Margolis (1998) suggests that my claim about intelligence and rationality (Rickert 1998) was quite limited. I restate my claim in a way that should underscore its generality.
2. Here is a brief restatement, in a different form, of my original claim:
(a) Rationality has to do with following socially accepted rules.
(b) Intelligence has to do with being able to create useful rules
where none are available, and with being able to create more
effective rules than those that are socially accepted.
(c) If an intelligent person is unable to follow socially accepted
rules, whether for lack of knowledge or lack of knowhow, we should
expect them to create some suitable alternative rules that they
could follow.
(d) It should be no surprise that sometimes these newly created
rules are suboptimal and therefore perceived as irrational.
(e) The growth of human knowledge has a great deal to do with
having social institutions, printing presses, and other
communication systems which allow us to preserve the most effective
rules that intelligent folk have created.
REFERENCES:
Margolis, H. (1998). Logic, intuition, and einstein. Psycoloquy 9(57) http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?9.57 ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/1998.volume.9/psyc.98.9.57.social-bias.4.margolis.
Rickert, N. W. (1998). Intelligence is not rational. Psycoloquy 9(51) http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?9.51 ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/1998.volume.9/psyc.98.9.51.social-bias.3.rickert