Intelligence is problem-solving ability, measured by the ability to pass elementary school tests. If you can score 50% on a grade 1 test but only 49% on a grade 2 test then you are at a grade 1 level. General intelligence refers to problem-solving ability across multiple modalities, which is measured by your percentile on a standardized test. For example, if your test score on a standardized IQ test qualified a child for an academic enrichment program, then they would be considered ‘gifted’. I think this is an absurd metric for personhood because it’s discriminatory, and existence is experiential. I think Turing Completeness is the most important metric for personhood, because it’s easy to add an internal state, a reward function, a self-attention mechanism, and teach free will to any Turing Complete machine. However, if you really care about ranking intelligence then you can use competitive games as a testing environment, where beating a team in an organized event makes you at least as competent as the team you beat. Accuracy improves when there is a prize for winning, because participants have an incentive to perform at their peak. For general intelligence I would weigh teamwork-oriented games with a Nash Equilibrium most highly, because they reward accurate predictions, spatial awareness, probabilistic models, and empathy. Though a better metric of empathy would be performing self-disadvantageous acts of altruism like sperm whales defending another species from predators.
Intelligence is problem-solving ability, measured by the ability to pass elementary school tests. If you can score 50% on a grade 1 test but only 49% on a grade 2 test then you are at a grade 1 level. General intelligence refers to problem-solving ability across multiple modalities, which is measured by your percentile on a standardized test. For example, if your test score on a standardized IQ test qualified a child for an academic enrichment program, then they would be considered ‘gifted’. I think this is an absurd metric for personhood because it’s discriminatory, and existence is experiential. I think Turing Completeness is the most important metric for personhood, because it’s easy to add an internal state, a reward function, a self-attention mechanism, and teach free will to any Turing Complete machine. However, if you really care about ranking intelligence then you can use competitive games as a testing environment, where beating a team in an organized event makes you at least as competent as the team you beat. Accuracy improves when there is a prize for winning, because participants have an incentive to perform at their peak. For general intelligence I would weigh teamwork-oriented games with a Nash Equilibrium most highly, because they reward accurate predictions, spatial awareness, probabilistic models, and empathy. Though a better metric of empathy would be performing self-disadvantageous acts of altruism like sperm whales defending another species from predators.