lamp Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hal. Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Here is a view to start things . There are people who are talented at any given activity . Then there are people who are exceptionally brilliant at any given activity . Then there are those called genius' . Don't try to follow the rules to be a genius as if you promise too much you may not deliver . If you are exceptionally brilliant at an activity , be happy at that . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michel123456 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Genius is the one very very brilliant in one single activity. People who are brilliant in too many activities are boring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Genius is the one very very brilliant in one single activity. People who are brilliant in too many activities are boring. I know! I am so good at so many things I bore people to death No matter how smart you are or think you are there is always someone who is snapping at your heels at least and probably more ahead of you hoping to stay ahead, genius is mostly hard work and inventiveness, take either one away and you will miss them greatly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michel123456 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 The greatest example is Giovanni Pico della Mirandola. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marat Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Isn't there a saying that genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration? Perhaps genius, if it is the kind of genius that is attributed as a characteristic to someone because of his discoveries, is a talent for being so interested in something that the work invested in the 99% perspiration doesn't seem too daunting. The problem of genius is something like that of free will. We attribute free will to people by stipulating that they are responsible for what they do as a result of all the influences that have operated on them, both in terms of internal physiology and external socialization. We could just as easily deny the attribution of free will and just say that a 'person' is nothing other than the locus at which a number of influences external to the person have manifested themselves. Similarly, with genius, on one interpretation it is the brilliance of a single individual, but on another it is the result of the confluence of the work of preceding and surrounding thinkers who have influenced that individual, so 'genius' is essentially just being born at the right place and at the right time. On this view, Newton would have been simply ordinary if he had been born as a contemporary of Shakespeare, but being born in the confluence of influences from Galileo, Kepler, Leibniz, Huygens, Hooke, Wren, and Boyle, he was able to register and combine these influences to become a genius. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rktpro Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 A genius is the one who can think of a chain of ideas from one given idea and who can compare between two situations by making them inter-related. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michel123456 Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 A genius is the one who can think of a chain of ideas from one given idea and who can compare between two situations by making them inter-related. That is the definition of a chimpanzee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 A genius is the one who can think of a chain of ideas from one given idea and who can compare between two situations by making them inter-related. In a similar vein, It's the ability to find relations between apparently disconnected things that most people would not see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lamp Posted June 8, 2011 Author Share Posted June 8, 2011 A genius is the one who can think of a chain of ideas from one given idea and who can compare between two situations by making them inter-related. 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 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. I suspect there is an an element of serendipity involved in the making of a recognised genius. Einstein was born in an era when moving pictures was in it's infancy and the height of technology then was to see films executed at various frame rates with things moving faster/slower and it caused him to wonder if time itself was like this...the rest is history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rktpro Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 That is the definition of a chimpanzee. Well, humans have earned evolution from chimps. One point which I missed there is that the genius himself creates the idea and compare other pre-existing ideas with it or simply creates a number of ideas and chain them up. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhDwannabe Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Two standard deviations above the mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marat Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 The historian of science Derek Price said that genius arises from the ability to synthesize results from two or more disparate areas of knowledge to make a significant new advance. It is essentially a process of triangle construction, with the base of the triangle defined by the conceptual distance between the insights in the two different fields synthesized, and the apex being the new theory. He posited that as science grows, fewer and fewer people will be able to command different areas of knowledge sufficiently to be able to synthesize them, so there will be fewer and fewer geniuses. How much did Galileo, Kepler, and Newton have to read and learn in order to be able to make a significant advance relative to what was already known? Contrast that with today and you can see why it seems as though genius is becoming rare. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michel123456 Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 (edited) Correct. i edited a stupid comment of mine. Edited June 9, 2011 by michel123456 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lamp Posted June 9, 2011 Author Share Posted June 9, 2011 The historian of science Derek Price said that genius arises from the ability to synthesize results from two or more disparate areas of knowledge to make a significant new advance. It is essentially a process of triangle construction, with the base of the triangle defined by the conceptual distance between the insights in the two different fields synthesized, and the apex being the new theory. He posited that as science grows, fewer and fewer people will be able to command different areas of knowledge sufficiently to be able to synthesize them, so there will be fewer and fewer geniuses. How much did Galileo, Kepler, and Newton have to read and learn in order to be able to make a significant advance relative to what was already known? Contrast that with today and you can see why it seems as though genius is becoming rare. 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marat Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 Math geniuses are sometimes known for their ability to span different subfields within math and synthesize new approaches from those syntheses. An example who comes to mind is the late Serge Lang, Professor of Math at Yale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
random Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 In my definition to be a genius one has to constantly generate new ideas and concepts that are BOTH feasible and functional or one has to excel so greatly in a given area that there results are mind boggling. All of us are capable of developing new ideas and concepts which we believe could change the world or better somthing but if it's proven wrong scientifically it's not genius it's just a creative idea that would never work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amanda more Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 Two standard deviations above the mean. Thank you! The language of science is math. There are two groups- scientists,technologists, mathematicians and everybody else. The everybody else keeps wanting us to use words. But they refuse to learn the baby steps of math. Why can't we have hardy discussions throwing numbers around. Or/and are we afraid some professor would be fine with logical fallacies, poor lucidity, inaccuracy with words but use some math and then powers that be come down on you if not exacting. Example: My friend wants to date and I think she should date smart men. I have always valued smart people that are in front of me. Yet, I just didn't do the math til looking at it now. If someone is so smart as to be in the 1 out of a thousand in IQ then there are 300,000 in the US. Half are male. 150,000 Then a third older than her 50,000. If half are single 25,000. Average per state is then 500. Wow. My opinion style estimate is half are drug or alcoholics so that leaves 250 actual dateable humans on average per state. Women should gravitate to silicon valley and men to Washington, DC to up their odds due to gender imbalance. So whether the word genius or not can be used she has a preference for high IQ just like someone may want a redhead (although that is like 2% of the population). It doesn't have to make brunettes feel leftout. My point- by using one objective criteria (however imperfect it is) we just figured some rather discouraging odds for her but realistic. As a twist on other dating advice- if you met in a bar, you may actually be as pretty as you are but he could have gotten dumber. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conor Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 I would say a genius is someone who excels beyond a high level in a given academic area or areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amanda more Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 (edited) I would say a genius is someone who excels beyond a high level in a given academic area or areas. So a master manager that convinces foreign born and native grad students to work lots of hours for little pay and uses his political connections to get grants is a genius? Ah, if only the world was a meritocracy instead of a political game. The flipside is the individual in his own individual lab can do so little so to work with others is absolutely necessary to be productive requiring some level of EQ. Edited July 7, 2011 by amanda more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewmon Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 (edited) Isn't there a saying that genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration?Yes, by Thomas Edison (and he should know). Some (imho) Rules of "Geniosity" The First Rule: Geniuses can't be "drones". There are some people of science who use known/proven scientific facts to accomplish their tasks. These people can do some wonderful things; however, they are merely programmed "drones", just like paper wasps who build those wonderful nests. You only get what you've always got, if you only do what you've always done. The Second Rule: Geniuses must, therefore, think outside the box. They may begin with some known scientific facts, but then they wonder if one or more of these facts may not be true or may be modified/combined to produce a different result. The Third Rule: Geniuses do not listen to people who say they are foolish or stupid. This can be a very difficult decision because, typically, these other people are prominent and/or dominant people in the genius' field of study. Surround yourself with people who support you. If you're not willing to be laughed at or summarily dismissed, then don't try to be a genius. The Fourth Rule: Geniuses often end up taking a technology/methodology from one field of science and using it to great advantage in another field of science. The Fifth Rule: Sometimes geniuses need to create a new dimension/characteristic in their field of work, and then they need to develop a means of detecting/measuring that new dimension/characteristic, sometimes requiring them to invent an instrument to do so. The Sixth Rule: A genius must be able to hold an unrealistic idea (or conflicting ideas) in his/her mind without going crazy ... a feat of mental juggling. Circumstances may require a genius to do this for long periods of time. The Seventh Rule: Geniuses do not quit. They may take time off from a project, or they may get disgusted, but they never quit. They do this because of their conviction that a solution or a discovery is somewhere in the mess in front of them. The Eighth Rule: Geniuses must want to know every little detail about their work. Typically, the details contain the new data or lead to new data. Advances can result when patterns can be extracted from the noisy data. Sometimes previous scientific "facts" result from ignoring the perturbations in the data. Edited July 8, 2011 by ewmon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hal. Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 ............................ Vincent van Gogh , 1853 - 1890 ............................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amanda more Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 If genius didn't have some underlying IQ whether we put math on it or not then why would we believe in "unfulfilled potential?" I am reminded of Forest Gump's mothers advice "stupid is as stupid does." Really? So genius is as genius does? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baric Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 (edited) Genius is, as the old saying goes, a combination of inspiration and perspiration. You must have an inclination for knowledge (inspiration) and the willingness to advance it (perspiration). If you are able to combine these two traits and advance the state of scientific knowledge, then you have met the minimum requirements for consideration as a genius. It's not enough to be smart. I am smart. Most people reading this science forum are smart. We are all human beings gifted with large brains; being smart is a default human condition so it's not really much of a bragging point. If you want to be a genius, you must be able to successfully apply yourself and do something novel with your brain. My opinion is that, if your name is prominently attached to a successfully tested theory in your chosen discipline, then you are probably a genius. Edited July 8, 2011 by baric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now