know the feeding and defense habits of animals, how to hide and how to dress to break up your outline, how to stay downwind, know when and where fish will feed, what bait they'll attack, etc etc etc. There is also a seasonal aspect to this, a weather aspect to this, a terrain aspect to this, and the fen a time of day aspect to this
Now imagine this when you live in a hunter-gatherer society. No cars, no sporting goods stores, etc. You have to work with dogs, make and repair weapons, barter for goods (which requires more thinking and reading people than paying a set price), tracking the time and day without calendars and watches, etc.Think about the knowledge needed to knap tools. Think about what you need to know to make pitch to preserve the leather that holds the arrowhead to the shaft. And so on and so on.
I also have an advanced degree in a mathematical science. I've worked with some brilliant people, but a couple of them can't be trusted to sit the right way around on a toilet.
So yes, you can be a flipping genius but not literate, in my opinion.
One who learns things quickly, and can solve problems presented to them.
Think of it this way; the genetic sum of any given ability is a fluid and the environment is, well, the environment you keep the fluid in. Your crystalline ability is the combination of both. So, adding salt to water will decrease the crystalline temperature, right? Well, no amount of salt can decreasee the crystalline point to that of nitrogen. Except the differences between humans are not that marked. An average person runs 100 m in 13 seconds, but a trained person in around 11 s. Usain Bolt can run 100 meters in 9 seconds.
So, like, if your potential intelligence was 18, but you never made an effort in school, you can deduct around 20%, and if you grew up in some impoverished dirt farm where sentences longer than four words are considered witchcraft, deduct another 20% - you would end up with like 11 int. Now, barbarians actually need smarts to survive in the wilderness, so I think they are not a perfect example. If you want someone with genetic potential of 18 IQ under the intellectually least possibly stimulating conditions, you actually want a slum. But not just any old slum, you want the creme de la creme of shitty slums, such as whatever the realmz equivalent of Calcutta is, so a better example would actually be a thief. A neglected or orphaned child forced to fend for him/herself, and routinely harassed by authorities and beaten by stronger kids and/or whatever adult guardian the child seeks out in lieu of loving parents - there you go! Genetic potential of 18 squandered to a mere average of 11. Even if this unfortunate souls life took a turn for the better, the brain would basically have atrophied by now, and proper study etc would probably never see the intelligence reach above, say, 13 or maybe 14.
Anyways, the point to all of this is that if you cannot read, you would likely lose access to intellectually stimulating material, and therefore likely have a less trained brain. Thus, illiteracy would lower your intelligence - ergo, literacy cannot truly be separated from intelligence.
So yeah, it is possible.
A study done on eskimoes living in the artic circle came to the conclusion that the sheer amount of knowledge required to survive was the equivalent of a university degree.
And they didn't find any drop outs.
generally 15 seems like a bit too much. i wouldn't go over 13
Most intelligent people are illiterate in most languages after all...
Don't want to go there really but as you mentioned it, I wikkied "Eskimo".
Seems like it is a lot more appropriate than "innuit" or "ipota".
Let's all hear it for those from the Dorset Culture, wonder if they had the accents (that's a joke just in case anybody is offended).
It's not a derogatory term, it's a case once again of those who shout loudest drowning out dissenting voices.
Squeaky wheel gets the kick.........
As for words being derogatory, sadly, etymology just can't be used to determine if people should be offended (not on its own at least). Case in point : negro vs black. Same etymology, different cultural baggage. And if in wikipedia we trust, well, it does say right there on eskimo page that "Some people consider Eskimo derogatory". Not that this means a word cannot be used, of course, but just that it cannot be used without running the risk of pissing someone off.
Semantics aside, and assuming average-or-better intelligence, I agree with Calmar that it'd be pretty weird to grow up illiterate in Candlekeep, especially when you're Gorion's ward. For your everyday barbarian though, sure, why not?
Although you could ask how that barbarian worked his intellect up to higher than average levels if he never left his tribe of illiterate steppe dwellers. But that doesn't really jive with DnD stats being set in stone at character creation with very little room for change.
As I said, continue using it if you like, I was merely attempting to enlighten you before you do offend someone with the term.