In signal processing theory there’s this thing called the Shannon Theorem or Nyquist rate. It basically says that to sample a fast signal you need to be twice as fast as the thing you’re sampling. If you’re a little slow on your observations then the observed object looks too fast or too slow. This is why a wheel on a car can look like it’s going backwards.
I’ve often wondered whether a similar theory applies to measuring the intelligence of others. i.e. you need to be at least twice as smart as Marx to know whether he’s talking bollocks or not.
And if it IS true, how likely is it that anyone is twice as intelligent as somebody else? And even if you have Mr Double Intellect on the planet, he can only tell you that he’s twice as smart as you because you’re not clever enough to know if he’s lying.
AND even Mr 10-x-normal-brain is only guessing if the thing he’s trying to fathom is much more complex than he can comprehend. If my cat and your cat are playing chess and your cat has knocked over his king because it looked a little bit like a mouse, does that make my cat good at chess? Does my cat even know he’s playing chess.
Answers on a postcard.