There are many definitions of intelligence but it is widely studied in humans and other animals. Intelligence involves abilities like abstract thought, reasoning, problem solving, and emotional skills. Most views see intelligence as an internal, one-dimensional trait that does not change much after age 17. It is viewed as something inside an individual that can be measured with tests and informs how capable they are. Deductive reasoning derives a conclusion necessarily from given premises, while inductive reasoning uses observations to make generalizations or determine probabilities rather than absolute conclusions.

1. Intelligence has been defined in different ways, including the abilities for abstract thought, understanding, communication, reasoning, learning, planning, emotional intelligence and problem solving.<br />Intelligence is most widely studied in humans, but has also been observed in animals and plants. Artificial intelligence is the intelligence of machines or the simulation of intelligence in machines.<br />Numerous definitions of and hypotheses about intelligence have been proposed since before the twentieth century, with no consensus reached by scholars. Within the discipline of psychology, various approaches to human intelligence have been adopted. The psychometric approach is especially familiar to the general public, as well as being the most researched and by far the most widely used in practical settings.[1]<br />intelligence derives from the Latin verb HYPERLINK quot;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiktquot;
quot;
Wiktquot;
intelligere which derives from inter-legere meaning to quot;
pick outquot;
or discern. A form of this verb, HYPERLINK quot;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiktquot;
quot;
Wiktquot;
intellectus, became the medieval technical term for understanding, and a translation for the Greek philosophical term nous. This term was however strongly linked to the metaphysical and cosmological theories of HYPERLINK quot;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleologyquot;
quot;
Teleologyquot;
teleologicalscholasticism, including theories of the immortality of the soul, and the concept of the Active Intellect (also known as the Active Intelligence). This entire approach to the study of nature was strongly rejected by the early modern philosophers such as Francis Bacon, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and David Hume, all of whom preferred the word quot;
understandingquot;
in their English philosophical works.[2][3] Hobbes for example, in his Latin De Corpore, used quot;
intellectus intelligitquot;
(translated in the English version as quot;
the understanding understandethquot;
) as a typical example of a logical absurdity.[4] The term quot;
intelligencequot;
has therefore become less common in English language philosophy, but it has later been taken up (without the scholastic theories which it once implied) in more contemporary psychology. some of the ci's can be inpared.<br />How do we view intelligence? Both laymen and experts use widely varying definitions of intelligence. Try and ask your friends and colleagues what they think intelligence is. You will probably get references to solving problems, being able to adapt, quick thinking, quick learning, being creative, being smart, reasoning logically, being sensible, analytic qualities, and so on. Interestingly, although the variation in answers is great, most layman and experts seem to agree on certain aspects of intelligence. Most people implicitly or explicitly assume that intelligence has the following three characteristics: <br />1. Intrapersonal: intelligence is a characteristic of individuals. In other words: it is intrapersonal. It is inside you and is indissoluble from you as an individual. Personnel selection psychologists often base their advises to a large degree on individual measurements of intelligence. Laymen too view intelligence mainly as something that is inside the person. <br />2. One-dimensional: both laymen and experts acknowledge that different dimensions or aspects of intelligence can be distinguished but both groups treat intelligence mainly as if it were a onedimensional concept. Selection psychologists speak of the so-called G-factor, the general intelligence factor and summarize the findings of intelligence measurements into a single (IQ-) score, while laymen too implicitly talk about intelligence as if it were one thing (“She has a high intelligence.”) <br />3. Unchangeable: intelligence is a characteristic that is mostly unchangeable from the age of about 17. The assumed unchangeability, or stability, of intelligence implies that people keep the same intelligence level both across different situations and at different ages. In short: it is inside you, it is one thing and it is largely unchangeable.<br />Deductive reasoning, also called deductive logic, is reasoning which constructs or evaluates deductive arguments. Deductive arguments are attempts to show that a conclusion necessarily follows from a set of premises or hypotheses. A deductive argument is valid if the conclusion does follow necessarily from the premises, i.e., if the conclusion must be true provided that the premises are true. A deductive argument is sound if it is valid and its premises are true. Deductive arguments are valid or invalid, sound or unsound, but are never false nor true. Deductive reasoning is a method of gaining knowledge. An example of a deductive argument:<br />All men are mortal<br />Socrates is a man<br />Therefore, Socrates is mortal<br />The first premise states that all objects classified as quot;
menquot;
have the attribute quot;
mortalquot;
. The second premise states that quot;
Socratesquot;
is classified as a man – a member of the set quot;
menquot;
. The conclusion states that quot;
Socratesquot;
must be mortal because he inherits this attribute from his classification as a man.<br />Inductive reasoning, also known as induction or inductive logic, is a kind of reasoning that constructs or evaluates propositions that are abstractions of observations. It is commonly construed as a form of reasoning that makes generalizations based on individual instances. In this sense it is often contrasted with deductive reasoning.<br />However, philosophically the definition is much more nuanced than simple progression from particular / individual instances to wider generalizations. Rather, the premises of an inductivelogical argument indicate some degree of support (inductive probability) for the conclusion but do not entail it; that is, they suggest truth but do not ensure it. In this manner, there is the possibility of moving from generalizations to individual instances.<br />This is an example of inductive reasoning:<br />90% of humans are right-handed.<br />Joe is a human.<br />Therefore, the probability that Joe is right-handed is 90%. (See section on Statistical syllogism.)<br />