Thanks for enquiries regarding lifemudra. Request you to make a member of lifemudra.   Helps in making analysis of Organ disorders.   From lifemudra CEO, M V Rao

General Summary Brain Analysis Report

Dermotoglyphics Analysis of Brain and Organs.

1. Neuroscience: the nervous system from brain to organs (two ways).
A. Firmware.
B. Through spine.

2. Neuroscience: the nervous system from organs to palm and foot.
A. Construction of Organs.
B. Layers connectivity to nervous.
C. Blood flowing system.

(Towards organs and from organs to outside of the organs. Outside of the organs Neurons carrying garbage (fat and other acids), this garbage filtered at friction skin. Due to this reason the friction is preparing. Hence it is permanent until de-composition sets in).

3. Study of Friction Skin.

4. Study of Finger Print Science.

5. Analysis of Brain and Organs through finger impressions and other friction skin.

6. What is fingerprint analysis?

Fingerprint Img

Brain Analysis “Report”
Brain analysis depends upon the neuron and its nodes construction.
Mental ability, problems and disorders depends upon the construction of Neurons and its Nodes.

We can identify in which of these he/she is having strength/General Strength / weakness
Physical Status of Brain

Frontal lobe/temporal lobe/parietal

Frontal lobe/temporal lobe/parietal lobe/occipital/cerebellum/spinal cord Non Physical Status of Brain = Mind

Focus / memory/ brain power
Creativity/imagination/learning/IQ/energy/sleep/fitness/mood/relax/Happiness

Better memory/ better vision and hearing/ enhance IQ/ Fast and Accurate thinking/focus and concentration/ mind power

Retrieval / Reconsolidation / Acquisition / early encoding/ Storage/ memory short and Long

Productive think/wise mental energy/evaluation beliefs/ controlling/ change/ happy / kind/ risk calculations/responsibility/ success

20-20

Serial Right Brain Functions Left Brain Functions
1 Strength of input
a.Low level Strength Poor
b.General level Strength average
c.Maximum Strength Excellent Higher mental consciousness Higher motor Consciousness
Keeping Formulas Numbers Languages Fixed Visionary Images
Strength of output
a.Low level Strength poor
b.General Strength average
Maximum Strength excellent Higher mental Consciousness Higher motor Consciousness Spoken Language Mathematics Solving Science Formula Making Creativity Art Music Reflexive consciousness
2 Energy (Input)
a.Positive
a.Negative
c.Mixed Energy
Energy (output)
a.Positive
b.Negative
c.Mixed Energy
3 a.Single Core energy Input System
b.Double Core energy Input
a.Single Core energy output System
b.Double core energy output
4 Keeping subject in Mind
a.Not possible
b.Solution(selection of Solution)
c.Percentage of Storing
Using subject
a.Not possible
b.Solution(selection of Solution)
c.Percentage of output
5 Input Taking time
a.Understanding subject too late
b.Understanding subject too fast (sharper)
output Taking time
a.Subject recovery too late
b.subject too fast (fast observer)
6 Confusion
a.Confusion in Understanding
Confusion
a.Confusion in answering
7 Memory
a.Short subject memory
b.Long subject memory
Memory out put
a.Short subject memory
b.Long subject
8 Output disability
a.Against doing of work
b.Against doing of thinking
c.Percentage of both
Input disability
a.Against insertion
b.Against observation
c.Percentage of both
9 Unable to output
a.We can’t understood what these type of people saying
Unable to input
a.Unable to input whatever heard think against to that.
10 Power full brain
a.Unable to connect corpus calosum
b.Antilock output
Power full brain
a.Unable to connect corpus calosum
b.Clockwise input
11 Continuity stopping
a.Ability of output stops at certain age
b.Against neurology starts at certain place of pattern
Continuity stopping
a.Ability of studying stops at certain age
b.Against neurology starts at certain place of pattern
12 No quarrel mind output
a.Smooth going
No quarrel mind input
a.Calm and quite listener
13 Vice versa Vice versa
14 Percentage of Output
a.Lower Percentage of output
b.General Percentage of Output
c.Strength Percentage of Output
Percentage of Input
a.Lower Percentage of input
b.General Percentage of input
c.Strength Percentage of input
15 Percentage of Negative output Percentage of positive input
16 Peripheral Pain or Stress No links with output Peripheral Pain or Stress No links with input
17 Positive Output in two ways Mixed output(Negative Positive) Positive input in two ways Mixed input(Negative Positive)
18 Negative Output in two ways Negative input in two ways
19 Conditional output Conditional Input
20 No fear in output No fear in input

Strength of Input:

a. Low Level Strength:

Input weak: People with low level strength have to read a subject multiple times to grasp it. And further they have to keep fixed information in brain after making maximum exercise.
Fixed means language (alphabets, grammar).
Fixed means Numbers 0 to 9 and mathematical formulas.
(+ - % / x) Like fixed meaning symbols.
Fixed means Science formulas.
Fixed means History and their dates.
Fixed means Visual Images.
Fixed means Audio Fixation (voice of various people to recognize)

All the above fixed material gained by the Right brain. So low level means all the above fixed material keeping in mind is weak.

b. General Level Strength:

Input general: People with general level strength have to read one or two times to gain a subject. And further they have to keep fixed information in brain after making medium exercise.
Fixed means language (alphabets, grammar).
Fixed means Numbers 0 to 9 and mathematical formulas.
(+ - % / x) Like fixed meaning symbles.
Fixed means Science formulas.
Fixed means History and their dates.
Fixed means Visual Images.
Fixed means Audio Fixation (voice of various people to recognize)

All the above fixed material gained by the Right brain. So general level means all the above fixed material keeping in mind is so natural.

c. Maximum Strength:

Input Strong:For people with maximum input strength, reading and writing the subject one time is enough to gain it. And further they have to keep fixed information in brain after making minimum exercise.
Fixed means language (alphabets, grammar).
Fixed means Numbers 0 to 9 and mathematical formulas.
(+ - % / x) Like fixed meaning symbols.
Fixed means Science formulas.
Fixed means History and their dates.
Fixed means Visual Images.
Fixed means Audio Fixation (voice of various people to recognize)

All the above fixed material gained by the Right brain. So high level means all the above fixed material keeping in mind is very high and have maximum capacity of grasping.

Strength of output

a. Low level Strength

Output weak: People with low level strength have to explain a subject a lot to make the person understand. And further they have to prepare to fix information in brain after making maximum exercise.
Fixed means language (explain or to write).

b. General Strength

Output general: People with general level strength have to explain one or two times to make someone understand a subject. And further they have to prepare to fix information in brain after making one or two trail of exercise.
Fixed means language (explain or to write).

c. Maximum Strength

Output very high: People with maximum strength have the capability to make someone understand a subject with a one time explanation. And further they have to prepare to fix information in brain to explain after making minimum exercise.
In the below they have fully skilled.

1. Skilled Movements
2. Intelligence/ Emotion and Behavior
3. Speech
4. Hearing
5. Movements
6. Touch
7. Visual recognition

Fixed language (explain or to write).

2. Energy of Right Brain.

a. Input Positive Energy

Whatever we are listening, whatever we are seeing the right brain understands that he/her will take it as positive.
Positive taking depends on the neurons culture of brain.
The percentage can be decided by analyzing fingerprints.

b. Input Negative Energy

Whatever we are listening, whatever we are seeing the right brain understands that he/her will take it as negative.
Negative taking depends on the neurons culture of brain.
The percentage can be decided by analyzing fingerprints.

c. Mixed Energy

Some people have both input energies. They have understood in both ways. They will take each and every subject as negative and positive. Percentage of positive and negative energy can be analyzed through fingerprints.

Energy of Left Brain.

a. Output Positive Energy

Whatever we are explaining, whatever we are showing the left brain manipulates the subject in a positive way.
Positive Output depends on the neurons culture of brain. The percentage can be decided by analyzing fingerprints.

b. Output Negative Energy.

Whatever we are explaining, whatever we are showing the left brain manipulates in negative way. Negative output is depends on the neurons culture of brain.
The percentage can be decided by analyzing fingerprints.

c. Mixed Energy.

Some people have both output energies. They can explain in both ways. They will explain each and every subject as negative and positive. Percentage of positive and negative energy can be analyzed through fingerprints.

3. Core energy system.

a. Single Core energy Input System
b. Double Core energy Input
c. Single Core energy output System
d. Double core energy output

4. Keeping subject in Mind.

a. Not possible. They are able to listen but unable to keep in mind, even though heard number of times. Because the mind developed by them is keeping knowledge and subject in eternal, they are unable to recollect the subject, as the subject must be linked to the mind through an image address.
b. Possible - Duel thinker: They take decisions by two ways. Suggested to take first decision or second decision by analyzing fingerprints we can decide.
c.Percentage of Storing: Some people keep the subject in proper way and they will succeed with a 100%. But some people have no such capacity to keep the entire subject in mind. By analyzing fingerprints we can decide the percentage of keeping subjects in minds.

Using subject

a. Not possible
Not possible. They are unable to explain or unable to use, could be kept in mind. Mind developed by them is retrieving knowledge from eternal. They are unable to recollect the subject; as the subject must be recollected through linked image address.

b. Solution
Each and every subject must be addressed with image. Then it is easy to recollect.

5. Input Taking Time.

a. Understanding subject too late: They will keep the subject very slowly but fully. They need more time to keep the subject in mind.

b. Understanding subject fast: Some of the people have sharper input. They will understand most of the subject quickly.

Output Taking time

a. Subject recovery too late: Getting subject from brain is too late but most of subject can be retrievable.

b. Subject too fast (fast observer): Getting subject from brain is too fast and most of subject can be retrievable.

6. Confusion.

Confusion in understanding: They are unable to choose right way. They are confused while deciding between right and wrong (confusion).
Output confusion
Whenever they want disclose the ideas or subject they are in trouble to make a decision in which he got ideas. More than One idea he got.
Input confusion
Whenever they listen or hearing from the others the subject and others in more than One way. Each and every subject they will take two types. To take decision they will disturb to identify which one is best.

7. Memory.

Who have talent in keeping short subject in mind?
In this sector the people kept subject in mind is very less. So they are always trying to keep short subject in Mind.
Who have talent in keeping long subject in mind?
They have very highly talented in keeping long subject and continuity subject in mind.

8. Output disability

Against doing of work Whatever they do work is against to the natural
Against doing of thinking Whatever they think is against to the natural
Percentage of both- Input disability Some of them understand minimum Against insertion- Against observation Percentage of both

9. Unable output/input

We can’t understood what these type of people saying Unable input
Unable to input whatever heard think against to that.

10. Power full brain OUTPUT but

Unable to connect corpus calosum
Antilock output
Power full brain INPUT but
Unable to connect corpus calosum
Clockwise input

11. Continuity stopping

Ability of output stops at certain age Against neurology starts at certain place of pattern

Continuity stopping
Ability of studying stops at certain age
Against neurology starts at certain place of pattern

12. No quarrel mind output. Smooth going

No quarrel mind input. Calm and quite listener

13. Percentage of Output

Lower Percentage of Output
General Percentage of Output
Strength Percentage of Output
Percentage of Input
Percentage of Input Lower
Percentage of input General
Percentage of input Strength
Percentage of input and output both.

14. Percentage of Negative output

Negative will not give results. Success only at new things. The percentage of negative 50 % is Normal more than that problem.

Percentage of positive input
Positive will give results. Follows only subject.
The percentage of positive upto 100% no problem.

15. Pain or Stress. No links with output

Without working (output) of brain they will get headache.
Peripheral Pain or Stress. No links with input
Without working (Input) of brain they will get headache.

16. Positive Output in two ways. Mixed output (Negative Positive)

They have 50% power in positive output and 50% in negative input. Always the allow two ways of output.
Positive input in two ways. Mixed input (Negative Positive)
They have 50% power in positive input and 50% in negative output.
Always they allow two ways of input.

17. Negative Output in two ways

They have two outputs but both of them Negative.

Negative input in two ways
They have two inputs ways but both of them Negative,.

18. Conditional output

After some age they have face to study. They are unable to give output properly.

Conditional Input
After some age they have face to study. They are unable to give input properly.

19. No fear in output. No fear in input

They don’t feel any fear even any situation.

20. Balanced Connectivity

Both output and input are balanced.

Lower or Medium or Strength

The strength in right brain and left brain is parallel lower strength.
The strength in right brain and left brain is parallel medium strength.
The strength in right brain and left brain is parallel higher strength.

Problems faced by the people who have

Sl. No Problems in mind either by birth are after some time
1 a. By understanding.
b. By birth problems.
2 a. By splitting of neurons and its nodes. Due to accidents and brain clots and others.
3 a. Stress
Output stress
Input stress

a. By understanding:

Even though have good brain but unable to kept in mind why?
By birth they have neglected by the Parents/Society. The mind can open their neurons within the Womb and out of Womb. Out of Womb the brain will be open their neurons when he was learning and seeing. If not opened their neurons (just like keeping in jail) then they will not understand anything.

b. By birth problems. They have brain problems in understanding and doing. Why the neurons are entirely build in apposite ways.

2 a. either by accident or any brain problems the neuron system in some place may be ruptured.

3 a. Stress can be identified through analysis of fingerprints. Output when they want to express or when they want to disclose or to put on paper they will feel stress.

Input when they want to know or when they want to hear or to ask they will feel stress.

ORGANS “Reproductive System (Ovary-Testis), Kidneys, Pancreatic and Heart”

Sl. No Organ Description
1 Reproductive System
a. Ovary
b. Testis
a. Ovary
  1. Lower Strength
  2. General Strength
  3. Maximum Strength
  4. Defects
  4. Problems
b. testis
  1. Lower Strength
  2. General Strength
  3. Maximum Strength
  4. Defects
  4. Problems
2 Kidneys a. Stone formation
b. Filtering Strength
c. Problems in filtering
3 Pancreatic A. Strength
  a. Lower
  b. Medium
  c. Higher
b. Problems
  a. Insulin Production
  b. Insulin Stop at after some age
  c. Un controlled Insulin Production
4 Heart a. Breathing Input/output
b. Genetically Disorders
c. Construction Problems

And who have below qualities also can be detected through Fingerprints.

Musicality

sensitivity to sounds, able to sing, play musical instruments, and compose music. You have sensitivity to rhythm, pitch, meter, tone, melody.

psychology

Judgment and the ability to visualize with the mind's eye.

Linguistic intelligence

high verbal-linguistic intelligence display a facility with words and languages. You are typically good at reading, writing, telling stories and memorizing words along with dates. Verbal ability is one of the best abilities.

Reason logic,

abstractions, reasoning, numbers and critical thinking. Having the capacity to understand the underlying principles of some kind of causal system Logical reasoning is closely linked to general intelligence.

Bodily-kinesthetic

Gross motor skill and Fine motor skill kinesthetic intelligence are control of one's bodily motions and the capacity to handle objects skillfully.

Sense of timing, a clear sense of the goal of a physical action, along with the ability to train responses.

You have high bodily-kinesthetic intelligence should be generally good at physical activities such as sports, dance, acting, and making things.

bodily-kinesthetic intelligence include: athletes, dancers, musicians, actors, builders, police officers, and soldiers. Choices.

Interpersonal

You have high interpersonal intelligence are characterized by their sensitivity to others' moods, feelings, temperaments, motivations, and their ability to cooperate in order to work as part of a group. According to Gardner in How Are Kids Smart: Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom, "Inter- and Intra- personal intelligence is often misunderstood with being extroverted or liking other people..."[12] Those with high interpersonal intelligence communicate effectively and empathize easily with others, and may be either leaders or followers. You often enjoy discussion and debate. Gardner has equated this with emotional intelligence of Goleman.

Selection

interpersonal intelligence sales persons, politicians, managers, teachers, lecturers, counselors and social workers.

Intrapersonal

This area has to do with introspective and self-reflective capacities. This refers to having a deep understanding of the self; what one's strengths or weaknesses are, what makes one unique, being able to predict one's own reactions or emotions.

Naturalistic

Not part of Gardner's original seven, naturalistic intelligence was proposed by him in 1995. "If I were to rewrite Frames of Mind today, I would probably add an eighth intelligence - the intelligence of the naturalist. It seems to me that the individual who is readily able to recognize flora and fauna, to make other consequential distinctions in the natural world, and to use this ability productively (in hunting, in farming, in biological science) is exercising an important intelligence and one that is not adequately encompassed in the current list."[15] This area has to do with nurturing and relating information to one's natural surroundings.[8] Examples include classifying natural forms such as animal and plant species and rocks and mountain types. This ability was clearly of value in our evolutionary past as hunters, gatherers, and farmers; it continues to be central in such roles as botanist or chef.

This sort of ecological receptiveness is deeply rooted in a "sensitive, ethical, and holistic understanding" of the world and its complexities – including the role of humanity within the greater ecosphere.

Existential

Spiritual intelligence
Gardner did not want to commit to a spiritual intelligence, but suggested that an "existential" intelligence may be a useful construct, also proposed after the original 7 in his 1999 book.[17] The hypothesis of an existential intelligence has been further explored by educational researchers.

Additional intelligences

On January 13, 2016, Gardner mentioned in an interview with BigThink that he is considering adding the teaching-pedagogical intelligence "which allows us to be able to teach successfully to other people".[19] In the same interview, he explicitly refused some other suggested intelligences like humour, cooking and sexual intelligence.[19]

Critical reception

Gardner argues that there is a wide range of cognitive abilities, but that there are only very weak correlations among them. For example, the theory postulates that a child who learns to multiply easily is not necessarily more intelligent than a child who has more difficulty on this task. The child who takes more time to master multiplication may best learn to multiply through a different approach, may excel in a field outside mathematics, or may be looking at and understanding the multiplication process at a fundamentally deeper level.

Intelligence tests and psychometrics have generally found high correlations between different aspects of intelligence, rather than the low correlations which Gardner's theory predicts, supporting the prevailing theory of general intelligence rather than multiple intelligences (MI).[20] The theory has been widely criticized by mainstream psychology for its lack of empirical evidence, and its dependence on subjective judgement.

Definition of intelligence

One major criticism of the theory is that it is ad hoc: that Gardner is not expanding the definition of the word "intelligence", but rather denies the existence of intelligence as traditionally understood, and instead uses the word "intelligence" where other people have traditionally used words like "ability" and "aptitude". This practice has been criticized by Robert J. Sternberg, Eysenck,and Scarr White (2006) points out that Gardner's selection and application of criteria for his "intelligences" is subjective and arbitrary, and that a different researcher would likely have come up with different criteria.

Defenders of MI theory argue that the traditional definition of intelligence is too narrow, and thus a broader definition more accurately reflects the differing ways in which humans think and learn.

Some criticisms arise from the fact that Gardner has not provided a test of his multiple intelligences. He originally defined it as the ability to solve problems that have value in at least one culture, or as something that a student is interested in. He then added a disclaimer that he has no fixed definition, and his classification is more of an artistic judgment than fact:

Ultimately, it would certainly be desirable to have an algorithm for the selection of an intelligence, such that anytrained researcher could determine whether a candidate's intelligence met the appropriate criteria. At present, however, it must be admitted that the selection (or rejection) of a candidate's intelligence is reminiscent more of an artistic judgment than of a scientific assessment.

Generally, linguistic and logical-mathematical abilities are called intelligences, but artistic, musical, athletic, etc. abilities are not. Gardner argues this causes the former to be needlessly aggrandized. Certain critics are wary of this widening of the definition, saying that it ignores "the connotation of intelligence ... [which] has always connoted the kind of thinking skills that makes one successful in school

Gardner writes "I balk at the unwarranted assumption that certain human abilities can be arbitrarily singled out as intelligence while others cannot." Critics hold that given this statement, any interest or ability can be redefined as "intelligence". Thus, studying intelligence becomes difficult, because it diffuses into the broader concept of ability or talent. Gardner's addition of the naturalistic intelligence and conceptions of the existential and moral intelligences are seen as the fruits of this diffusion. Defenders of the MI theory would argue that this is simply a recognition of the broad scope of inherent mental abilities, and that such an exhaustive scope by nature defies a one-dimensional classification such as an IQ value.

The theory and definitions have been critiqued by Perry D. Klein as being so unclear as to be tautologous and thusunfalsifiable. Having a high musical ability means being good at music while at the same time being good at music is explained by having a high musical ability

Neo-Piagetian criticism

Andreas Demetriou suggests that theories which overemphasize the autonomy of the domains are as simplistic as the theories that overemphasize the role of general intelligence and ignore the domains. He agrees with Gardner that there are indeed domains of intelligence that are relevantly autonomous of each other.[32] Some of the domains, such as verbal, spatial, mathematical, and social intelligence are identified by most lines of research in psychology. In Demetriou's theory, one of the neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development, Gardner is criticized for underestimating the effects exerted on the various domains of intelligences by the various subprocesses that define overall processing efficiency, such as speed of processing, executive functions, working memory, and meta-cognitive processes underlying self-awareness and self-regulation. All of these processes are integral components of general intelligence that regulate the functioning and development of different domains of intelligence. The domains are to a large extent expressions of the condition of the general processes, and may vary because of their constitutional differences but also differences in individual preferences and inclinations. Their functioning both channels and influences the operation of the general processes. Thus, one cannot satisfactorily specify the intelligence of an individual or design effective intervention programs unless both the general processes and the domains of interest are evaluated

IQ tests

Gardner argues that IQ tests only measure linguistic and logical-mathematical abilities. He argues the importance of assessing in an "intelligence-fair" manner. While traditional paper-and-pen examinations favour linguistic and logical skills, there is a need for intelligence-fair measures that value the distinct modalities of thinking and learning that uniquely define each intelligence.

Psychologist Alan S. Kaufman points out that IQ tests have measured spatial abilities for 70 years.[38] Modern IQ tests are greatly influenced by the Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory which incorporates a general intelligence but also many more narrow abilities. While IQ tests do give an overall IQ score, they now also give scores for many more narrow abilities

Lack of empirical evidence

According to a 2006 study many of Gardner's "intelligences" correlate with the g factor, supporting the idea of a single dominant type of intelligence. According to the study, each of the domains proposed by Gardner involved a blend of g, of cognitive abilities other than g, and, in some cases, of non-cognitive abilities or of personality characteristics.[6]

Linda Gottfredson (2006) has argued that thousands of studies support the importance of intelligence quotient (IQ) in predicting school and job performance, and numerous other life outcomes. In contrast, empirical support for non-gintelligences is either lacking or very poor. She argued that despite this the ideas of multiple non-g intelligences are very attractive to many due to the suggestion that everyone can be smart in some way.

A critical review of MI theory argues that there is little empirical evidence to support it:

To date, there have been no published studies that offer evidence of the validity of the multiple intelligences. In 1994 Sternberg reported finding no empirical studies. In 2000 Allix reported finding no empirical validating studies, and at that time Gardner and Connell conceded that there was "little hard evidence for MI theory" (2000, p. 292). In 2004 Sternberg and Grigerenko stated that there were no validating studies for multiple intelligences, and in 2004 Gardner asserted that he would be "delighted were such evidence to accrue",[40] and admitted that "MI theory has few enthusiasts among psychometricians or others of a traditional psychological background" because they require "psychometric or experimental evidence that allows one to prove the existence of the several intelligences

The same review presents evidence to demonstrate that cognitive neuroscience research does not support the theory of multiple intelligences
the human brain is unlikely to function via Gardner's multiple intelligences. Taken together the evidence for the intercorrelations of subskills of IQ measures, the evidence for a shared set of genes associated with mathematics, reading, and g, and the evidence for shared and overlapping "what is it?" and "where is it?" neural processing pathways, and shared neural pathways for language, music, motor skills, and emotions suggest that it is unlikely that each of Gardner's intelligences could operate "via a different set of neural mechanisms" (1999, p. 99). Equally important, the evidence for the "what is it?" and "where is it?" processing pathways, for Kahneman's two decision-making systems, and for adapted cognition modules suggests that these cognitive brain specializations have evolved to address very specific problems in our environment. Because Gardner claimed that the intelligences are innate potentialities related to a general content area, MI theory lacks a rationale for the phylogenetic emergence of the intelligences.

The theory of multiple intelligences is sometimes cited as an example of pseudoscience because it lacks empirical evidence or falsifiability though Gardner has argued otherwise

Use in education

Gardner defines an intelligence as "biopsychological potential to process information that can be activated in a cultural setting to solve problems or create products that are of value in a culture."[44] According to Gardner, there are more ways to do this than just through logical and linguistic intelligence. Gardner believes that the purpose of schooling "should be to develop intelligences and to help people reach vocational and avocational goals that are appropriate to their particular spectrum of intelligences. People who are helped to do so, [he] believe[s], feel more engaged and competent and therefore more inclined to serve society in a constructive way

Gardner contends that IQ tests focus mostly on logical and linguistic intelligence. Upon doing well on these tests, the chances of attending a prestigious college or university increase, which in turn creates contributing members of society.[45]While many students function well in this environment, there are those who do not. Gardner's theory argues that students will be better served by a broader vision of education, wherein teachers use different methodologies, exercises and activities to reach all students, not just those who excel at linguistic and logical intelligence. It challenges educators to find "ways that will work for this student learning this topic

James Traub's article in The New Republic notes that Gardner's system has not been accepted by most academics in intelligence or teaching.[47] Gardner states that "while Multiple Intelligences theory is consistent with much empirical evidence, it has not been subjected to strong experimental tests ... Within the area of education, the applications of the theory are currently being examined in many projects. Our hunches will have to be revised many times in light of actual classroom experience

Jerome Bruner agreed with Gardner that the intelligences were "useful fictions," and went on to state that "his approach is so far beyond the data-crunching of mental testers that it deserves to be cheered

George Miller, a prominent cognitive psychologist, wrote in The New York Times Book Review that Gardner's argument consisted of "hunch and opinion" and Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein in The Bell Curve (1994) called Gardner's theory "uniquely devoid of psychometric or other quantitative evidence

In spite of its lack of general acceptance in the psychological community, Gardner's theory has been adopted by many schools, where it is often conflated with learning styles,[51] and hundreds of books have been written about its applications in education.[52] Some of the applications of Gardner's theory have been described as "simplistic" and Gardner himself has said he is "uneasy" with the way his theory has been used in schools.[53] Gardner has denied that multiple intelligences are learning styles and agrees that the idea of learning styles is incoherent and lacking in empirical evidence.[54] Gardner summarizes his approach with three recommendations for educators: individualize the teaching style (to suit the most effective method for each student), pluralize the teaching (teach important materials in multiple ways), and avoid the term "styles" as being confusing

Educational pedagogies, including Purpose Driven Education, have begun to tap into multiple intelligence as a way to better understand the uniqueness and specific abilities of each individual. These draw from the idea that each student is capable, and has a purpose.