Intelligence is volatile and hard to define due to the broad specificities it is entitled to. Facts tend to determine one's perception of intelligence when semantic memory is global and inversely related to the progression of technology.
Critical analysis and reasoning: words thrown out in academia consistently like a grasp of these concepts is going to produce life altering nomothetic discoveries. Some may. But discussing the deeper meaning behind the Hamlet manuscript doesn't quite fit into a critical analysis.
Producing data in a laboratory setting might leave a layman in awe, when the layman himself has much more experience and knowledge over multiple fields of study. Yet, we see a sense of pride from the scientist and a sense of ignorance from the layman. The saying if a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, does it make a sound is analogous to logical thought. The value of intelligence is not in the quality or magnitude of knowledge but in its transformation from one to another independent of precedent comprehension.
My message is no more insightful than tribal understanding for many centuries. Storytelling. Language shapes thought and thought shapes language, so the significance in linking the two creates a label to put on intelligence. Being able to understand a complex idea is insufficient if one is unable to deliver the idea in a variety of forms subjective to the recipient's cognitive capacity of reasoning.