Practical Application of Thinking and Intelligence

Practical Application of Thinking and Intelligence

The first section of this paper discusses how the concept of Thinking and Intelligence has been applied in responding to my selection of: My Choice Car, and the second section in selection of: My Romantic Partner, and the reason for choosing the various models and concepts of Thinking and Intelligence. The last part examines the life of Kim Ung-Yong’s intelligence, and how it reflects the level of intelligence according to General Intelligence Theory.

1. Selection of My Choice Cars

Prototype Model of Selection

The concept of prototype psychology is closely related to the schema in psychology. Linguistically, the word “prototype” implies an original form of an aspect, serving as the central standard. The prototype also implies what is seen as an absolute form something, possessing all expected qualities. It might also try to imply a graded categorization. Here, some elements of a category are “more equal” and perfect than others. In essence, some elements in prototype, though in the same category, are “less equal” than others. Prototypes may be influenced by one’s language, cultural background, and the social background (Prototype Psychology: Prototype Theory, Definitions, and Examples, 2017).

Choosing a car set of prototypes is a very broad question that deals with all the features of a well-designed layout. Because of unlimited resources and time, a design typically involves making compromises to the prototypes. From a small diorama to the largest club layout, traditionally based facts to literary fiction, a craftsperson to the most casual modeler, are confronted with the question of prototypes. It’s the role of the designer to understand where to compromise, where to have a strict fidelity to the prototype and to understand the consequences of each decision. I used the following types of prototype in selecting my car model

Physical Appearance

Accessories to the layout, such as building architecture, automobiles, signs, and other scenery acted as the strong visual clues in helping me choose my overall design.

Logical Identification

Furthermore, my choice of car model depended on Logical Identification. Logical Identification refers to the names used in a layout that significantly determines the fidelity to the prototype. I would opt for the company that sells equipment with real names than those which invents a name.


There are a lot of compromises to be reached in selecting the model environment. I considered the notion of enough space for pure fidelity and location for great distances involved. I rejected the model, the American design which’s often characterized by a severe compression of distance combined with an excess of objects: too much track, too many structures. Rather, I chose on the British Designer which occupies less space, can create layouts with very high fidelity to location – literary, a single location, almost a diorama-like. Though this model has an advantage over the American model in terms of location, often lacking, however, is the sense of travel across distances as well as a visual clue to long trains that are moving at speed.

Expected Behavior

Regarding how the designed layout operates is a major visual clue which significantly contributes to the overall impact of a scaled model of reality. There are many components of operation. At a minimum, I will need to be aware of plausible frequency and speeds of trains reappearing at the same scene. While we can consider the different tastes of the public (often poorly informed of the subtleties of our hobby who, on visiting at an open house, may expect trains, Trains, and TRAINS), graduates of the Gomez Addams School of dispatching will have a hard time living it down afterwards with his or her pals at the local hobby shop.

Expected Behavior and Operating models consist of distribution and transportation concept. I choose the model that emphasizes the distribution approach because this would be more appealing to my interest in small trains and the parts of trains and because of my choice on space- I needed a car that can occupy limited space.

2. Selection of My Choice Romantic Partner

Physical Attraction

Research indicates that romantic attraction is basically determined by physical attractiveness. During the early stages of dating, I get more attracted to a partner whom they regard as more physically attractive. In physical attractiveness, men are more selective than women are.

The bottom line is: I do not intend to spend my life with someone I find physically repellent. Hence, physical attraction obliges to the laws of the market: attractive goods cost more, buyers don’t get what they need but what they afford.

Personality and Character

There are two personality factors regarded across the board desirable. They are competence and warmth. For the competent people, or rather the intelligent and socially skilled people, they are considered more attractive. Equally, the kind people with a warm personality can also be very much attractive. According to my selection traits, I based on warmth and wisdom as a winning pair in my mate selection tournament.

Exposure and Familiarity

There is no doubt people tend to grow to like those with whom we have frequent contact, and those around us. The more we spend with someone, the higher the chances that we’ll like, accept and even fall in love with them. Now provided, we all know someone through whom increased interaction results increased frustration and resentment, simply, we’ll give exception to that. Just by virtue of exposure, it will be reason enough why many romance blooms at institutions. Daily contact for an extended time may turn strangers into intimate friends.


I would prefer a partner who stays within a walking or driving distance. There is high unlikelihood that relationship with someone who’s a transatlantic flight doesn’t persist. For instance, the great Yehuda Amichai, in his poem wrote, “Advice for good love: Don’t love those from far away. Take for yourself one from nearby.” Long-distance relationships can be more difficult to nurture, and of course, they survive much less often (Shpancer, 2014).

Intelligence vs. Desire for Children

There is a high probability for me to forgive my partner who’s pursuing a career and higher education in case she is not interested in having many children. On the contrary, I may forgive the limited educational and career background (lay blames on limited career and education) of my partner who really needs to have children and raise a large family.


More often than not, people are drawn to partners that are more like them. As it regards our parameter of background, religion, experience, personality and education, I would prefer a partner who has much in common with me than one who is totally different from me. I would love someone who will complement me.

The preference of similarity criteria is based on the fact that I would need somebody with whom we can easily communicate, compromise and trust. It would be better to choose a partner who speaks my own language, understands my culture, shares my values, and even believes in my God.

Another complement is, getting a romantic partner with my similarity amounts, psychologically, like killing two birds with a single stone: I would be wonderful, since, she compliments me! Two people in one. That seems wonderful.

3. Using the Theories of Intelligence

General Intelligence

Refers to the single Factor of Intelligence, together with the underlying factors influencing an individual’s specific abilities that are related to intelligence as it concerns writing and math, and high IQ. It’s noted that general intelligence impacts important life outcomes like an individual’s socioeconomic conditions, health, or even political status.

Essentially, general Intelligence is the ability to think about various ideas, to analyze different situations, and establish solutions to the problems.

An example of an intelligent person, according to the traits of General Intelligence is Kim Ung-Yong. Kim possesses the following traits of General Intelligence that makes him very smart intellectually.

The South Korean man is one of the intelligent people on earth. His intelligence exceeds that of Einstein and Stephen Hawking. He has a record IQ of 210! He began to speak at 3 months. Kim could read English, German, Japanese, and Korean when he was 2 years.  At age 3 he enrolled for a university degree at Hanyang University. NASA sent him an invitation to study in the US when he was 8years. (Kim Ung-Yong – The Man with World’s Highest IQ Has a Message to All People, 2015).


Ackerman, P. L., Beier, M. E., & Boyle, M. O. (2005). Working memory and intelligence: The same or different constructs? Psychological Bulletin, 131(1), 30-60.

Aptitude tests & intelligence. (2017). Retrieved on April 7, 2017 from

Kim Ung-Yong – The Man With World’s Highest IQ Has A Message To All People (2015). Retrieved on April 2, 2017 from

Prototype Psychology: Prototype Theory, Definitions, and Examples (2017). Retrieved on April 7, 2017 from

Shpancer, N. (2014). Laws of Attraction: How Do We Select a Life Partner? Retrieved on April 7, 2017 from

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *