NOETIC: of, relating to, or based on the intellect*

Intelligence is one of those concepts which is easier to say than to define. Noetic is a word used in research circles to describe anything related to studying, discovering,speculating, or otherwise commenting on the intellect. The noetic data available fills huge libraries. Yet, most people would be at a loss to give a clear definition of what we mean by intelligence.

Intelligence is measurable (to some degree.) One's IQ (Intelligence Quotient) is one way of determining one's intelligence. But more and more there is some caution in the use of IQ. It, like any scientific tool, has limitations.

Most of us use a much more accessible tool: we talk to someone. It's not foolproof, but it works for most of us. The problem with it is that sometimes extremely intelligent people are not very articulate. The factors of intelligence and speech don't always coordinate.

But I'm not talking about scientific definition; I'm more focused upon the ability of someone to demonstrate some degree of intelligence by their words and their ability to express knowledge.

Something which is humorous to me is the way TV reporters are quick to shove a camera in the face of witnesses to a crime or some other tragedy. It amazes me that they don't edit out 99% of the commentary filmed simply because it isn't intelligent.

The same thing can be said about the current debates about health care legislation. I am awed (not in a positive way) by the inability of some Senators to express their answers to questions in a way that is intelligible...or even coherent. Much of it is live feed, so the reporter has no opportunity to screen it before it hits the airwaves, but then the interview is repeated over and over again, demonstrating nothing about the issue, but revealing a lot about the Senator. The noetic element is disastrous.

Probably it's not fair to select out a TV interview to be the criterion upon which one's intelligence is determined. But it is telling. And, for most Americans, it is the place where they have the greatest access to the spoken abilities of public officials. Sometimes the best answer a public official can give is "no comment." But politicians aren't like that. Their medium is public speaking, so it is unlikely that any politician will turn down an opportunity to speak live on national television.

The alternative, of course, is to prepare for such exigencies, and to have an opinion waiting. That gives the politician a chance to be somewhat clear in front of hundreds of thousands of viewers. But reporters are clever, often catching a subject when he or she is not expecting an interview. And the rapidity of questions can throw even an experienced public speaker off guard.

I can speak from personal experience. Once, when a candidate for public office, I was confronted by a reporter when I was in the midst of a taxing conversation with a colleague. My convoluted answer to his clever question became a disaster. It may well have led to my not being elected. I didn't sound very intelligent on the issue when it aired.

Analysis of television interviews is a highly problematic tool for noetic discernment. But it is telling.



*Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary, © 2002 Merriam-Webster, Inc.
Photo Credits: Reuter's News Service and jrth.physik.uni-frankfurt.de
Joachim Reinhardt