I was sitting down, pondering the many wonders of life when it suddenly hit me like a hammer blow to the skull. It's never really occurred to me for I almost never have the time to indulge in such philosophical questions, but is there a genius in all of us? I mean, if we dig into the records of history we can find brilliant mathematicians, scientists, physicists. Einstein, Newton, Archimedes, Hannibal, etc. The list goes on and on, but ... what about us? The other people, the normal people.
So, I sat there wondering for who knows how long; I could have grown a beard and the trees could have grown fifty feet tall for all I cared. These geniuses are famous because of their achievements in renowned areas (such as science and architecture). Yet, the question I wanted to pose is: are we all geniuses? Not in a symbolic sense, but in a literal sense. For all we know, stromboli could be a genius at catching butterflies, or leo could have been a revolutionary in the arts of woodwork. We would never know because there are a plethora of different things a person could explore in this planet. There's painting, sculpting, sketching, animating, directing, gardening, broadcasting, researching, planning, cleaning, drinking, and more. We'll never discover such "genius" qualities because there are innumerable paths to choose from.
In other words, let's just say Einstein was pretty lucky he got in touch with the scientific field because that was where he excelled at the most.
What do you guys think? Is it an interesting point, or am I just a raving lunatic?
Everyone is a unique and beautiful snowflake.
Which is why I'm always stuck shoveling their unique and beautiful shit.
I would say that no, for any useful definition of the word genius, not everyone is a genius.
[youtube:z0as49o0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1E9pKU_N15A[/youtube:z0as49o0]
Quote from: "the_antithesis"Writer posted a YouTube video (//http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1E9pKU_N15A)
She makes a valid point, but each hero still have a power that is unique to him or her. Same thing when it comes to genius, no? You could have been a genius at (idk, landscaping), but would never know because it's incredibly unlikely you would ever go that route.
The first element of genius is passion. So you'd probably know the things you could become genius at. The second element is lots of and lots of hard work. So just do what you love for many hours a week and you should see in a few years (or decades) whether you'll become a genius at it or not. But probably not.
Not to mention that all the people who don't have an active passion won't be able to be geniuses in anything for the simple reason that they're not doing anything because they don't enjoy anything constructive.
Sorry, but no. We like to believe that everyone has the potential for genius, because we like the idea that everyone's born with equal prospects in life, but the sad fact is that your genes largely determine "how good your brain works". Your womb environment makes up another chunk of it, and your upbringing counts for almost jack shit. Some people are born with intelligence genes passed onto them, some aren't, and some get born developmentally disabled regardless of intellect genes, like people with Down Syndrome. There has never been a physicist, or even a doctor or lawyer, with Down Syndrome. I know of one famous Down's person who's an accomplished swimmer, got an AS from a community college and is fairly intelligible when she speaks publicly, but let's be real, she's no Einstein. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Gaffney (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Gaffney)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ)
Now, if you mean "genius" in the figurative sense of "someone who accomplishes something extraordinary", that's a whole different question, but also doesn't mean much.
QuoteNow, if you mean "genius" in the figurative sense of "someone who accomplishes something extraordinary", that's a whole different question, but also doesn't mean much.
This. There is a difference between being good, even the best, at something and being a genius. Michael Phelps isn't considered a genius just because he is an amazing swimmer, nor Amrstrong for his biking abilities, or Christian Bale for his amazing acting.
Quote from: "Shiranu"There is a difference between being good, even the best, at something and being a genius. Michael Phelps isn't considered a genius just because he is an amazing swimmer, nor Amrstrong for his biking abilities, or Christian Bale for his amazing acting.
Exactly so. We, as a society sharing a language and having to agree on the definitions of words, agreed on the definition of "genius" as "intellectual exceptionality" , not "pottery skill" or "excelling at making people stop being sad" or any other version of "being good at this random thing."
Quote from: "Shiranu"QuoteNow, if you mean "genius" in the figurative sense of "someone who accomplishes something extraordinary", that's a whole different question, but also doesn't mean much.
This. There is a difference between being good, even the best, at something and being a genius. Michael Phelps isn't considered a genius just because he is an amazing swimmer, nor Amrstrong for his biking abilities, or Christian Bale for his amazing acting.
I agree with both statements. Technically, a genius is a person with an IQ of 180, as I recall. That's pretty much where it ends. The issue of accuracy of IQ tests aside, we are just talking about a person who scores somewhere in the 99th percentile on an IQ test. To extend the definition of genius to celebrity scientists and great statesmen is commonly done, but it's playing with semantics, and not technically correct. And to extend the definition of genius to anyone with a special skill, is even farther from the mark.
As far as Einstein and Newton, I would guess they would have blown the top off of an IQ test, but I don't actually know that. They were brilliant for sure. Genius? Maybe. Genius or not, you never would have heard of either of them if they weren't willing to get off their lazy asses and put their minds to work. But their willingness to apply themselves has nothing to do with genius.
The old saying, "Genius is 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration," is clever and all, and it gets a point across, but it takes liberties with definitions and is technically incorrect.
I know a guy who claims to have an IQ of 170, although I would estimate it's closer to 90, and I've known him for a very long time. Granted, he's lazy, butt ass lazy as they come, but he lacks the ability to reason, and can't seem to understand that his foggy brained decisions are the cause of most of his problems.
On the other hand, I know a guy who has never once talked to me about his IQ, but I do know that he was placed in all the honors classes and gifted programs. Just talking to him, I'd guess his IQ is up above 150. Now he's a lazy ass too, but he knows this. He has very little need for material gain, and chooses not to use his abilities for some greater purpose. But he does understand what's going on around him.
Not sure why I posted that.
Quote from: "SGOS"Technically, a genius is a person with an IQ of 180, as I recall.
I recall differently; a genius-level IQ is variously seen as an IQ over 145, 150 or 160, but never above that. Also, many definitions of "genius" require that cutoff IQ
plus some exceptional achievement. Example: Einstein was estimated by some sources to have a ~155 IQ, but his achievements make him universally regarded a genius, whereas people with IQs in the 160s and 170s who are also lazy and useless, like some friends of mine, would be regarded as intellectually gifted but not genius.
Quote from: "SGOS"I know a guy who claims to have an IQ of 170, although I would estimate it's closer to 90, and I've known him for a very long time. Granted, he's lazy, butt ass lazy as they come, but he lacks the ability to reason, and can't seem to understand that his foggy brained decisions are the cause of most of his problems.
On the other hand, I know a guy who has never once talked to me about his IQ, but I do know that he was placed in all the honors classes and gifted programs. Just talking to him, I'd guess his IQ is up above 150. Now he's a lazy ass too, but he knows this. He has very little need for material gain, and chooses not to use his abilities for some greater purpose. But he does understand what's going on around him.
Not sure why I posted that.
not sure either but it illustrates something. The second guy (in the honours classes) has the ability and really nothing to prove. he's smart but it doesn't matter to him. He went through the programs and had the marks to prove it but that's the same with anything. I've known people that have been truly good at sports, those that are don't brag about it, it just is, no big deal. These are people that made money from doing it. There was never a "look at me, I've played professional hockey and I'm going to tell you all about it."
The people that make a show of it, they are the ones that feel they have to convince everyone that they are smart, superior at something but they forget that if they really were there would be evidence for it. I'm always wary of someone that has to give me their "resume" on anything or justify their intelligence because if they were that smart then there would be something to show it.
QuoteI'm always wary of someone that has to give me their "resume" on anything or justify their intelligence because if they were that smart then there would be something to show it.
Isn't their resume basically the "something to show for it", though? :P
I mean; a resume is a list of their accomplishments, is it not?
Quote from: "Plu"QuoteI'm always wary of someone that has to give me their "resume" on anything or justify their intelligence because if they were that smart then there would be something to show it.
Isn't their resume basically the "something to show for it", though? :P
I mean; a resume is a list of their accomplishments, is it not?
it is, it's also a sign of insecurity if used anywhere else other than a job interview.
QuoteSo what is considered a genius IQ score? Generally, any score over 140 is counted as a high IQ. A score over 160 is considered by many to be a genius IQ score. Scores that are 200 and over are often referred to as "unmeasurable genius."
The term genius is a flexible one. I have seen different rates and scores given as genius. It has more to do with accomplishments and gifts than an IQ score. Many scientists are considered genius, even though very few people, a miniscule number, have IQ's in the 160 or above range.
Quote from: "Titania"Quote from: "SGOS"Technically, a genius is a person with an IQ of 180, as I recall.
I recall differently; a genius-level IQ is variously seen as an IQ over 145, 150 or 160, but never above that. Also, many definitions of "genius" require that cutoff IQ plus some exceptional achievement. Example: Einstein was estimated by some sources to have a ~155 IQ, but his achievements make him universally regarded a genius, whereas people with IQs in the 160s and 170s who are also lazy and useless, like some friends of mine, would be regarded as intellectually gifted but not genius.
I just checked. The one source I googled says:
"So what is considered a genius IQ score? Generally, any score over 140 is counted as a high IQ. A score over 160 is considered by many to be a genius IQ score. Scores that are 200 and over are often referred to as "unmeasurable genius."
http://psychology.about.com/od/psycholo ... -score.htm (http://psychology.about.com/od/psychologicaltesting/f/genius-iq-score.htm)
Also, again from what I recall, the old labels, idiot, moron, genius were thrown out some years ago because they stigmatized and were misunderstood. Now they use newer terms that stigmatize and are misunderstood. :-D
I prefer the more common classifications of "dumbass" and "smarty pants." They cut to the chase and stigmatize everyone, but at least I know what they mean.
Quote from: "surly74"Quote from: "Plu"QuoteI'm always wary of someone that has to give me their "resume" on anything or justify their intelligence because if they were that smart then there would be something to show it.
Isn't their resume basically the "something to show for it", though? :P
I mean; a resume is a list of their accomplishments, is it not?
it is, it's also a sign of insecurity if used anywhere else other than a job interview.
But then what would you have them show for it?
QuoteMensa's requirement for membership is a score at or above the 98th percentile on certain standardised IQ or other approved intelligence tests, such as the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales. The minimum accepted score on the Stanford-Binet is 132, while for the Cattell it is 148.[10] Most IQ tests are designed to yield a mean score of 100 with a standard deviation of 15; the 98th-percentile score under these conditions is 131.
Mensa also has its own application exam, and some national groups offer alternative batteries of tests. These exams are proctored by Mensa and do not provide a quantified score; they serve only to qualify a person for membership. In some national groups, a person may take a Mensa offered test only once, although one may later submit an application with results from a different qualifying test.[10]
more confusion
Quote from: "Plu"But then what would you have them show for it?
sorry, i'm not sure what you mean?
Well you said you were wary when people give you something to justify their intelligence, because you say that if they have it, there'll be something to show for it. But then, if there's something to show for it, isn't that still justifying their intelligence?
Unless you mean when they're putting too much work in pointing out their accomplishment and trying to justify intelligence. That'd be annoying and insecure indeed. Is that what you meant?
Quote from: "surly74"The people that make a show of it, they are the ones that feel they have to convince everyone that they are smart, superior at something but they forget that if they really were there would be evidence for it.
LOL I was blown away when that one guy told me he had an IQ of 170. I thought maybe I could stimulate his brain to consider the claim he just made without calling bullshit on him to his face. I said, "Well, you're in good company then. Einstein and Sir Isaac Newton had IQs of 170," but he just looked at me with his typical vacant look and nodded as if to say, "Yeah, I'm in that category then." He also added that he knew he was smarter than other people, because most people could not keep up with him. However, I'm pretty sure he didn't know the difference between his opinions and his intelligence. If someone has a different opinion, he just considers them dumb.
And all I did was pump up his already inflated opinion of himself with my Newton remark. I guess I should have encouraged him to join Mensa, but that would have required him to compose a letter of application, and would most likely have posed a great difficulty for him. LOL
double post
QuoteHe also added that he knew he was smarter than other people, because most people could not keep up with him.
Reminds me of my previous boss. People couldn't keep up with him either. But that's because he was impossible to follow because he failed at basic communication at all times.
Of course, that was our fault for not understanding him, not his fault for being impossible to understand.
Quote from: "Plu"QuoteHe also added that he knew he was smarter than other people, because most people could not keep up with him.
Reminds me of my previous boss. People couldn't keep up with him either. But that's because he was impossible to follow because he failed at basic communication at all times.
Of course, that was our fault for not understanding him, not his fault for being impossible to understand.
:rollin: Yeah, been there more than once.
Quote from: "Plu"QuoteHe also added that he knew he was smarter than other people, because most people could not keep up with him.
Reminds me of my previous boss. People couldn't keep up with him either. But that's because he was impossible to follow because he failed at basic communication at all times.
Of course, that was our fault for not understanding him, not his fault for being impossible to understand.
:rollin: Yeah, been there more than once.
What's with this double post stuff? I think my mouse is on the fritz. I need to turn down the sensitivity or something.
Quote from: "Plu"Well you said you were wary when people give you something to justify their intelligence, because you say that if they have it, there'll be something to show for it. But then, if there's something to show for it, isn't that still justifying their intelligence?
Unless you mean when they're putting too much work in pointing out their accomplishment and trying to justify intelligence. That'd be annoying and insecure indeed. Is that what you meant?
yeah. too much working in pointing out their accomplishments...that part.
Quote from: "Jesus"is there a genius in all of us?
Answer: no.
A vast amount of the human race is mind-numbingly stupid, sorry to say. On the other hand, some people cannot comprehend just how brilliant some people can naturally be if they have never met such people. It's truly humbling.
When I was younger, I assumed most people were like me. How naive I was. In the military, I learned exactly how stupid people can actually be. In university, I had the opportunity to meet people that showed me how far from genius I actually was.
No genius trait in us all, but I know more than plenty of people with the 'blatantly stupid' trait. They're not hard to spot.. Many wear their pants down around their knees in attempt to look kool!
Awww man, I'm just 13 short of being a certified genius :(.
Quote from: "Jesus"In other words, let's just say Einstein was pretty lucky he got in touch with the scientific field because that was where he excelled at the most.
Einstein was considered a genius because he was a 'effin genius. Math is where he choose to apply himself. If he had decided to apply himself to basket weaving, he still would have been a genius. He just wouldn't be in the history books.
Being extremely talented at something does not make one a genius at it. It just makes them good at that one thing. People who have genius level intelligence tend to be good at pretty much everything they decide to try. Not always otherworldly good at everything they try mind you. Because certain undertaking require more than just pure intelligence to pull off. A genius who is a world class physicist will probably never be able to keep up with most world class guitar players. But being a genius, that person would likely go a lot further with guitar if they chose to pursue it, than someone with an equal amount of 'musical potential' but lessor intelligence. Being smart helps.
I'll spot you 13...
Quote from: "Johan"A genius who is a world class physicist will probably never be able to keep up with most world class guitar players. But being a genius, that person would likely go a lot further with guitar if they chose to pursue it, than someone with an equal amount of 'musical potential' but lessor intelligence. Being smart helps.
I remember an incident that was related to me about a student of some musical instrument who was unable to perform a certain tune or exercise. His teacher eventually told him that his fingers were just not "wired" in such a way for him to do it. I think I can relate to that. I played the guitar for many years. I even got pretty good at it, but there were things I just couldn't do. And I don't think it was a matter of practice. It is not inconceivable to me that good musicians have certain physical attributes above and beyond the norm, just as gifted intellectuals have certain mental attributes beyond the norm. Gifted musicians probably have better innate abilities at tonal associations too. There are probably a number of abilities that must come together to make a good musician. Some people are innately better at specific things.
Gifted guitar players show up at such early ages at levels far beyond what took me years to master. I look at some of these youngsters with amazement. I don't think you get that good that fast without being "wired" to do it. If you have been blessed with the proper wiring, you still need to refine it, of course. You can't expect excellence in much of anything if you don't do the work. Or so it seems to me.
I also remember an interview with BB King. If you think about it, he sings a few bars and then plays a riff, but he never does both at one time. The interviewer asked him why he always follows that pattern. He confessed in the interview that he just couldn't sing and play something complicated at the same time. Other guitar players can, however.
Another thing I remember reading about IQ tests and things like entrance exams. They are designed to test the center of the bell curve, where the bulk of range of abilities exist. Where a person scores very low or very high, the results become less valid and are expressed in terms of margins of error. I'm not an expert, but I question those margins of error. To me they don't seem wide enough. But I digress.
If you are testing for the middle, which is what IQ tests do best, most people will render a proficiency level of 50% or so, and obtain a score of about 100. Questions that are too hard or too easy don't contribute much to being able to differentiate abilities, because almost everyone gets them all right or all wrong. The number of questions, therefore, that tax a gifted person are fewer in number and don't help as much in differentiating them from those slightly above them or slightly below them. A brilliant person who might get a perfect score is certainly regarded as smart, but a perfect score doesn't do anything to compare him with others close to his abilities. Scores of 99 percentile are considered dicey.
Teachers often use a scale of 90% right equals an A. 85% equals a B, and so on. But they are only testing to check for mastery of a small unit. They don't care so much about who's better (theoretically speaking). They only want to know how well the students master a relatively small amount of information. Not all teachers do it that way. But the frequently used scale for an end of the week test works well for their purposes unless the questions are too hard or too easy, in which case the test becomes unfair or a mickey mouse giveaway.
Well, this is quite depressing. Darn ...
These were great points! I've had my question answered more than adequately. I'm glad I can put this thought to rest now.
Quote from: "Jesus"Quote from: "the_antithesis"Writer posted a YouTube video (//http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1E9pKU_N15A)
She makes a valid point, but each hero still have a power that is unique to him or her. Same thing when it comes to genius, no? You could have been a genius at (idk, landscaping), but would never know because it's incredibly unlikely you would ever go that route.
Not everyone is a hero, son. You missed the point.
Quote from: "the_antithesis"Quote from: "Jesus"Quote from: "the_antithesis"Writer posted a YouTube video (//http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1E9pKU_N15A)
She makes a valid point, but each hero still have a power that is unique to him or her. Same thing when it comes to genius, no? You could have been a genius at (idk, landscaping), but would never know because it's incredibly unlikely you would ever go that route.
Not everyone is a hero, son. You missed the point.
Darn, and I was so hoping to be a genius myself.
"Everyone is special in their own way."
Bullshit. You are not a beautiful or unique snowflake. We are just cheapening the definition of "genius".
QuoteIs there a "genius" trait in us all?
trait, aw, sheesh, no.....not just a trait......
Quote from: "Jesus"Well, this is quite depressing. Darn ...
These were great points! I've had my question answered more than adequately. I'm glad I can put this thought to rest now.
I wouldn't get too depressed about it. Just because being extremely good at one particular thing doesn't qualify you as a genius doesn't negate the fact that you're still extremely good at something.
Say what you want, I'm still depressed I'm not a genius. So close, yet so far away...
Quote from: "Shiranu"Say what you want, I'm still depressed I'm not a genius. So close, yet so far away...
Ugh, tell me about it. I think about this all the time. Curse you, Powers That Be!
Quote from: "aitm"QuoteIs there a "genius" trait in us all?
trait, aw, sheesh, no.....not just a trait......
So what really does determine "genius"? I've never really given much thought about that. Genius transcends "hard work" and "talent" alone. Sure, as noted already one may be a fantastic actor (aka DiCaprio, or someone to the likes of that), but genius itself is something completely different.
Genius, in its simplest form, is the ability to look at a problem that makes most people go "that's unsolvable" and find the solution anyway.
No. Some people are just all-around stupid.
Frank
They're geniuses at stupidity.
> They're geniuses at stupidity.
A bit of an oxymoron, but there might be something to it. If you administer an IQ test to a subject, and he eats the test, I guess he'd qualify.
Frank
Quote from: "Johan"Einstein was considered a genius because he was a 'effin genius. Math is where he choose to apply himself.
Einstein was a cosmologist. He wasn't bad at math, but that's not where his genius lay.
QuotePeople who have genius level intelligence tend to be good at pretty much everything they decide to try. Not always otherworldly good at everything they try mind you. Because certain undertaking require more than just pure intelligence to pull off. A genius who is a world class physicist will probably never be able to keep up with most world class guitar players. But being a genius, that person would likely go a lot further with guitar if they chose to pursue it, than someone with an equal amount of 'musical potential' but lessor intelligence. Being smart helps.
You never heard Einstein play the violin, then, did you?
Quote from: "Plu"Genius, in its simplest form, is the ability to look at a problem that makes most people go "that's unsolvable" and find the solution anyway.
It's the ability to see connections where most people don't see any. And most geniuses also have more trivia floating around in their brains than others. (There's a connection there.)
Quote from: "Colanth"Einstein was a cosmologist. He wasn't bad at math, but that's not where his genius lay.
Wow. I guess I should feel like quite the asshole for not knowing that. And yet, I don't. Weird.
QuoteYou never heard Einstein play the violin, then, did you?
Why would I have heard Einstein play the violin? Obviously I never heard Einstein play violin nor was I even aware that he could. So you have my permission to smuggly pat yourself on the back and feel superior as long as you can answer one question. How does any of that render the ultimate point I was making any less valid?
Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Plu"Genius, in its simplest form, is the ability to look at a problem that makes most people go "that's unsolvable" and find the solution anyway.
It's the ability to see connections where most people don't see any. And most geniuses also have more trivia floating around in their brains than others. (There's a connection there.)
That was the definition I was looking for, Colanth. It was lingering on the edge of my tongue. Geniuses see the world differently than regular people do.
Genius' see the world exactly the same as regular people. They're just smarter than regular people.
Quote from: "Johan"Genius' see the world exactly the same as regular people. They're just smarter than regular people.
That's the reason they see it differently compared to others. A genius may look at a supposedly bland object and think of the many wonders it could perform, whilst a normal person may see only the uselessness.
It doesn't take a genius level of intellect to be able to look at an object and see all of its potential uses. It only requires experience and an open mind for that. Likewise, having a genius level of intellect does not mean one will look at an object and automatically see all of its potential uses.
Quote from: "Johan"It doesn't take a genius level of intellect to be able to look at an object and see all of its potential uses. It only requires experience and an open mind for that. Likewise, having a genius level of intellect does not mean one will look at an object and automatically see all of its potential uses.
Actually, it does, for even the smartest of people fail to see the usefulness of some things. A genius operates differently ... he or she can take a problem and complete it with ease. They think differently than we do.
May not be 'genius', but every person may be very good at some particular job.
Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Plu"Genius, in its simplest form, is the ability to look at a problem that makes most people go "that's unsolvable" and find the solution anyway.
It's the ability to see connections where most people don't see any. And most geniuses also have more trivia floating around in their brains than others. (There's a connection there.)
I like this description as well :)
QuoteIt doesn't take a genius level of intellect to be able to look at an object and see all of its potential uses.
Any object has an infinite number of uses. Not even a genius can see all of them.
Quote from: "Jesus"A genius operates differently ... he or she can take a problem and complete it with ease. They think differently than we do.
I think you're trying to draw a line of demarcation where there is none. Human intelligence exists on a continuum. There's no sharply defined divider between "geniuses" and "everyone else".
I know plenty of people with genius-level IQs and I can tell you their brains don't work
differently from those of lower-IQ people so much as they just plain old work
better. There's no special function your brain gains when you break the IQ ~150 mark that makes you think entirely differently than someone of IQ 140 does. Again, it's a continuum, and the performance improvement is generally diffuse and global.
Quote from: "Jesus"They think differently than we do.
No they don't.
Quote from: "Johan"Quote from: "Jesus"They think differently than we do.
No they don't.
no one could really know as the genius wouldn't know how the "average" think nor the average know how the genius thinks. Now if your talking about the actual science of thoughts being sent via neurons and such then probably.
Quote from: "aitm"the genius wouldn't know how the "average" think nor the average know how the genius thinks.
Stop it already. People with genius IQs don't think in a magically distinct way from "regular" people. They think pretty much along identical lines, they're just much better and quicker at it.
The only difference might be that geniuses draw more difficult connections and rely less on rote axioms, but even that's only a matter of degree.
You peeps keep trying to make this mystical "other" out of geniuses, but that's not the way it works!
Quote from: "Titania"Quote from: "aitm"the genius wouldn't know how the "average" think nor the average know how the genius thinks.
Stop it already. People with genius IQs don't think in a magically distinct way from "regular" people. They think pretty much along identical lines, they're just much better and quicker at it.
The only difference might be that geniuses draw more difficult connections and rely less on rote axioms, but even that's only a matter of degree.
What is this based upon?
Quote from: "Seabear"Quote from: "Titania"Quote from: "aitm"the genius wouldn't know how the "average" think nor the average know how the genius thinks.
Stop it already. People with genius IQs don't think in a magically distinct way from "regular" people. They think pretty much along identical lines, they're just much better and quicker at it.
The only difference might be that geniuses draw more difficult connections and rely less on rote axioms, but even that's only a matter of degree.
What is this based upon?
You're joking, right? I will politely assume that you're playing devil's advocate. :wink: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genius)
I'll claim genius status. I have magic brain cells. I got em at Walmart on sale for $12.99. ... discontinued item. :)
Quote from: "Titania"Quote from: "aitm"the genius wouldn't know how the "average" think nor the average know how the genius thinks.
Stop it already. People with genius IQs don't think in a magically distinct way from "regular" people. They think pretty much along identical lines, they're just much better and quicker at it.
The only difference might be that geniuses draw more difficult connections and rely less on rote axioms, but even that's only a matter of degree.
You peeps keep trying to make this mystical "other" out of geniuses, but that's not the way it works!
oh pull your hands back out of your underpants.....there are genius's and then there are those who are not..you make the claim they all think the same, I make the claim, "how can we tell, since one is one and the other is the other", you make the claim that they all must think the same because there is no magic.....ah.....whut?
Quote from: "aitm"oh pull your hands back out of your underpants.....there are genius's and then there are those who are not..you make the claim they all think the same, I make the claim, "how can we tell, since one is one and the other is the other", you make the claim that they all must think the same because there is no magic.....ah.....whut?
Hey, wait, I never said any of that. Read the whole thread and you'll see I never made any claim that geniuses are just the same as regular folk. Quite the opposite. All I said was that their brains don't work in fundamentally different ways, just better. It's like how hard liquor has more alcohol than beer and gets me drunker, but the thing getting me drunk is still the same thing, ethyl alcohol, and it's not like once the alcohol percentage of a drink climbs above a certain amount it turns into a different chemical with different psychoactive properties.
Quote from: "Titania"You're joking, right? I will politely assume that you're playing devil's advocate. :wink: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genius)
Hmm, Wikipedia... okay. Apologies, but I can't seem to find the section of the wiki link you provided that would seem support your assertion above. Can you be more specific, or is this just your opinion?
If so, that's fine, but based on my experience with some of the more brilliant people I have encountered in my life, my impression was that their thought process was indeed different from the average persons. not just the same thoughts but faster, but took different paths and abstractions.
Admittedly, this is anecdotal evidence on my part, but it would seem to contradict the assertion that geniuses think just like we do.
PS: at the risk of going back to "Wikipedia", this exerpt of about richard Feynman comes to mind as an example of wha I am trying to describe:
QuoteIn high school, his IQ was determined to be 125—high, but "merely respectable" according to biographer James Gleick.[14] In 1933, when he turned 15, he taught himself trigonometry, advanced algebra, infinite series, analytic geometry, and both differential and integral calculus.[15] Before entering college, he was experimenting with and re-creating mathematical topics, such as the half-derivative, using his own notation. In high school, he was developing the mathematical intuition behind his Taylor series of mathematical operators.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman)
Quote from: "Seabear"Quote from: "Titania"You're joking, right? I will politely assume that you're playing devil's advocate. :wink: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genius)
Hmm, Wikipedia... okay. Apologies, but I can't seem to find the section of the wiki link you provided that would seem support your assertion above. Can you be more specific, or is this just your opinion?
You're really making me work for it this morning, aren't you? :lol:
You're right, it's kind of a shit article to back my premise. Here's another dubious article that's at least more on point: http://people.howstuffworks.com/genius.htm (http://people.howstuffworks.com/genius.htm)
And also, my point is partially anecdotal because I spent my youth in the gifted program with a bunch of kids with genius-level IQs and, having had innumerable conversations with them in and out of class, and also having had innumerable conversations with the kids who had gifted-level but not genius-level IQs
and with kids outside the gifted program who had regular IQs, I can tell you their thought processes were essentially no different except for the fact that the genius kids were quicker and better. Anecdotal, of course. You may make what you will of it.
The whole trope of "geniuses are a whole different animal" is IMO sensationalist tripe that isn't backed by any real science. Lots of books have been written about the idea, yet there isn't a single shred of evidence to prove that it isn't pseudoscientific horsecrap like phrenology or the MBTI. At this point I'm not the one making the positive statement. You have asserted that "genius minds work along different lines than normal ones do", correct? The burden of proof is on you to back that claim. I have never seen any evidence of this. Your turn.
Quote from: "Seabear"If so, that's fine, but based on my experience with some of the more brilliant people I have encountered in my life, my impression was that their thought process was indeed different from the average persons. not just the same thoughts but faster, but took different paths and abstractions.
I often find that my own thought process is different from many of the people around me. Does that mean I'm a genius? Because I can assure you I am not.
Quote from: "Johan"Quote from: "Jesus"They think differently than we do.
No they don't.
They just think more. A good deal of thinking involves making connections and what we often call genius is making a connection that others did not see, like realizing that pretzels would be good in ice cream.
Quote from: "Johan"I often find that my own thought process is different from many of the people around me. Does that mean I'm a genius?
No but it does establish that different people think "differently". Why is it so easy for me to manage million dollar construction sites and others can fail so miserably? I don't know why they don't see the process as I do, I cannot understand why they cannot see problems and find solutions as easily as I can, just by looking at it.
Why do day laborers see the same thing I do and not see obvious solutions? Why do they suggest I get a backhoe to dig a fifty foot trench in sand three foot deep instead of having two of them dig it? Why cannot they process the cost/time/value factor as obviously as you and I can? Why can I know immediately that a car with a low front tire is going to pull to that side and others not even understand why? Because we think differently. I am no genius but to some I most certainly am.
IF I can see so many things so clearly to those who cannot, even with me prodding them, then those much smarter than me can see things that I cannot, even with their prodding I will never see it. We think differently.
Quote from: "aitm"Quote from: "Johan"I often find that my own thought process is different from many of the people around me. Does that mean I'm a genius?
No but it does establish that different people think "differently". .
Which means that thinking differently has nothing to do with being a genius. You cannot say oh that guy thinks differently because he's a genius and then say this other guy also thinks differently even though he's not a genius.
And FWIW, my level of intellect has nothing to do with my understanding that low tire pressure on one side will cause a vehicle to pull to that side. Its my level of experience with tires and vehicles and level of experience with mechanical shit in general that enables my understanding of the concept. I would suspect that its same for most people. Put another way, I know people with genius level IQ's who would not have the first clue as to why low tire pressure on one side would make the car pull one way or the other.
Yeah, there's a big difference between experience and genius. The genius will be able to pick up the experience faster, usually. If you have 20 years of experience in a field, and some rookie comes in and rivals your skill after a month on the job, that's probably the sign of genius.
But just because you can do something doesn't make you a genius. It's how quickly you collect the skill, or how far you can go with it that does that.
The ordinary man looks at an acorn and sees a seed. The genius looks at it and sees an oak tree.
Quote from: "aitm".. there are genius's and then there are those who are not ..
Sometimes even those who are not geniuses invent great things, they do it by hard work. IMHO, inventions are not confined to geniuses.
Quote from: "Aupmanyav"Quote from: "aitm".. there are genius's and then there are those who are not ..
Sometimes even those who are not geniuses invent great things, they do it by hard work. IMHO, inventions are not confined to geniuses.
No, but more often than not known geniuses have contributed to the world through invention or discovery.