This article at New Scientist provides a good framework for understanding some of the relationship between IQ and being smart. Every time I teach about Carol Dweck's work on growth mindsets, I run into some push back from academically successful folks arguing that there really is an intrinsic, something-internal-to-me element in "smartness." Of course there is, but as Dr. Dweck and this article suggests, we tend to overestimate it.
On the other hand, to the extent that the article suggests "rational thinking" is just IQ applied to non-intuitive situations, I think it underestimates the complexity of intelligence. Ap Dijksterhuis' work on unconscious thinking shows that the "intuitive" system is capable of highly analytical and goal-directed thinking. Further, there are some aspects of intuitive or emotional intelligence for which high-IQ cannot compensate. Damasio's work shows that individuals with brain damage in certain areas associated with the emotional system can identify patterns but then not be able to adjust behavior to better achieve goals based on that knowledge. Both laboratory experiments and studies in real-life situations (expulsions from school for high-school boys) demonstrate this finding.
So what's the best approach to intelligence?
First, it's rarely if ever, the limiting factor in living a happy, successful life filled where one experiences autonomy, competence and good relationships. Use what you've got of all types of intelligence and you'll be able to accomplish goals that truly matter to you.
Second, apply Barb Fredrickson's "Broaden and Build" theory: in general, thinking and living in a way that generates a 3:1 or better ratio of positive to negative emotions will allow the broadest, most creative thinking and the best ability to collaborate with others.
Finally, remember that some tasks are best done in a neutral or slightly negative mood. An example are tasks that require an ability to spot errors such as checking a spreadsheet for mistakes.
Photo: Rachel by Lcrward