Implicit theories of intelligence - Entity vs. Incremental View

[Darrell_Johnston]

Are you an Entity theorist or an Incremental theorist?

Entity theory vs. incremental theory

1 Entity View – This view (those who are called “Entity theorists”) treats intelligence as fixed and stable.

2 Incremental View – This view treats intelligence as malleable, fluid, and changeable. These students see satisfaction coming from the process of learning and often see opportunities to get better. They do not focus on what the outcome will say about them, but what they can attain from taking part in the venture.

Entity theorists are susceptible to learned helplessness because they may feel that circumstances are outside their control (i.e. there’s nothing that could have been done to make things better), thus they may give up easily. As a result, they may simply avoid situations or activities that they perceive to be challenging (perhaps through procrastination, absenteeism, etc.). Alternatively, they may purposely choose extremely difficult tasks so that they have an excuse for failure. Ultimately, they may stop trying altogether. Because success (or failure) is often linked to what is perceived as a fixed amount of intelligence rather than effort (e.g., the belief that “I did poorly because I’m not a smart person”), students may think that failure implies a natural lack of intelligence. Dweck found that students with a long history of success may be the most vulnerable for developing learned helplessness because they may buy into the entity view of intelligence more readily than those with less frequent success[1].

Those with an incremental view (“Incremental theorists”) when faced with failure, react differently: these students desire to master challenges, and therefore adopt a mastery-oriented pattern. They immediately began to consider various ways that they could approach the task differently, and they increase their efforts. Unlike Entity theorists, Incremental theorists believe that effort, through increased learning and strategy development, will actually increase their intelligence.

More information here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit_ ... telligence

[El_Caudillo]

I'm a believer in incremental model Darrell, as I imagine you are. I think I know what your are getting at. Winston himself has something of the incrementalist in his writings - in that he went through an awakening, a breakthrough both spiritual and intellectual at some stage due to his struggles with his environment in America. Sadly in middle age entity theory has taken over - however, I would argue that come age thirty a majority of people stop developing - sometimes the reason for this is altruistic i.e. they begin to focus on developing others - most of the time where they have got to in terms of intelligence is good enough for them to function in the world. If they went further it may make them less comfortable.

[Darrell_Johnston]

I would argue that he has always been an entity theorist, he is dependent on his environment to flourish

[Darrell_Johnston]

and when you understand entity theory, it comes at no surprise that he believes that spirits and demons are controlling everything that happens to him and everything is fate. There is no room for responsibility of self at all.

[El_Caudillo]

@Darrell_Johnston Yes, but oddly by being so helpless he has attracted a lot of advice and attention. If I were to state my problems here you wouldn't respond so often or in depth as you'd have implicit faith that'd Id sort them out - and vice versa. Neither of us could change this attitude to each other unless we spent years chronicling our neuroses on a website such as happierabroad - and by doing so annoyed the other so much that they felt driven to sort absurd problems and call out illogical excuses. So in a weird sense Winston has achieved something many others have not i.e. few men get so much counselling, advice and invective from others, now he's done this despite his best efforts not to achieve anything that I'll grant you.

[Winston]

and when you understand entity theory, it comes at no surprise that he believes that spirits and demons are controlling everything that happens to him and everything is fate. There is no room for responsibility of self at all.

Well entities, spirits and inorganic beings do exist. There is a lot of evidence for them now. And psychiatric experts even admit it. I posted a lot of info about it in other threads. See here:

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=14066
https://www.yahoo.com/news/apos-demonic ... 31844.html

Btw I recently talked to @publicduende on the phone and we came to an understanding. Even if I'm right that they do exist, still they cannot control us or possess us 100 percent. The universe or God does not allow them to completely control us unless we ask them to. We still have some free will. But they can influence us of course. And the more we submit to them or give in, the stronger their influence becomes.

Father Malachi Martin, an experienced exorcist, told Art Bell in their interviews that perfect possession does exist, in which the possessed have no free will. However that only happens if you make a pact with the entity or demon, and give yourself over to it by choice, or summon it to possess you.

[Winston]

I would argue that he has always been an entity theorist, he is dependent on his environment to flourish

Actually, both are true to some degree. There are some things you can change and some things you cannot. Intelligence and ability can be changed to some degree, but not to an unlimited degree as the self-improvement industry claims. That is too exaggerated. Neither is true or false. They are both true to some degree. So I won't vote either option.

Darrell you said you believe in "The Secret" and Law of Attraction and that critics misunderstand it. Can you elaborate on that? To what degree is it true and to what degree is it untrue?

Bruce Lipton claims that your thoughts can change your reality and even alter your DNA. But if so why hasn't he been able to use his thoughts and power of beliefs to cure his baldness or reverse his aging for example? See what I mean? This is the kind of stuff that makes me and @Ghost skeptical of such claims. Even if there is some truth in them, still they are greatly exaggerated to sell books and hype.

[Darrell_Johnston]

I would argue that he has always been an entity theorist, he is dependent on his environment to flourish

Actually, both are true to some degree.

I agree, but the studies show that one belief improves future perfomance and the other belief impedes it.

There are some things you can change and some things you cannot

.

This is true also, but the difference is that an incremental theory is knowing that you are capable of doing your best and will want to try to the best of their ability, entity theorist are less likely to try their best or even try at all because they are likely to believe that it is not worth the effort because they dont believe they will ever do better

Intelligence and ability can be changed to some degree, but not to an unlimited degree as the self-improvement industry claims.

I agree again. The study showed that incrementals recognise there are limits but they also are aware that everyone who got to a high level of success did it by working as hard as they can. Entity theorists believe that other peoples success is because of gift or by luck. They don't accredit success to ability.

That is too exaggerated. Neither is true or false. They are both true to some degree. So I won't vote either option.

You teach incremental theory to your followers. Teaching people that they cannot do better or that their happiness is dependent on their enviroment is text book incremental theory coaching.

Darrell you said you believe in "The Secret" and Law of Attraction and that critics misunderstand it. Can you elaborate on that? To what degree is it true and to what degree is it untrue?

We dont need to discuss that here, make another thread about that please and tag me in it, this thread is about implicit theories of intelligence, this is what I really believe in. Keep exploring this subject with me in this thread please and you will learn about what I really believe in.

[Darrell_Johnston]

and when you understand entity theory, it comes at no surprise that he believes that spirits and demons are controlling everything that happens to him and everything is fate. There is no room for responsibility of self at all.

Well entities, spirits and inorganic beings do exist. There is a lot of evidence for them now. And psychiatric experts even admit it.

Sorry, I think there may a be tad confusion.....entity theory doesn't mean the belief in ghosts and demons. Its the belief that your ability in life is fixed and cant change. Incremental is the belief that ability isn't fixed and can be improved

But it would make sense that some entity theorists would believe in ghosts, some incremental theorists will too, but regardless of if ghosts are real or not, its the belief that your life is out of your own control and everything is fete guided by something else.......that is text book entity theory.

[Darrell_Johnston]

Please watch this to get a deeper understanding of implicit theories of intelligence, its fascinating the way people are divided psychologically and the affects it has, it will help you understand why we think so differently.

[Ghost]

.

[Cornfed]

This is a silly/obvious question. Much like the weight you can bench press, you can increase you intelligence through training, but not indefinitely, since there is going to be a natural biological limit.

[Darrell_Johnston]

There is truth to both of them.

I agree, the study shows that people fluctuate between the two, the point of the study is to show the affect that each mindset has on performance and ability

There are things that a man has control over, and things he does not have control over.

I agree , forces of nature for example

For the things he controls, he is completely responsible for. For the things he does not control, he is not responsible for.

True

For the things he does not control, the best he can do is hope to influence them. For example, getting a job. A man cannot walk into a workplace and go "I'm hired!" But perhaps he can influence his chances of being hired during the job interview.

Yes he can....an entity theorist would ask "how can i get a job?" Or "how can i get a girl?" An imcremtal theorist will ask "how can i become the type of person that someone would want to employ ? " or "how can i become the type of person that women want to be with?" Because with entity theorists the last part always gets skipped....its the magic pill society...the fad diets...the pua books with 3 steps to getting into her pants with out having to change anything about yourself bullshit is all marketed towards entity theorists....the last part requires effort and entity theory doesn't like that

I don't think anyone would say that intelligence is entirely static. Brain damage can change it, experience can change it, age can change it.

Nothing in life is static....but entity theorists think their ability is static rgardles of whether it actually is or not

Men can also have different ranges for their abilities. One man may be able to learn ten foreign languages, while another can barely learn one. One man may be able to increase his muscle mass more than another. And so on.

Very few men reach their full potential....do you know many who have? Arnie is one of the few men who reached his muscle mass potential....could say that davinci reached his artistic potential....but he was limited by the technology available to him.....if he was alive today and had access to computer art he would no longer be bound by the technological limitations

An entity theorist places a lower bar on what he thinks he is capable of and is less likely to ever reach his potential because he is less likely to try

My field of expertise is music.....will i ever reach my full potential in a lifetime? Perhaps not....but i wont stop and i will do my best....could i be better tban i am? Yes, could i have tried harder in the past and be better now? Certainly.....but i will keep going. I will be going a degree in music technology soon and might go on to do a masters after that....even then i still have the rest of my life to improve....and the better i get ...the more value my skill will have for others

These theories are best used as tools, not dogma.

i agree and they are great tools...never said its dogma

Just as it is now coming to light that nature and nurture are two sides of the same coin, both of these theories are part of each other.

Except they have opposite effects for most people, one enhances ability and the other impedes it....everyone is guilty of both .....but most people tend to lean more towards one than the other.

thank you for engaging me in an open discussion of ideas..... Have you watched the video of Neuroscientist Ian Roberston above? If you want to go deeper into this discussion with me it would be easier if you have a deeper understanding of it. I know in another thread you said I should explain it all myself, but its a deep topic and would take a long time to write it all out. The media I posted is just a platform to open up a discussion that we can all learn from. I am interested in this as personal development, not spiritual books that are backed up by nothing, this is all scientifically backed up by research and studies into human psychology and biology

[publicduende]

Btw I recently talked to @publicduende on the phone and we came to an understanding. Even if I'm right that they do exist, still they cannot control us or possess us 100 percent. The universe or God does not allow them to completely control us unless we ask them to. We still have some free will. But they can influence us of course. And the more we submit to them or give in, the stronger their influence becomes.

It's a controversial topic @Winston. Whether they exist or not, and what exactly they are (spirits of dead people, spirits who have always had that form, etc.) is highly debatable.

What's important to stress is that our free will should trump everything else. God, or Gods, or our Makers gave us free will, which means we are always in power to choose good from evil, or at least what's good for us from what is not.

[Cornfed]

There is truth to both of them.

This is stupid. Soo stupid.