In the United States, if you ask teachers, "Are there children whom we should call 'gifted?'", many if not most will say 'No.' That's the politically correct answer. But if you then ask the teacher to rank order students in terms of how well they paint or write or dance, they'll have little difficulty in doing so.

I reject the notion that human beings have a single intelligence, which can be drawn on for the full range of problem solving.

We need to focus on the kind of human beings we want to have and the kind of society in which we want to live.

Part of the maturity of the sciences is an appreciation of which questions are best left to other disciplinary approaches.

Intelligences are enhanced when a person is engaged in activities that involve the exercise of that intelligence. It helps to have good teachers, ample resources, and personal motivation. Anyone can improve any intelligence; but it is easier to improve the intelligence if those factors are available and if you have high potential in that intelligence.

'Til 1983, I wrote primarily for other psychologists and expected that they would be the principal audience for my book.

Best of all, persons can sometimes be app-transcendent: making dramatic progress or discoveries, without any dependence on any app. In this context, I like to mention Steve Jobs. While he had as much to do as anyone with the invention and development of apps, he NEVER was limited by the current technology - indeed, he typically transcended it and relied on his own considerable wits.