I have a theory, which at first may seem quite rudimentary, reductive, and regressive.
That intellect, in terms of IQ can be taught.
This, I posit on the basis of a recognition that all sorts of intellegences we currently value, the tradition type currently tested by IQ, emotional, spatial, and so on, all seem connected by way of pattern and structure recognition. All of these sorts of intellegences and the way in which we interpret them in others seem to have true relations to the application in regards to the way in which individuals apply the greater recognition of structures to the task at hand.
When we say someone is emotional intellegence, we are not talking about an abstract undefinable sort of intellegence, but a practical one. We are refering to the way in which an individual can relate data of emotion gathered in individual situations and place it in the greater scheme of the situations they have observed in the past and judge in moments what best suits the necessity of the form of emotion with which they are interacting with currently. True, there is a complex web of preconceptions and judgements at play when the emotionally intellegent person applies gained knowledge in an appropriate way, yet how does one gather the insight into the application of the cognized most acceptable output? I suppose, that it has to be pedagogical. There has to be some sort of learning involved in the system of thought that is at play. And perhaps a receptivity towards the act of recognition of an appropriate output is not simply inherent. If one is not born with emotional intellegence, but the schema in which they act is taught or inherited, when is the process of the abstraction of emotional thought into an applicable system gained? Again, I will hazard a guess, that it is in very early childhood, when we are closest to the tabla rasa, that the schemas of intellegence are inbedded in us. And subsequently, the farther we stray from this ‘blank slate’, the further we stray from the likelyhood that we will view the prisms in which we view the world as movable. And to some extent they will become less movable.
Just as it is harder to renovate an old dilapidated house to new building codes the further it sinks into dilapidation, it is harder for us to integrate new systems of abstraction into ourselves, yet I propose that is not nearly as impossible as some make it seem, in the nature vs. nurture discourse.
The science, which I am barely familiar I admit, is from what I understand inconclusive on the genetic heredity of intellegence. Based on my own conceptions of historical ascientific remarks of heredity of intellegence in the past, I am sceptical of a great chasm of nature preventing a child put in the correct environment to reach a certain level of high level abstract thinking based solely upon genetic factors