lamp

This is an insightful definition, I'm wondering what about those geniuses who breathe and dream about math and do not leave their area for another, as far as I can see those would not fit your description? Though, those are still considered as geniuses by many, especially after a significant contribution like a new formula.

Nicely formulated sentence, though I'm not sure if this is simply highly intelligent rather than actual genius, to the least I would say it is a common attribute of genius people.

Earlier I was telling people that - to me - a genius idea is one which is close but nobody thought of before. These people reacted by saying that I have exactly those type of ideas quite often which would make me - as a logical consequence - to a genius. In this moment I could not say yes or no, since I never figured out what a genius really is, I only thought about what a genius idea may be. And I have to admit I am a logical and creative thinker at the same time and think in a different way than most people, which often leads me to have ideas which many people don't see at first and become astonished after I point it out to them. With this thread I'd like to ask you - the intellectuals - what a "genius" to you is and how you define it? p.s. I know that this topic is not the typical psychology discussion, but these questions come up in psychology as well, there is no reason to sabotage this thread if you do not like it, simply keep it moving - we are on a virtual forum.

Athena, the idea for this thread did not really derive from a situation that may have happened to me. It was rather an idea which I got when I was noticing something. You can tell to a degree by the way how I formulated my other questions. I noticed that a lot of business men, especially leaders, will rarely crack jokes or be silly, they'll be serious most of the time and maybe crack one or two jokes for spicing up the conversation. Those people usually get respected by the crowd, especially if these people are knowledgeable, wise and skilled, basically if they know what they're doing and if they know it well. In the contrary I've noticed that clowns simply do not get respected, even if they may have the knowledge and skills too, they're simply not the people you'd call when you urgently need somebody for advice. ego, you've great points there, you brought my attention to something which I did not even think about, that "respect is dependent on the social circle you're in", this is true, people around the world respect other people for different reasons. In other countries older people get respected for the simple reason of being old. While in western countries older people are more seen as a superfluous burden.

"Distance" is a good word and is related to "respect" just like this thread is related to psychology. I define respect as in "to eighth" somebody, or to treat somebody with care, which also often means treating somebody with distance.

How do you define it? How do you gain it? What makes YOU respect a person? Is it the achievement or rather his presentation or even a combination of both? How do some people manage to not get respected to a point that people will dance on their nose, whereas other people get respect as soon as they enter the room? Suggestions, opinions, experiences - all welcome.

Good point, where does the calmness of big people derive from?

I'm from Germany, so I'm not sure what exactly you're addressing. Al Gore seems to have a body language I was talking about as you can see here: What exactly is unfavorable about this body language? Also this video: Seems to be the top tog body language I was talking about.

It's true, too stuff is unsought as well, perhaps the golden middle is what people find as desirable. Though, specifically with these top togs, they do not have a stiff body language from my observation, they are rather calm, relaxed, slow and sparing in the movements, also a little bit edgy at times which may get mistaken as stiffness.

A lot of so called Top Dogs and Take It or Leave Its have sparing body movements, which means they do not move a lot and do only the most necessary movements. If you're jittery you're not seen as a top dog, which does not mean that you can't be one, but people just naturally do not consider jittery people as top dogs, rather as creative people or even immature. I'm wondering where does this derive from? I can imagine that even back then the leaders in a tribe were the focused people with sparing body movements, perhaps that is what such body language displays to the outside, a sharp and focused mind? Which means that people naturally would want such a guy as their leader instead of a so called grass hopper, who does not focus but jumps from thought to thought? I'm also wondering what causes a man to have a sparing body movement compared to a fidget. Is it the chemicals in the brain? Or the brain hemisphere orientation, logical or creative thinking? Or is it psychology? In psychology, people who have experienced a lot of deep communication are the ones who mature a lot, and then again, from my own observation I see a correlation between maturity and body language, many mature people will move economically. In that sense could age be a factor as well, since we mature over time? Questions over questions, I'm going to think about this a bit more, in the meanwhile I'd welcome your suggestions!

Does a budget exist?

I think repressed anger causes a person to suffer, which can lead to depression and even further self-destruction. Anger is an emotion which makes you want to solve a problem. I think the best way to deal with this emotion is to realize that you're angry because you sub-consciously want to solve a problem, and then simply try to solve the problem with a clear and calm mind.

I will second the argument that cultural factors have an immense influence on the occurrence of schizophrenia by saying that schizophrenia is an illness which occurs through an overload of the brain. In another words, if you're living a carefree life with little stress and noise which would overload your brain, you're much less likely to develop an illness like schizophrenia. I haven't checked any studies but I'd assume that cities with high population density have a higher rate of schizophrenia affected people than small countries with a small population, less technology, less traffic and fresh air.

This is sig worthy, I cracked up at this one. And I agree with the rest of the post btw. And to even add to it, schizophrenia is only treatable since 60 years, till the 50's there were no medication for it and people had to stay in psychiatry for 3 years until they were de-socialized and couldn't get back into normal life anymore, I imagine those times as quite hard. As I've heard the older medicaments were quite harsh and had immense side effects, this is not the case anymore, at least most of the time. If the patient shows involvement in the treatment of his illness and makes sure he lives a healthy life then all he really needs is a minimum dose to live a symptom free life. He may experience a slight numbness and a different body feel, but these are side effects that can be tolerated. Better than staying for 3 years in psychiatry until de-socialization happens.

Man I'm glad there are other people and I'm not alone with this. I believe that it's a gift to be multi-talented but sometimes I second-question myself if it's a curse. The problem I'm experiencing is that I'm parted into two different worlds, one is the IT world I'm totally into web-development and am now learning to program PHP, working on a niche website while also developing a Wordpress theme. The other side in me is the guy who is deeply interested into life questions and psychology - what is the meaning of life, how does the human mind work, cultural questions etc. I'm 25 and haven't studied anything yet, I'm planning on going to college soon and I'm not quite sure how I should manage to combine my focal points. I don't want to give up this computer world, because that would mean that all the years I invested into it would be for nothing, at the same time I'd like to pursue my desire about life questions. I would like to study psychology, I'm not sure if I should study computer science as well, because I mainly wanted to become an Internet Entrepreneur not necessarily a specialized programmer (I have also quite good skills in business and finances). Neuroscience and sociology are other types of areas I'm interested in. I feel as if I'm a scientist and business man in one. Though as of now I'm pursuing web-development much more than my science interests, I think I should just start a blog and ramble about some theories and see how I like embracing the scientist in me.

When you look for new books how do you weed out the good ones from the bad ones? I've figured that I can not trust Amazon reviews anymore. I got disappointed with some books, which I bought based on good Amazon reviews. I'm trying to figure out a new way to research books before buying.

A renaissance soul is somebody who is so diverse that he gets into multiple and different areas and develops a variety of skill sets. Though, for the people on the outside it looks like they're wasting their time and are never able to settle down. Back in the renaissance era getting into multiple areas was a must (ala Leaonardo DaVinci), but nowadays society rather has the attitude of "choose something you like and stick to it" as in "specialize yourself and be an expert". Renaissance souls get labeled as "jack of all traits and a master of none", day dreamer, or a person with ADHD never able to focus on one thing. I recently turned 25 and I still really haven't found my career mission. In the hope to get clearer about this problem I bought the book "The Renaissance Soul" where I learned that people like me were standard and even a must in the renaissance era but nowadays they rather get bashed by society, which does not mean that there's no place for them in society it's rather the opposite. A little bit about me, I was interested in computer and internet very early on since age 13, I picked up an HTML book when I was 14, by 15 I got into graphic design, and later on I learned CSS and PHP. Though I never really wanted to specialize myself, I never wanted to become a full time programmer, nor did I want to become a graphic designer. After the internet business became serious business I learned the first time what an Internet Entrepreneur does and that's where I thought that this could be something for me. It's a job where you necessarily have to be an all rounder with a diverse set of skills. What I didn't mention is I've also researched business a lot, I know how to negotiate deals, I know about contracts, and I know the process of building businesses. The job internet entrepreneur was a chance to combine everything together, my design skills, programming skills and my knowledge business, if I would need advanced design or programming I'd work with people specialized in those areas and I'd be able to communicate with them in their own language. So, everything looks fine so far, if there wasn't one thing, and that is the secret scientist in me. While learning all the skills above I've also dealt with scientific topics, I've watched many documentary movies, I've researched psychology A LOT (to a point that real psychology graduates said I wouldn't learn much new if I'd study psychology). I'm naturally drawn to existential questions, be it social psychology, the evolution, cultural differences, population questions, understanding men and women, and many other life questions. Dealing with my internet interests simply takes acquiring a lot of skills, you choose something that you want to learn, then you pick out some books and then you simply put the time in. It just takes time until I've acquired the skills that I want to acquire, it is not really challenging on an intellectual level like science does it to me. Science is really challenging me intellectually and I really like getting really deep into life questions. What I learned from the above mentioned book that I bought is that I do not need to find that ONE thing I want to specialize myself (a mistake that I initially wanted to do), I rather need to find a way to combine all my passions. I could either become an internet entrepreneur as a career and deal with science on the side, or I could combine both passions. For example I thought of creating a science social media tool similar to Digg and co, I know they have a science tag but I think it's not enough, I think a social media tool with all the famous science sub-categories would get adopted better for scientific articles. Or I thought of having a blog and writing about my thoughts and findings. I could as well imagine a website like www.philosophersnotes.com I think I've already answered my own question, though if you have any suggestions, they're greatly welcomed. I do realize now that I don't have to end up with a low paying job at the lower ladder of the hierarchy just because I'm not a crack or expert in one area, may diverse set of skills and knowledge can indeed lead me to a high income earner provided I simply find a way to combine everything together. I'm wondering if people on here are renaissance souls as well or if you're all singular people like the math or physics crack, and if you belong to the former, how do you manage to combine you passions in your career mission?

Nice trick as well michel, I'm reading Arthur Benamin's book as well, it's called Secrets of Mental Math if anybody is wondering. It is always funny how easy you can impress people with these tricks, I find this a good way to pick up girls by the way.

Thank you a lot for this detailed explanation, and you are not the first I hear/read say that he'd rather live with the illness but without medicament than taking the medicaments. I've always wondered how this could be when the illness is considered as such a severe illness. I haven't yet read any detailed description like yours, I never thought of that some affected people could even find the symptoms pleasant to a degree. I have to say for that fact that schizophrenia describes the inability to differentiate between reality and fantasy you make a very reflective impression. I now also can understand why John Nash finds medication overrated. I also think that intelligent people also often have problems with the reduction of their cognitive abilities, and even a possible reduction of their IQ, thus they refuse to take the medicaments. They'd rather feel alive than be a zombie, which is understandable.

Invega is actually one of the better medicaments (and very expensive), if you take the minimum dose there shouldn't be too many side effects with it, 20% weight gain and 16 hrs of sleeping sounds way too much for Invega. A sleeping behavior of 1-3 hours more is possible, but 16 hrs sounds a lot. I once talked with my own doctor about Invega and he told me that most of his patients are happy with that than with anything else, but he also said that there are still people experiencing side effects and not liking it, you may be one of them, I guess. For how long did you try to take them perhaps it will take you a while until you get used to them? Don't get me wrong, though I can't understand how you can say that you'd rather deal with the symptoms of psychosis than taking medicaments, schizophrenia is an extremely severe illness and makes affected people unable to live a normal life, especially once they have reached the acute phase.

I really like this forum on the first look, at least one science forum that does not look rudimentary. To my question, excuse my lack of knowledge, I just was watching a documentary about Astronomy and there was Stephen Hawking explaining his own theories and the newest findings about the universe and how life originated. While all this is happening, I'm wondering how does a man who is paralyzed even do his researches in a way that he's brining innovative theories to the table? Obviously he doesn't have the same possibilities like others, for example working all day in the labor using telescopes. The only explanation I have is that he's simply reading A LOT, be it studies, findings, books, articles, and then he takes all those bits of details and combines them together to his own theories. Would that be his only way of doing it, or just one way of it? What would be another way of his research methods? I'm just asking out of interest.