Instruct: Given a question, retrieve passages that answer the question.
Query: How is intellect measured?
According to J.P.Guilford, intellect consists of three key parameters: operations, contents and products. Each parameter contains specific elements, which are independent and therefore should be measured individually and considered as autonomous units of human intellect.[8]
The passive intellect (Latin: "intellectus possibilis"; also translated as potential intellect or material intellect), is a term used in philosophy alongside the notion of the active intellect in order to give an account of the operation of the intellect ("nous"), in accordance with the theory of hylomorphism, as most famously put forward by Aristotle.
In philosophy, especially in classical and medieval philosophy the intellect or nous is an important subject connected to the question of how humans can know things. Especially during late antiquity and the Middle Ages, the intellect was often proposed as a concept which could reconcile philosophical and scientific understandings of nature with monotheistic religious understandings, by making the intellect a link between each human soul, and the divine intellect (or intellects) of the cosmos itself. (During the Latin Middle Ages a distinction developed whereby the term "intelligence" was typically used to refer to the incorporeal beings which governed the celestial spheres in many of these accounts.[2]) Also see: passive intellect and active intellect. In modern psychology and neuroscience, intelligence and intellect are used as terms describing mental ability (or abilities) that allow people to understand. A distinction is sometimes made whereby intellect is considered to be related to "facts" in contrast to intelligence concerning "feelings".[3] Intellect refers to the cognition and rational mental processes gained through external input rather than internal.
If the intellect acquired its knowledge so that it could access them any time it wants then the intellect called as actual intellect. in this degree, aql is in act which is compared to the absolute potency of the material Aql and has a first form of knowledge. for Farabi,the potential intellect becomes the actual. in fact the most important task of the actual intellect is to acquire secondary intelligible from primary intelligible and ready to employ them all at any time.this stage has similarities with al-‘aql bi al-malaka. but its task is so more. actual intellect also called as cognitive and theoretical. this knod of intellect counted as a journey from general knowledge to special knowledge. this intellect also is the second perfection of intellect. However, this kind of reason allows to human free themselves from illusion and errors.
His primary aim in teaching was to provoke in his students a fundamental shift in sensibility and perspective from the mode of Critical intellection and reflection that characterizes Modernity and predominates in the academic world, to what he and Michael Polanyi called a Post-Critical mode of thinking. Instead of attending solely to the "what" of a topic (an item of content, a teaching, a matter to be subjected to intellectual mastery and critique as an indifferent object of thought), the shift involves becoming aware of the "how" of intellection itself — specifically of the "how" of one's responsive relationship as person in the world to the object of thought—of "how" one personally happens to be relating oneself to it. That "how" of intellection, the "how" of one's "personal" relation to the object of thought—in other words, the underlying relationship between knower and known—is predominantly tacit, difficult to articulate, and therefore not something on which one can easily reflect, which causes it to be all the more potentially consequential in the process of knowing.
Soul ("Psyche") is produced by Intellect, and so is the third principle in the Neoplatonic system. It is a mind, like Intellect, but it does not grasp all of its own content as one. Therefore with Soul, Time comes to be, as a measure of Soul's movement from one object of thought to another. Intellect tries to grasp the One, and ends up producing its own ideas as its content. Soul attempts to grasp Intellect in its return, and ends up producing its own secondary unfoldings of the Forms in Intellect. Soul, in turn, produces Body, the material world.
This motion from potentiality to actuality requires the Agent Intellect to act upon the retained sensory forms; just as the Sun illuminates the physical world to allow us to see, the Agent Intellect illuminates the world of intelligibles to allow us to think. This illumination removes all accident (such as time, place, quality) and physicality from them, converting them into primary intelligibles, which are logical principles such as "the whole is greater than the part". The human intellect, by its act of intellection, passes from potentiality to actuality, and as it gradually comprehends these intelligibles, it is identified with them (as according to Aristotle, by knowing something, the intellect becomes like it). Because the Agent Intellect knows all of the intelligibles, this means that when the human intellect knows all of them, it becomes associated with the Agent Intellect's perfection and is known as the acquired Intellect.
In his letter of December 30, 1988 to Dr. Robert Epstein , Loebner authorized Dr. Epstein to move forward with a contest, and referring to the Turing Test, Loebner wrote: "Robert, in years to come, there may be richer prizes, and more prestigious contests, but gads, this will always be the oldest."
Establishing the Loebner Prize, he introduced the Turing Test to a wider public, and stimulated interest in this science. It remains Hugh Loebner’s desire to advance AI, and for the Turing Test to serve as a tool to measure the state of the art: "There is a nobility in this endeavour. If we humans can succeed in developing an artificial intellect it will be a measure of the scope of our intellect" (from: "In Response", 1994) .
Dr. Terruwe embraced the spiritual aspect of the human person in the treatment of her patients. Her ideas included topics about man’s emotional life, his intellect and free will, how "love is the passion of the intellect," and how the "nature" of man’s emotional life is to "follow reason." The discussion continues into topics of affirmation and what it means to be "authentically human."
Some psychologists have recently pointed out that previous instruments used to measure openness actually assessed two distinctive aspects. The first is intellect, which reflects intellectual engagement and perceived intelligence and is marked by ideas, while the second is emotion, which reflects the artistic and contemplative qualities related to being engaged in sensation and perception and is marked by fantasy, aesthetics, feelings and actions. On this basis, intellect was found to be associated with the neural system of the working memory, which is related to "g", whereas openness was not. In addition, according to a study of genetic behaviour, intellect is genetically closer to intelligence than openness.
In 1939, David Wechsler realized the limitation of the Stanford-Binet and designed an intellect by tapping a diverse sample of capabilities. In earlier methods of assessment, Weschler devised the format that we currently known as the Wechsler scales, consisting of a collection of subsets. He believed in the unitary nature of intelligence but subscribed to the idea that intellect can be best measured through interdependent, qualitatively different abilities. Historical, the picture arrangement subsets of the Wechsler scales have been characterized repeatedly as being nonverbal and verbal measure of social competence. For this reason, clinicians interpret performance on the picture arrangement subsets as measures of social ability.
Although picture arrangement (PA) has been viewed as predictive of social intelligence, there has been considerable difficulty defining social intelligence, social functioning and/or social competence. Wechsler believed that general intelligence could be applied to all situations. Thus, “social” intelligence might best be conceptualized as one aspect of general intelligence.
Aristotle says that the intellect ("nous"), the ability to think, has no bodily organ (in contrast with other psychological abilities, such as sense-perception and imagination). In fact, he says that it is not mixed with the body and suggests that it can exist apart from the body. This seems to contradict Aristotle's claim that the soul is a form or property of the body. To complicate matters further, Aristotle distinguishes between two kinds, or two parts, of intellect. These two intellectual powers are traditionally called the "passive intellect" and the "active (or agent) intellect". Thus, interpreters of Aristotle have faced the problem of explaining how the intellect fits into Aristotle's hylomorphic theory of the soul.
In his last commentary—called the "Long Commentary"—he proposes another theory, which becomes known as the theory of "the unity of the intellect". In it, Averroes argues that there is only one material intellect, which is the same for all humans and is unmixed with human body. To explain how different individuals can have different thoughts, he uses a concept he calls "fikr"—known as "cogitatio" in Latin—a process that happens in human brains and contains not universal knowledge but "active consideration of particular things" the person has encountered. This theory attracted controversy when Averroes' works entered Christian Europe; in 1229 Thomas Aquinas wrote a detailed critique titled "On the Unity of the Intellect against the Averroists".
The Tayyibi system of ten Intellects is adopted from the ten Intellects of the Fatimid "da’i" Hamid al-Din al-Kirmani, in a departure from Fatimid cosmological Neoplatonism. However, in Kirmani’s system, the First Intellect emanates two beings: the Second Intellect and the Potential Intellect, which is primordial Matter and Form. The Second Intellect emanates eight other Intellects in successive emanation, while the nine spheres of the Aristotelian cosmos proceed from the activities of each of the Intellects upon the Potential Intellect. The Potential Intellect—an emanation of the First Intellect subordinate in rank to the Second Intellect—is responsible for the physical world. Tatsuya Kikuchi suggests that this Potential Intellect is probably not equivalent to the Tayyibi Tenth Intellect, and the Tenth Intellect in Kirmani’s system does not maintain any special significance above the other separate intellects. The second Tayyibi "da’i mutlaq", Ibrahim al-Hamidi, introduced a more mythical, gnostic, mystical “drama in heaven” into Tayyibi doctrine. He launched a new stage of medieval Tayyibi and Ismaili cosmology wherein the Tenth Intellect takes on special significance, although he is not singularly responsible for this evolution- he did not introduce or utilize the terms “Universal Adam” and “Partial Adam,” for example.
Other thinkers, however, were opposed to the theory. Many scholastic thinkers, including the Italian Thomas Aquinas criticized it for not being able to explain how humans can think individually, and how this single intellect is associated with human body. They also criticized the thesis from the theological standpoint. If there is only one eternal soul, and individualized thinking only happens through a lower faculty which will perish with the body when a person dies, then the theory fails to provide for a person's immortality and afterlife.
Intellect is a term used in studies of the human mind, and refers to the ability of the mind to come to correct conclusions about what is true or real, and about how to solve problems. Historically the term comes from the Greek philosophical term nous, which was translated into Latin as intellectus (derived from the verb intelligere, "to understand", from inter, "between" and legere, "to choose"[1]) and into French and then English as intelligence (other than intellect). Intellect is in fact considered as a branch of intelligence (see Intellect vs intelligence).
The active intellect, in the sense described, is more properly called the Agent Intellect, as it is the force triggering intellection in the human mind and causing thoughts to pass from the potential to the actual. It must not be confused with the "intellect in act", which is the result of that triggering, and is more akin to the psychological term "active knowledge". Another term for the final result of intellection, that is to say a person's accumulated knowledge, is the "acquired intellect".
The passage tries to explain "how the human intellect passes from its original state, in which it does not think, to a subsequent state, in which it does." He inferred that the energeia/dunamis distinction must also exist in the soul itself. Aristotle says that the passive intellect receives the intelligible forms of things, but that the active intellect is required to make the potential knowledge into actual knowledge, in the same way that light makes potential colors into actual colors. 
In the Tayyibi Ismaili cosmogony, known as the “drama in heaven,” the transcendent Originator ("al-mubdi") originated a number of primordial originated beings equal in rank and capacity. One of these originated beings realized it had been created by God and began to worship its originator, and was thus called the First Intellect ("al-mubda al-awwal") reigning over the spiritual cosmos. Other originated beings were ranked by how quickly they followed the example of this First Intellect, and the second and third Intellects competed for the second rank. The second originated being succeeded and emerged as the Second Intellect. The third originated being refused to accept this prioritization of the Second Intellect and committed the first “sin,” thus falling from third rank to tenth rank in the hierarchy of archangelic Intellects. After realizing its error and repenting, this Tenth Intellect emerged to govern and sustain a physical cosmos filled with its own spiritual members—other fallen souls—that had equally failed to recognize the preeminence of the Second Intellect.
The unity of the intellect is a philosophical theory proposed by the Muslim medieval Andalusian philosopher Averroes (1126–1198), which asserted that all humans share the same intellect. Averroes expounded his theory in his long commentary of "On the Soul" to explain how universal knowledge is possible within the Aristotelian theory of mind. Averroes' theory was influenced by related ideas by previous thinkers such as Aristotle, Plotinus, Al-Farabi, Avicenna (Ibn Sina) and Avempace (Ibn Bajja).
The idea of a single, universal intellect associated with all human knowledge had been proposed by philosophers before Averroes. The Greek philosopher Aristotle (384–322 BC) proposes a "maker intellect" which enables thinking by making things intelligible, much like light allows seeing by making things visible. Plotinus (d. 270), whose works were well known in the Islamic world, proposed that human beings gained knowledge through their relation to a divine intellect. Muslim philosophers Al-Farabi (d. 951) and Avicenna (also known as Ibn Sina, d. 1037) further develop this theory and call it the "agent intellect", which gives forms to matter and facilitates human knowledge. Avempace (also known as Ibn Bajja, d. 1138) proposed a theory of the intellect that was to influence Averroes' theory, but, according to the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica, his preserved works are so obscure and incomplete that scholars of philosophy do not know how well-developed his theory was.
Sachs comments that the nature of the active intellect was "the source of a massive amount of commentary and of fierce disagreement"; elsewhere, chapter 5 of "De Anima" has been referred to as "the most intensely studied sentences in the history of philosophy". As Davidson remarks: 
Just what Aristotle meant by potential intellect and active intellect - terms not even explicit in the "De anima" and at best implied - and just how he understood the interaction between them remains moot. Students of the history of philosophy continue to debate Aristotle's intent, particularly the question whether he considered the active intellect to be an aspect of the human soul or an entity existing independently of man.
Al Kindi also pointed out to a kind of intellect could reach from the state of potentiality, to the state of actuality. Farabi pointed out the first level of actualization of intellect is the potential intellect. the second stage is to Aql bi'l fil or actual intellect. The actual intellect reflects upon itself. in other word when intellect acquired forms and categories, reflects upon itself, this action called as actual intellect. of course Groff classify the actual intellect as third. meanwhile Farabi used the term Aql bi'l fil for intellect in full exercise of its powers. also Iji ,known theologian, referred to the actual intellect versus potential. it seems that the term Aql bi'l fil for Avicenna is comparable with A ruh Al Aqli for Al Ghazali.
The passage tries to explain "how the human intellect passes from its original state, in which it does not think, to a subsequent state, in which it does" according to his distinction between potentiality and actuality. Aristotle says that the passive intellect receives the intelligible forms of things, but that the active intellect is required to make the potential knowledge into actual knowledge, in the same way that light makes potential colours into actual colours. As Davidson remarks:
Just what Aristotle meant by potential intellect and active intellect - terms not even explicit in the "De anima" and at best implied - and just how he understood the interaction between them remains moot. Students of the history of philosophy continue to debate Aristotle's intent, particularly the question whether he considered the active intellect to be an aspect of the human soul or an entity existing independently of man.
In the third book of "De Anima", entitled "De Intellectu", Philoponus analyzes the doctrine of the intellect. The author (Philoponus or pseudo-Philoponus?) sets the theory on the role and functioning of the active intellect. On one hand, there is the active intellect, and on the other, the idea of perception awareness or how we are aware that we are perceiving. In other words, in this reflective philosophy, there is a rationalist conclusion which emphasizes a relation between self and truth which leads to the discussion of the nature of knowledge.