Shouldn't the obvious indicator be that the reproduction of what was learned is more diverse in the verbal part than the qualitative whch is more direct.
You can make anyone complete a Linear Algebra question if it is one they have seen before and were indoctrinated to when faced with this question to do EXACTLY as learned.
How can you emblazon language onto a retards brain where all they can is regurgitate back onto paper what someone else forced upon them. Best one can do is mimic the style of a great writer but still then one is left to write as they would have and can not simpl place a new word, fitting to the question, where a different, from a different situation, stood as one would with different numbers for any math question.
Any vocabulary and sentence structure only shows aptness which others can perhaps fake but to, from that, write a great paper is what can not be learned over a course of a month before taking the exam.
This really should be obvious if you read classical philosophical texts like Kant, Fichte, Schelling, etc. The intellect of these guys when reading their works is palpable. And I am not talking about what they write about but how. If you want to feel fascinated (or feel like a midwit) read Fichte's scientific work and compare that to your own or literally any other writing.
Let's be real you are not actually ever showing innovative intellect when solving math problems on test. You will only more quickly solve a problem you have practiced than someone else if you are more intelligent.
>>11808595>SOT>society of toxicology>Sea of thieveswhat does this mean?
