Being in the army has changed me, I have become less of an intellectual snob than I once was.

I once thought that the mark of intelligence was sophisticated expression of complex ideas. It was once the reason why I dreaded conscription so much; the thought of having to live with people of differing minds seemed like such a lonely fate. I was afraid that no one would think of the same ideas I thought, no one would express them to me in a way I would understand, or worst of all, that everyone would just be just terribly shallow.

True enough, this was the case when I first entered BMT. I remember lamenting how every sentence was peppered with "fuck" and "cheebye" from both the superiors and my bunkmates. Worst of all, the only conversation topic that seemed to be popular was about girls, the only humour was about breasts dicks and other genitalia (that's reproductive organs, by the way). It cemented my impression of the ugly, stupid and horny army boy, and I often retreated to the smoking point in those days so that I could mope.

After all, there is some sort of nobility to be found in solitude, the dissociation of oneself from the masses.

And yet now I find that these people have true gems of wisdom to offer. True, they may not be well versed in the art of eloquence, and they may struggle sometimes in finding a sophisticated way to express. But sometimes their statements radiate with so much truth that even bad grammar, foul hokkien and broken sentences cannot smother them. More importantly, these people have found ways to express complex ideas using the crudest analogies and metaphors, methods which some would find distasteful or low-class, but I find intriguingly clever.

Intelligence comes in two parts. First, it is the ability to conceptualize and explore complex ideas. To take a concept, twist it around in one's mind, and build a three dimensional blueprint of the hows, whys and what ifs of these ideas. Secondly, intelligence is the ability to communicate these ideas to another, through the means that is most effective and most precisely describes the idea.

The ability to conceptualize and explore an idea is not easy. Take for example the statement "God exists". From a person's reaction to this statement we will see a spectrum of intelligences exhibited. From the unintelligent person we would see a simple acceptance without any questioning: The statement "God exists" enters his brain and stays there without forming any connections whatsoever with the rest of his life and experience. This person belongs on the Stupid side of the spectrum.

As we go up the spectrum we find more complex thought; the person may accept the statement, and then relate how his life experiences and other pieces of information connect to this idea of God existing. For example, he may think about how his life has been relatively smooth sailing, and that he has had many lucky breaks. Since God exists (this statement is taken to be true here), and God by its definition is a benevolent thing, his lucky breaks are evidence of God's existence. Or he may question the statement, citing examples of terrible disasters where god seems to have failed to intervene. Further up the spectrum of intelligence we will find individuals questioning the implications of these connections; If God exists, but disasters still happen, does this imply that God is not benevolent? Or that he is powerless? Or simply apathetic? Does God exist merely for some but not for others then?

To cut a long story short, intelligence is a mapping out of different pieces of information, forming strong connections between them by questioning every facet of the idea. The more of these connections that are formed, the more intelligent a person is. By itself, however, this facet of intelligence is useless, just as the artwork that no one understands is meaningless. The proof, and validation, of this intelligence lies in the ability of one to express it.

By the expression of a concept I mean using words, sounds or any other form of communication to allow another person to form these precise concepts. The words "God exists" therefore communicates the base idea, the words in the bible communicates the connections from this base idea. Yet sometimes one form of communication does not work: it is why the church employs pastors or preachers, people to select the most appropriate words to communicate in the most effective way the concept of god to the people in the church.

The Bible is an ingenious piece of literature, because it is so persuasive and yet its language seems to be deceptively simple. Using simple metaphors, simple parables, it communicates extremely complex ideas in a matter of words. For example, the concept of "Suffering" is examplified beautifully in the short story of Job, and communicates at once the nature of Suffering and God in a short, effective way.

Sometimes the most effective way constitutes of long, relatable stories. Sometimes they constitute using the least, but most relevant words possible. Prose, and poetry. Grandmother Stories, and Chinese Proverbs.

It is thus erronous to condemn a person who uses crude language as stupid and shallow. Just as it is erronous to commend a bookworm for being intelligent. The army has given me the opportunity of meeting counterexamples for both these erronous conclusions.

The old warrant officer who tells you grandmother stories is no less intelligent than the quiet bookworm who can only superficially scratch at the idea. The WO's story may be long, it may be full of grammatical errors, it may have foul language inserted at certain points. But at the end of the day the story is compelling - you realize that it is an effective example of the concept he is trying to illustrate, and it forms the connection between the idea and other ideas. Of course this is arguable if you're picky about bad grammar, but presumably the story is one that is sufficiently relatable to. Furthermore, the story alone covers most of the questions you would want to ask about the topic.

Take the flipside then, the bookworm. He will quote to you direct passages from the book about the topic he has read, but question him and he will falter. He may quote to you another passage, or worse, he will not understand what you are asking. Worse, he may try to use mathematical formulae, or sophisticated language, to cover up his inadequacy.

Intelligence, as I have said earlier, constitues of the conceptualization of an idea and the expression. The WO succeeds in both, as examplified by his story - not only is it a neat, accessible way of relating the idea, but it also covers all the connections that should be formed from that idea. The bookworm, however, fails to understand the concept in his inability to answer your question, and fails to express it in his mindless regurgitation of passages/formulae. The use of bombastic words and formulae, hence, is Not an indicator of intelligence.

Arguably, it may be true that sophisticated language is the most effective, precise and accessible way of expressing an idea. Yet a truly intelligent person will understand the need to communicate ideas, and hence to use other forms of expression at times when eloquence fails. The Stupid do no such thing.

The Stupid are not those who use "cheebye". Rather, the Stupid are the superficial - those who throw big concepts around without giving sufficient thought. They are the people who will swallow the Seven Core Values of the SAF whole, and they are also the people who will say Army Sucks. They are the ones who will tell you ScHoOL SucKs!, and at the same time say they feel a Deep Indescribable Nostalgia That Runs Through Every Corpuscle Of Their Veins Everytime They Walk Down The Memory Lane of School. Because these people are simply chanting these mantras because they are fashionable, and not because they truly understand any of it. They are moulded by the strongest ideas of the moment. And hence the Stupid are those with no personalities, no views, no opinions to defend - because the world tears each of these things down easily due to their inability to justify them.


Side note:
Coming to the realization that I don't need any more friends is liberating indeed. I love all that I have now, and I cannot afford any more.