Slashdot Mirror


How Do You Spot a Genius?

Hugh Pickens writes "Ingrid Wickelgren reports in Scientific American that people have long-equated genius with intelligence, but it is more aptly characterized by creative productivity which depends on a combination of genetics, opportunity and effort. 'Nobody can be called out for outstanding contributions to a field without a lot of hard work, but progress is faster if you are born with the right skills. Personality also plays a role. If you are very open to new experiences and if you have psychopathic traits (yes, as in those shared by serial killers) such as being aggressive and emotionally tough, you are more likely to be considered a genius.' True creativity and genius depends on an unfiltered view of the world, one that is unconstrained by preconceptions and more open to novelty, writes Wickelgren. 'In particular, a less conceptual and more literal way of thinking, one more typical of people with autism, can open the mind up to seeing details that most people miss.' Our schools devote few resources on nurturing nascent genius, concludes Wickelgren, because they are focused on helping those students most likely to be left behind. 'We need to train teachers to spot giftedness, which may take a variety of forms and often needs to be accompanied by creativity, drive and passion. Offering a greater variety of enrichment activities to children will cause many more hidden talents to surface. And accelerated classes and psychological coaching are essential for nurturing talent as early and vigorously as possible.'"

385 comments

  1. How do I spot a genius? by Deathlok's+Bear · · Score: 5, Funny

    I look in the mirror.

    1. Re:How do I spot a genius? by AwesomeMcgee · · Score: 5, Funny

      You have a genius following you??

    2. Re:How do I spot a genius? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I look in the mirror.

      And then you cut his ear off!

    3. Re:How do I spot a genius? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had a genius following me once, but I ducked into an ally and lost him

    4. Re:How do I spot a genius? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      U 2?

    5. Re:How do I spot a genius? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well duh, everyone know that the narcissism gene is linked to the nearsighted genius gene.

    6. Re:How do I spot a genius? by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 2

      Or whom ever is following him, IS a genius.

    7. Re:How do I spot a genius? by xstonedogx · · Score: 4, Funny

      Really? I use permanent marker.

    8. Re:How do I spot a genius? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, you too?

    9. Re:How do I spot a genius? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    10. Re:How do I spot a genius? by DuChamp+Fitz · · Score: 1

      What are you doing with my mirror?!

    11. Re:How do I spot a genius? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or go to an Apple Store?

    12. Re:How do I spot a genius? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pro-tip: If you have a genius following you, throw down a couple rubics cubes. The three minutes you gain will allow you to duck into a crowd where you can hide.
      Also a poorly edited textbook works in a pinch, but it's much heavier so you'll end up with fewer of them.

    13. Re:How do I spot a genius? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I look in the mirror.

      Welcome aboard!

    14. Re:How do I spot a genius? by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      no.. apples are for wannbe geniuses.. hipsters.

    15. Re:How do I spot a genius? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, that would be "whoever," not "whom ever."

      "Whom" isn't a word you can just use whenever you want to sound smart. There are specific rules that dictate which is right, and you got it wrong.

      Just FYI.

    16. Re:How do I spot a genius? by BergZ · · Score: 1

      Isn't that the same way you spot a patchwork mouse?

      --
      Warning: This sig is not thread safe. For more information see Slashdot's sig policy.
    17. Re:How do I spot a genius? by grcumb · · Score: 4, Funny

      I look in the mirror.

      WARNING: IQs in the mirror may be smaller than they appear.

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
    18. Re:How do I spot a genius? by ti-85 · · Score: 1

      "I'm going to kill myself tomorrow."

    19. Re:How do I spot a genius? by drkim · · Score: 2

      Or go to an Apple Store?

      I'm not sure real geniuses work for $9.33 an hour.

    20. Re:How do I spot a genius? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1, Funny

      Pro-tip: If you have a genius following you, throw down a couple rubics cubes. The three minutes you gain will allow you to duck into a crowd where you can hide.
      Also a poorly edited textbook works in a pinch, but it's much heavier so you'll end up with fewer of them.

      Obligatory xkcd

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    21. Re:How do I spot a genius? by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      I would just move the colored stickers on the rubric cube when people hand me one to solve.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    22. Re:How do I spot a genius? by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

      3 minutes? What's genius about that, 5 secs max to map the layout then you just apply a solving algorithm that doesn't actually require looking at the cube.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    23. Re:How do I spot a genius? by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

      social and evil genius is often under-rated.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    24. Re:How do I spot a genius? by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      "Whom" isn't a word you can just use whenever you want to sound smart.

      With most people it can be.

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    25. Re:How do I spot a genius? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I look at TV commercials.

      They portray:

      Women
      Blacks
      Hispanics
      Asians

      as geniuses who help dumb white men.

    26. Re:How do I spot a genius? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I just take it apart and reassemble it. At least, that's how I did it when I was a kid.

    27. Re:How do I spot a genius? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also gender identifiers

  2. Steve Jobs said.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    steve jobs just looked for the crazy ones, the misfits, the trouble makers, the round pegs in the square holes....

    1. Re:Steve Jobs said.... by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1, Funny

      Why bother looking. The local country jail is brimming with just such credentials.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    2. Re:Steve Jobs said.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The people who hold their phones wrong.

    3. Re:Steve Jobs said.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's the sad thing i doubt apple would realize if the next steve jobs was right under their nose.

    4. Re:Steve Jobs said.... by russotto · · Score: 2

      Why bother looking. The local country jail is brimming with just such credentials.

      Naa, those are the guys who couldn't cut it. A real genius quickly realizes petty crime doesn't pay, and non-petty crime is dangerous and a lot of hard work (you think it's easy running a drug cartel?). No, the real psychopathic geniuses will quickly figure out the place you can get the biggest payoff with the least work is Wall Street. If they're megalomaniacs, they might go for politics instead.

    5. Re:Steve Jobs said.... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      the square holes with rounded corners

      iFTFY.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    6. Re:Steve Jobs said.... by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      So are the rehabs

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
  3. Smart young kids by mynamestolen · · Score: 0

    Young kids should copulate geniuses, then they'd all be smart.

    --
    work in progress
    1. Re:Smart young kids by drkim · · Score: 5, Funny

      Young kids should copulate geniuses, then they'd all be smart.

      You might have missed that particular class in sex-ed.

      And criminal law.

      And English.

  4. How to spot a genius. by GoodNewsJimDotCom · · Score: 4, Funny

    Take away his pocket protector.

    1. Re:How to spot a genius. by LucidBeast · · Score: 2

      I wait patiently until a genius is close enough and after that pretty much any pen will do.

    2. Re:How to spot a genius. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Or take away her maxi pad.

  5. Duh by RyoShin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    His (her?) UID is less than five digits, of course.

    1. Re:Duh by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 4, Funny

      I might beg to differ.

      Or, I might not. That's the way it is, with Genius.

      Please don't ask me to explain it to you. :-)

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    2. Re:Duh by digismack · · Score: 1

      So I'm smarter than you because my Slashdot ID is lower?

      --
      http://www.hollowdepth.com
    3. Re:Duh by jhoegl · · Score: 0

      All things are plaussable, possible, or predictable.
      Nothing is by chance, math conquers all, bad grammar is key.
      The Genius I am.

    4. Re:Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes! And I am the smartest of you lot!

    5. Re:Duh by RyoShin · · Score: 0

      No, because your UID does not meet the requirements set forth (UID.length<5). Once that fifth digit hits, it's anyone's game! :)

    6. Re:Duh by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Do you really think there is a high enough rate of genius in the tranny demographic that all you have to do is find one that joined slashdot early?

    7. Re:Duh by stanlyb · · Score: 1

      I wonder who is number ONE? Does he exists? Is he a god? Or at least his incarnation? Or, NO, for god sake, what about number ZERO?????

    8. Re:Duh by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

      I thought Commander Taco was UID #1.

    9. Re:Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So we aren't making any new geniuses. Thanks alot /.

    10. Re:Duh by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 2

      Yes, CmdrTaco is 1

      A couple of minutes of fiddling around also reveals:
      2=hemos
      3=drendite
      4=CowboyNeal
      5=samzenpus
      etc...

      As far as uid 0, at least by the method I was using, is "whoever is asking".

      --
      This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
    11. Re:Duh by CBravo · · Score: 2

      The fact that the login+moderation system was needed implies that early users, who might now have low uids, were abusing slashdot. I would not call the abusers smart. QED.

      --
      nosig today
    12. Re:Duh by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I'd have let this slide if you'd been modded "funny".

      You discount the possibility that a twenty year old can be a genius (who registered at age 5?), and the possibility that someone with less than average IQ could have registered in 1997, especially since in 1997 the internet was pretty damned empty compared to today.

      And if that's not good enough, here's the fallacy to your hypothesis: samzepus' UID is 5.

      WTF, mods? That was just a stupid comment and I'm sure he meant it as a joke.

    13. Re:Duh by RyoShin · · Score: 1

      I did mean it as a joke (which I hoped would be obvious, but from some replies might not be), but there's a reason they wouldn't apply Funny: Funny doesn't apply any kind of karma bonus, but Insightful/Interesting does. So at times mods will use those moderations in order to also give a karma modifier as well as +1, if someone has already modded it Funny. Since my post has more Insightful ratings than Funny ratings, it's marked as "Insightful".

      (I don't need the karma, I have more than enough in my account, but it's still a nice thought on the part of the mods.)

    14. Re:Duh by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      A true genius would have an imaginary number.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    15. Re:Duh by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Funny doesn't apply any kind of karma bonus

      It didn't used to, but they quietly changed that some time back. And wanting to give someone good karma is a terrible reason to mod someone up. I've modded friends down and freaks up once in a while.

  6. We Geniuses by badford · · Score: 2

    are misunderestimated. Just because I can memorize pi to 1000 digits, lift 75 lbs with my weiner and compose French poetry in the bathtub don't mean I should be treated like a freak.

    I'm just a people, too.

    --
    -badford
    1. Re:We Geniuses by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      I'm just a people, too.

      Well, with so many unique individuals inside, it would be weird if you weren't really clever. Teams have an unfair advantage over single brains.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:We Geniuses by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Ironically none of that stuff would actually make you a genius.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  7. Begs the question... SIGH by ath0mic · · Score: 4, Informative
    From TFA

    "People attach the label âoegeniusâ to such diverse characters as Leonardo DaVinci, Bobby Fischer and Toni Morrison. The varied achievements of such individuals beg the question: what defines a genius?

    False. It raises the question. We've been over this.

    1. Re:Begs the question... SIGH by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      False. It raises the question. We've been over this.

      This is probably a battle we'll end up losing. If things continue as they are, it will eventually mean "raise the question" - if it doesn't already - simply by dint of popular usage. I won't be using it, but to be honest I'm getting fed up of trying to explain the difference to people who could* care less.

      *joke

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    2. Re:Begs the question... SIGH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i don't think the article was defining genius as a grammar nazi.

    3. Re:Begs the question... SIGH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Begs the question is perfectly legitimate; it's just a matter of interpretation. To beg the question in this sense is an idiomatic phrase that basically states "This (the following) question is begging to be asked." It's a question on everyone's mind, but nobody is really asking it.

      Simply saying it is true or false turns this into yet another black and white issue with no middle ground. The meaning of words depends on context and common understanding (something lacked here). Meanings also, regrettably, change. However, you ought to have learned by now what is meant, especially in an informal setting such as this.

    4. Re:Begs the question... SIGH by artor3 · · Score: 1

      The varied achievements of such individuals beg the question: what defines a genius?

      False. It raises the question. We've been over this.

      If we had been over it, the conversation would have been done and one side would have won. I don't recall all the people of the internet coming together to agree to use only the older definition of the phrase. Oh, I'm sorry, did you mean "We've discussed this"? I guess the meaning of that phrase must have changed at some point.

      Snark aside, I wonder if people a hundred years ago argued over shifting meanings like this? It's not like "begging the question" is some intergenerational battleground like "ain't" (or whatever teenagers annoy older generations with these days) with teenagers making up their own slang and parents wringing their hands over where this new generation went wrong. I feel like we've reached new heights of grammar naziism caused by people wanting to look smart on the internet.

    5. Re:Begs the question... SIGH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is one of the more pedantic dumber grammarian rules. The plain English meaning of "beg" is to ask wholehearedly and earnestly. Why are we supposed to prioritize (poor) a translation of a foreign phrase over the natural English meaning?

    6. Re:Begs the question... SIGH by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Yes, we've been over it and over it. "Begs the question" is such a bad translation of the Latin term petitio principii, (which is itself a fairly loose translation of the original Greek phrase) that one wonders why it is used at all. Someone did a survey. Out of 20 occurrences, 15 were of the "raising the question" variety, four were arguments about the "proper" use, and only one was of the "postulating the premise" or "assuming the conclusion" variety. Face it. It has jumped the shark.

      Furthermore, the term "begs the question" is by no means exempt from definition overloading: having multiple definitions. We use "hot" to mean "not cold", "attractive", and "stolen". And it is not difficult to determine which meaning is meant. When begging the question means raising the question, the question that the text figuratively begs to be asked is presented to the reader (typically after a colon). When begging the question means lacking an argument, it almost always only occurs in snooty university philosophy papers.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    7. Re:Begs the question... SIGH by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Even the BBC have started doing it. It's over, guys. The ignorami have won.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    8. Re:Begs the question... SIGH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm getting fed up of trying to explain the difference to people who could* care less.

      I've pleaded with them B4, butt too know a vale, most don't care to right rite.

    9. Re:Begs the question... SIGH by ultranova · · Score: 1

      False. It raises the question. We've been over this.

      Yes, we have, and the literal meaning of a phrase is always correct usage, even if a phrase meaning "circular reasoning" in a foreign language was also translated as it once upon a time.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    10. Re:Begs the question... SIGH by Emb3rz · · Score: 2

      Speaking for myself: this has nothing to do with a desire of my own to look smart on the Internet. I genuinely want others to be smarter. This confers several benefits; not the least of which being that I don't have to waste any clock cycles translating their poor communication into what it really means. I wish you had of thought of that. ;)

    11. Re:Begs the question... SIGH by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      Real geniuses don't care if they appear to be maroons on the internet

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    12. Re:Begs the question... SIGH by Emb3rz · · Score: 1

      Partially agree. Don't be too quick to discount the effect that low self-esteem can have on persons of any intelligence.

      The thing that always bothered me the most was having people misquote me and misrepresent my positions. Like the gaggle of slashdotters insisting that I thought the earth was created in 7*24 hours because I hold belief that we were created by God. The two beliefs are not the same. I definitely would have been more OK with that same group of people saying my beliefs were wrong than that they would tell me that I believed something I did not.

    13. Re:Begs the question... SIGH by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      "Literally" has been taken by the idiots. The war has been lost.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    14. Re:Begs the question... SIGH by Dracophile · · Score: 1

      This is probably a battle we'll end up losing.

      We certainly will if we don't fight it. I'm with ath0mic on this: keep calling them on it, especially if they don't care.

      --
      Athy, athier, athiest.
    15. Re:Begs the question... SIGH by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Snark aside, I wonder if people a hundred years ago argued over shifting meanings like this? ... I feel like we've reached new heights of grammar naziism caused by people wanting to look smart on the internet.

      A hundred years ago Mark Trwin was criticized for using colloquial language in his books. Then, common speech was always cleaned up with proper grammar, even when within quote marks.

  8. Autism != Genuis Savant by Dogbertius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem with these articles is that they suggest that in order to be a brilliant savant (ie: can do difficult arithmetic mentally without a calculator, or can play chess at an expert level with minimal tutoring), one must be autistic. This is not the case. One may be autistic, and not brilliant, just as well someone could be a brilliant savant, but not be on the autism spectrum. The two cases are effectively statistically independent of each other.

    Another issue is that autistic savants often get much more attention than their typical (ie: non-autistic) counterparts due to being able to carry out an apparently amazing mental feat despite suffering from a crippling set of mental limitations and/or deficiencies. Someone not suffering from such a condition is just generally thought of as very smart, and being an educated savant is not such a crowd pleaser, especially in an age where anti-intellectualism is on the rise. Everybody likes a hero story, but few people are comfortable accepting the notion that there are much smarter people out in the world.

    If parents are lucky enough to have the funding to send their kids to private schools with a Behavioral Interventionist (BI), then the strengths of the child are usually discovered early on, and it can make the kid's life a lot easier. If the parents don't have the cash though, the kid likely won't enjoy that benefit.

    On a side note, one should consider noticing talent amongst the non-autistic population in a school. How does one filter on this criteria when kids are not challenged? I turned out to be a math whiz in school, and was doing calculus by the time I was entering high school. If it weren't for my parents, I would've had to endure 5 years of boredom in high school math, as most of the teachers just came with a hangover, passed the daily readings out, and sat at their desks playing minesweeper. Thanks to my parents, I was allowed to fly ahead in math, and use my spare time for more shop and science courses. If the teachers don't care in the first place, the odds of them helping out their brightest students is minimal.

    Background: Been debating this topic with a colleague who has 10 years experience in this field for years over lunch.

    1. Re:Autism != Genuis Savant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's not what is being said here at all. The claim is that brain development in geniuses shares some similarity to traits found in psychopathy and autism, not that any one of those traits is a superset of any others. These things are all spectra.

      In other words, it is perfectly possible to be a brilliant savant without being autistic, there's just evidence that some portion of that genius has to do with a world view that shares some commonalities, if not as strong a deviation, as autism. You're not constrained needlessly by preconceptions, but are not so incapable of understanding those preconceptions that you can't make use of them to interact normally with other people.

      The accuracy of above statements is another question entirely, but this is not the article you were looking to complain about.

    2. Re:Autism != Genuis Savant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting, however as Autism is a "spectrum disorder" it can be said that literally everyone is autistic it's just that most are only .001% autistic. Based on that reasoning, every genius (and everyone else) is autistic.

    3. Re:Autism != Genuis Savant by fredprado · · Score: 2

      Which means that the term, as any term that is so widely defined, means absolutely nothing.

    4. Re:Autism != Genuis Savant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The GP isn't correct. Autism is now a spectrum disorder doing away with Classical Autism and Asperger's Syndrome, but if you keep going milder and milder you eventually hit ADHD and if you go beyond that you get normal. And if you're less autistic than ADHD you would pretty soon hit normality and not have a diagnosable neurological conition.

      And yes, if everybody is something, then it isn't diagnosable because it's normal. For most things if 2/3 of the population is something that's considered normal and deviations from that are potentially subject to treatment. That is if they are causing problems.

    5. Re:Autism != Genuis Savant by artor3 · · Score: 1

      Which would still mean that genius and autism are statistically independent, uncorrelated variables.

    6. Re:Autism != Genuis Savant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doing difficult arithmetic mentally is actually more of a parlor trick, similar to memorizing 10,000 digits of Pi, or a 100 pages of a book. Anyone with average intelligence can do it if they spend the time practicing the techniques. Although, as a parlor trick it of course attracts charlatans who play along with people who think it takes a super genius to do it, like the supposed autistic English kid who did an interview on Slashdot a few years ago. (Read Moonwalking with Einstein.)

      Geniuses can do mental arithmetic better than most people, but it's not like in the movies. It means being able to do long division or multiplication with a few more digits than normal. This is one of the tasks a psychologist will have you do when getting tested.

      Along those lines, there's also no such thing as a "photographic memory". It's just another technique that you can learn, but that geniuses often stumble upon without prompting. Like the way Asimov learned to do mental arithmetic as a child (I did too, and thought everybody did it until I read Asimov's account.)

      The geniuses of folklore aren't real.

    7. Re:Autism != Genuis Savant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you are using an uncommon definition of savant. The word savant is short/PC for idiot savant ("wise idiot"), i.e. excellency in some field paired with something that society sees as a neurodevelopmental deficit. The latter may include a range of conditions, but the most common of them is autism. Being excellent at something alone doesn't make you a savant.

    8. Re:Autism != Genuis Savant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being a "math whiz" isn't the same as being a genius. Genius has to do with creative unconventional thinking. I can see how not being constrained by conventional thinking can help with that. The math genius still needs a math whiz for the conventionally rigorous proofs and formalisms.

    9. Re:Autism != Genuis Savant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it basically means that in order to excel, you have to be unlike a nice little sheep who believe everything told you during your short little lifespan.
      Someone striving to conform, to think inside the box, will have a hard time inventing or discovering anything.

      A genious have to be absolutely unafraid to make mistakes, which is unlike most people.
      Geniouses NEVER wait until something is "statistically significant". That is for those afraid little people who tail along.

      This does not mean someone thinking outside the box is genious. Often quite the contrary. But it certainly helps. So I guess this explanation still seem meaningless to you. That should tell you something, but I doubt it will.

      Captcha: fictions

    10. Re:Autism != Genuis Savant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... few people are comfortable accepting the notion that there are much smarter people out in the world.

      We love a story with an evil genius. Although you may have revealed why an evil genius arose in the first place.
      Modern society depends on specialisation, namely the person who is brilliant in one field of endeavour: Albert Einstein, Pablo Picasso, etc. The mechanic who can adjust my engine idle in 10 seconds is just as vital.

      ... the strengths of the child are usually discovered ...

      Children are isolated from 'real life' and able to spend a lot of energy acheiving as much as they can. In school, that energy is spent mostly learning basic facts and algorithms. A teen-ager must also learn an inordinate number of skills from the adults around him to become a functioning individual. If there is a lack of lack of exposure to 'adult' activities or a lack of role-models, the teen-ager becomes an awkward or anti-social adult. A teen-ager whose childhood is solitary or mostly academic, does not have the team-building and ego-stroking skills to function outside school or the workplace.

      If the teachers don't care in the first place ...

      Teachers are rent-a-cops who ensure their inmates do the approved activities assigned to them. Those activities hopefully provide basic knowledge so inmates understand the society where they will soon be roaming around.

    11. Re:Autism != Genuis Savant by MickLinux · · Score: 1

      I've known a couple of cases of what is diagnosed as autism. One involved, if I remember, a wrapped umbilical cord. The other appeared suddenly after a DTP shot went bad, with fever, and brain swelling.

      I suspect that most or all autistic children are not going to be brilliant savants: that the autism is a form of brain damage. Just because brain damage shares some characteristics in some metrics, with some aspect of genius, doesn't mean that they are related.

      Internal cognitive math skills, genius: 180% normal. Communicative cognitive math skills: 105% normal. Internal cognitive math skills, Joey: 92% normal. Communicative congitive math skills: 53% normal. Just because the ratio of internal math to communicative ability is the same, doesn't make them the same.

      Likewise, a psychopath is very focused on one thing: himself. The working out of that may be through his pride, or his pleasures, or his social status -- but there is one key common thread: He has no empathy. A genius who is immersed in his work may also appear the same. But -- take Michael Faraday for example -- most of his drive came from working out his salvation, and his care for others.

      In agreement with the parent post, I think that what we are seeing is that when we measure a complex system by a 1-dimensional metric, we get a lot of scatter error. In this case, the author of the headline measured against a 4-dimensional metric (autism, psychopathy, education, opportunity), with almost equally ridiculous results.

      Not to criticise the effort: but you need more truly independent variables.

      --
      Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
    12. Re:Autism != Genuis Savant by fredprado · · Score: 1

      On the contrary. It is not meaningless. It means that you love to say catch phrases and have little content to add to any discussion.

    13. Re:Autism != Genuis Savant by Jmc23 · · Score: 1
      I've often wondered about the brain damage hypothesis.

      I had umbilical wrapped around my neck and my head crushed twice by improper use of forceps (granted they did save my life). However, even with that I was an early developer, speaking sentences at 12 months. 5 bad DTP vaccines later (protocol is to stop if there's a bad reaction and it's only supposed to be 3) and I turned into a mostly speechless parrot. By bad shots, I mean fever, pneumonia, viral infection, bacterial infection, extreme immune reaction with huge inflammed lymph nodes (i've got bad stretch marks), etc...

      I've often wondered if I could sue since it's all documented and very obvious that protocol wasn't followed

      Either way, it's made for an interesting life :)

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    14. Re:Autism != Genuis Savant by Jmc23 · · Score: 1
      Why are you responding when you clearly don't know your statistics?

      It's so sad so many people don't understand co-relation.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    15. Re:Autism != Genuis Savant by mikael · · Score: 1

      Give them a brain scan. Or alternatively, one of those SAT example papers would be a good way of finding out .

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2218611/How-differences-brains-autistic-people-explain-difficulties--shed-light-unique-talents.html

      It's all to do with the way your lateral ventricles are wired up. It's almost like have a data center where there are extra fiber-optic cables going from the disk servers/HD video cameras straight to the GPU card, and bypassing the CPU/bridge altogether. You can do some things faster because there is no contextual filtering being applied, but other things slower because there just aren't the connections.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    16. Re:Autism != Genuis Savant by MickLinux · · Score: 1

      Www.nvic.org

      --
      Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
  9. Where's Waldo? by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We need to train teachers to spot giftedness...

    You're a genius kid, now back in line for your standardized test. Or will government officials approve extra resources to cater to the geniuses? If so, how will they handle irate parents of the "unspotted".

    1. Re:Where's Waldo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We need to train teachers to spot giftedness...

      Or will government officials approve extra resources to cater to the geniuses?

      They do spot gifted students. But, I don't think they can figure out how to help most of them.

      I remember back in elementary school, I scored pretty far above average on a juvenile intelligence test. The first thing they did was transfer me to a private school. I'm sure they did that to inflate their school's merit though, as a cheaper alternative to hiring the most expensive teachers. I failed miserably to adapt and went back to public school a week later. The best memories I have were of a student who viciously hated me, and listening to bagpipes in the gymnasium one day.

      Following that, I was in a gifted and talented program for a couple years in a row. I remember going on brief field trips. One of which involved the song, "Lean on me" playing while we literally leaned back to be caught by another student. Apparently, old marriage counseling games can help kids open up and trust each other.

      Other than a few strange memories, it did absolutely nothing to help me as intended. Maybe I was too much of a misfit.

    2. Re:Where's Waldo? by TheLink · · Score: 1

      They do spot gifted students. But, I don't think they can figure out how to help most of them.

      Easy. Point them to Google, give a few examples of usage, point them in a decent direction then get out of their fucking way! Check once in a while to see how things are going. That's about it.

      It's the "rest of the class" who really need help.

      If you live in a democracy keep this in mind:
      0) The stupid and ignorant people outnumber the smart and knowledgeable ones.
      1) Voters don't need to be geniuses in order to vote

      Therefore it is definitely a good idea to help the stupid and ignorant be less stupid and ignorant.

      If one day the robots become too competitive, who will feed and clothe the stupid and ignorant? Will we keep humans who are no longer competitive around as nonvoting, well treated pets and restrict their reproductive rights[1]?

      [1] Resources don't grow exponentially.

      --
    3. Re:Where's Waldo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I grew up in a fairly small town in Florida (who has a shit education system as it is) and had gifted classes weekly in addition to my regular courses. Not many parents wanted it as it pulls you out of regular courses to take the special courses. Had more than one kid removed because the parent thought it interfered with normal learning when it was once or twice a week at the most. Ridiculous but sadly true.

    4. Re:Where's Waldo? by dbc · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How very true. Schools can't give extra resources for the academically talented, or people complain. Just like you can't selectivly give better coaching to kids that are great at basketball....oh wait, poor example. Just like you can't selectively give special coaching to kids that are good at acting... oh wait poor example. Just like you can't give extra coaching to kids with musical ability.... oh wait, poor example.

      Yes, it's true. The *only* place where it is taboo and will raise parental complaints about special treatment is if you identify academically talented kids and give them what they need to develop their ability. Around here, schools have been browbeaten out of doing anything for the identified gifted. They used to have those programs. But because of complaints and budget cutbacks, two things happend. 1) The "gifted" program is a 1 hour per week pull-out, and 2) anybody that asks to be in it can be in it.

    5. Re:Where's Waldo? by artor3 · · Score: 1

      Excellent point. Minor correction: some parents will complain if their not-so-talented kid doesn't get enough playing time on his school's team, or is stuck playing 3rd seat on his chosen instrument, or only gets cast as an extra in the school play.

      The difference is that, for whatever reason, schools will largely ignore those complaints, but will bow to pressure to treat all kids the same academically.

      I only bring it up because it suggests that this isn't the fault of complaining parents, since they complain in other cases too.

    6. Re:Where's Waldo? by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      It's the "rest of the class" who really need help.

      And they won't get much help if our public education system remains as bad as it is.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    7. Re:Where's Waldo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was booted from Honors English in 9th grade after receiving a D because I refused to read "Romeo and Juliet" again (we'd read it 2nd semester 8th grade), which was the main project for the first semester and counted for 1/3 of the grade (I aced everything else for the D). This resulted in me being called to the counselor's office to explain why I was doing so crappy in half my classes when my 99th percentile scores on the standardized tests indicated that I should be getting straight As. [I've always considered those tests to be bullshit and have no relation to the real world.] My answer was that I was bored by the majority of the courses. Her response? I was supposed to just buck up and deal with it. This was in 1984. I'm sure things have improved since then.....

    8. Re:Where's Waldo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just to speak to this effect... my kid goes to a school that's part of two schools in the same physical building. School A is great. School B is not so great. Both are magnet schools, so any parents who cared COULD have gotten their kid into School A with very little effort. But most of the students going to School B go there because it's the default for their neighborhood. (There are also other much better schools within the district too... with some exception, School B student's parents simply did not do their homework.)

      We tried combining the PTAs a few years ago. School B PTA threw a fit when it came to spending money, because they wanted to end all the programs School A had had for years, because it was "special treatment of a select few". Never mind that the parents of School A, despite being smaller, generally out give the parents of School B in both time and money (which benefits School B as well).

      That's when they are trying to spend money specifically set aside for that school. I can't imagine them ever accepting their own given money being spent on someone else's kid "unfairly."

  10. Disadvantaged vs advantaged by Guru80 · · Score: 1

    Without getting into the main topic being discussed, I would argue that is the biggest downfall of the public school system, at least in the U.S. We are so dedicated to pampering the less intellectually capable that we complete discard the gifted and those with well above intelligence.

    1. Re:Disadvantaged vs advantaged by Guru80 · · Score: 1

      *I obviously fall into the less than intelligent catagory. It's suppose to read "..discard the gifted and those with well above average intelligence.

    2. Re:Disadvantaged vs advantaged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I, for one, am well above intelligence. I find it to be a lower form of enlightenment.

    3. Re:Disadvantaged vs advantaged by mcl630 · · Score: 1

      The problem is the way curriculums are designed. In Grade X, students are required to be taught this, this, and that. More time and effort must be put into helping those who struggle, lest they won't be prepared for Grade X+1. There's little room for letting the smartest go beyond what's required. We really ought to let students advance (in a particular subject) at whatever pace they're capable of, rather than this one size fits all, everybody moves up one grade per year (in all subjects).

  11. Gifted Is Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's what my childhood development coach said when I was six. I believed her and it has been fun.

  12. Not sure where I fit by FrigBot · · Score: 2

    But it isn't genius. I don't have those two psychopathic traits, am not emotionally strong not aggressive. I'm not very good at defending myself or my ideas - from my boss, the owner of this machine shop I work in as an engineer (which I have the degree for). He doesn't believe in safety, and I haven't been able to convince him it's important to at least manage the internal liabilities. He just yells and throws tantrums. Like a psychopath (as described in the description).

    I've also always never felt like I fitted in, in the places I've worked. I don't know what it is, seems like suspicion of what's going on or who's in charge. But I do know I don't want to be here. It just feels like something is out of alignment.

    My biological dad is the same way. He told me about the jobs he had before going off on his own to do consulting, and even though he was competent, people didn't like him. Could be because he showed up late - but stayed late.

    So I don't know what the hell to do. I just don't fit in. Maybe I need to go off on my own too.

    1. Re:Not sure where I fit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      my boss, the owner of this machine shop I work in as an engineer (which I have the degree for). He doesn't believe in safety, and I haven't been able to convince him it's important to at least manage the internal liabilities. He just yells and throws tantrums. Like a psychopath (as described in the description).

      I hope you're not saying your boss is a genius.. because he sounds like a retard.

      ... But I do know I don't want to be here. It just feels like something is out of alignment.

      Do you think it could be the lack of safety standards?

    2. Re:Not sure where I fit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe I need to go off on my own too.

      Not sure why I misread this, but the first time I saw it as "Maybe I need to get off of my own lawn, too", which I thought was funny. For what it's worth, I like working for myself. It's annoying to have a constant conflict between working on my own projects that won't pay for a while or working on short term contracts that bring in some cash right away. The short term contracts tend to win, since I have to pay the bills, but I get sort of angry at myself for slipping on my own projects... that's the way it goes for now, though.

    3. Re:Not sure where I fit by SternisheFan · · Score: 2
      Your boss has anger issues. Google "angry people" ir "how do I deal.with anangry person" & read up on the sybject. You'll find tips like 'do not engage' them, etc..., You won't change the guy, but if you understand the hows and whys to angry people, then they win't be able to upset you as much. People can control your emotions only as much as you allow them to. Don't give them that power!

      Not always possible to walk away from an angry boss, it's a difficult work situation. Don't quit your job.until.you have a 'plan.B', and maybe, if it's getting too much for you, start looking for work somewhere else. Update that resume and be ready to jump ship if a better oppurtunity comes up. When you start dreading going to a job because you're miserable there, and there's no chance of the situation changing, it's best to go work somewhere there's a more pleasant work enviornment.

    4. Re:Not sure where I fit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I mostly feel the same way about not fitting in, but I'm pretty aggressive and can be emotionally tough at times; I don't put up with shit. I really want to go off on my own, but I still don't know what I want to do when I grow up.

    5. Re:Not sure where I fit by shiftless · · Score: 1

      You have exactly what it takes to succeed. If you don't have a direction yet, keep looking, and trying new things; you'll find it.

    6. Re:Not sure where I fit by Jmc23 · · Score: 2
      Better the devil you...

      Wait, is it better? Humans are social animals. You need to take care of yourself by finding an environment that enriches your life in all aspects not just fiscally. Fear is the biggest reason why the world is currently as it is. Don't ever let fear stop you from doing what you know in your heart is the right thing to do.

      I'm not necessarily saying quit your job, but rather ask yourself, what role do I want to play in society? You may find that you'll stay and learn new methods to deal with your boss just because you believe that safety is important and since he doesn't care about it you will take responsability for it. Or you may find that safety aside you just disagree with the whole premise of the job/industry and move on to something else that utilizes the skills and passion that undermine the reason for your degree.

      I remember when I was doing drug research being really disappointed by how people treated their lab animals and how undersocialized they were. My bro mentionned that staying there would be an opportunity to have someone treating their animals nicely. Only problem with that? Socialized happy rats don't take drugs!!! I had read papers before on this but to actually experience the inability to make happy rats into drug addicts just brought into question the model as a whole. Did i really want to participate in research whose whole goal is to hide/treat/prevent(not good prevention, but drug vaccines) the side-effects of modern society. Isn't the right path the one that works towards a solution and not towards a cover up?.

      Facing decisions like this, that question our morals, ethics, beliefs, and force us to break from what is socially acceptable, help to clarify in our minds who we really are, what we're here to do, and how we're going to do it.

      Fear of the unknown will always be there, but eventually you realize that confronting it just leads to an expansion of the known and that fear will turn into anticipation of the next unknown to conquer.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
  13. A Common Misunderstanding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "Our schools devote few resources on nurturing nascent genius..."

    That's because our schools are not meant for such a thing. They are meant to indoctrinate social order. "Nurturing nascent genius" would be in direct conflict with this goal.

    1. Re:A Common Misunderstanding by Un+pobre+guey · · Score: 1

      And to keep kids out of Mom's hair while she performs her motherly duties. And to keep as many kids off the streets as possible during business hours. And to make sure at least half or (best case) two thirds of them or so end up gainfully employed during most of their adult lives.

    2. Re:A Common Misunderstanding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's important to see the whole quote to understand what is wrong with it.

      "...because they are focused on helping those students most likely to be left behind"

      The problem with that quote is that many times genius, autistic savants and plain old just smart kids fall into this category. It is still quite common for very smart children to be labeled difficult, ADHD, learning disabled, to have separation anxiety issues and many other emotional and developmental disabilities. I am surprised by such casual and uneducated comments in this day and age. There is plenty of research by child development, education and cognitive experts that has exposed this.

      The real problem is that kids are being evaluated by people without proper (or modern) training in a strict clinical/professional environment.

    3. Re:A Common Misunderstanding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not seeing "the real problem", you're seeing the symptoms. The real problem isn't that all these things happen when individuals are seen as a commodity to be played with by bureaucrats on a spreadsheet. It's not social normalization, religious (nationalist) indoctrination, babysitting, work training, cost minimization, conservative anti-unionism strawman bashing, liberal AA whitewashing.

      The problem is that no one in society, from parents up, values knowledge for it's own sake. When creating a well informed, intelligent, productive, happy population isn't the goal, this is what happens.

    4. Re:A Common Misunderstanding by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      They are meant to indoctrinate social order. "Nurturing nascent genius" would be in direct conflict with this goal.

      Are you saying social disorder is the intelligent choice?

      I'm not a genius, so maybe I'm just confused about your radical concepts, but I put it to you that you are young and socially powerless, the disorder you seek is ultimately all about getting yourself off the bottom of the social ladder. You want to be a 'real adult', you've had enough of the alpha monkeys throwing turds while you sit there and take it, now you want to fling a few back at them. My advise is concentrate on dodging the really big turds and get on with doing what you enjoy. Myself and the rest of the "boomer generation" will be dead soon enough, your generation (or maybe your parent's generation) will sprout silver hairs and will inherit the Earth. I seriously doubt the turds will stop flying when your parents generation are gone. However I do 'know' that if you take take every turd personally for the next 10-20yrs under the mistaken belief that freedom is something external to the mind, or that success is defined by society rather than arbitrarily acknowledged by it, then there's a very good chance you will die how you lived, blaming your self inflicted misery on others.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    5. Re:A Common Misunderstanding by russotto · · Score: 1

      My advise is concentrate on dodging the really big turds and get on with doing what you enjoy. Myself and the rest of the "boomer generation" will be dead soon enough

      'Itâ(TM)s amazing how much "mature wisdom" resembles being too tired.'

    6. Re:A Common Misunderstanding by shiftless · · Score: 1

      Are you saying social disorder is the intelligent choice?

      Yes. The Founders called it "freedom."

    7. Re:A Common Misunderstanding by fermion · · Score: 1
      I wonder how many of us have complained about non US call centers. I wonder why US call centers are preferred. Not only because of the language, but because we have a shared expectation created by the public school system. This goes into all nature of our country. The US school system trains kids to work and live in such a way that we can pretty live next to each without major conflicts breaking out. Working with many people not educated int he US, I can tell you that the learning curve is significant, for all involved.

      As far as nurturing genius, public schools are pretty good at doing this, if one is in a city district that is well funded, and one has parents that are interested in more than a fast and easy graduation. The comprehensive high school simply has trouble dealing with anyone outside the middle standard deviations. My friends who grew up in the suburbs had to deal with this. There was no place for them to go. Those of us who grew up in the city had special schools to go to and did not have to deal with teachers that were trained to deal with the middle, and not the exceptional cases.

      Of course as has been increasingly realized, there are many forms of genius, but one thing is central to all of them, at least those that most would recognize as genius. That is a work ethic, often sn internal locus of control, often unable to deal with external schedules. So the big problem becomes managing the often non linear workflow while making sure things get down. One consequence of this is if a child does not have a work ethics, and most of the time is spent dealing with behavior or the antagonistic games, then their is little time to teach. Genius or not, a student who does not focus that genius to productive goals cannot blame anyone other than themselves.

      But one cannot expect a genius to behave and sit still while nonsense is going on at the front of the room. One cannot expect a genius to tolerate long schools days where nothing is going on and sitting in a corner because their curiosity has caused then to do something that was against the rules. And this is why I think so many of these new concept schools, are useless. They exist only to siphon off the kids who are cheap to educate and generate a profit, or to segregate a population. The expensive kids are then left to the taxpayer. Guinness are expensive to educate, so not benefit from longer formal classes, do not need rules that are tightly enforced, They need space, room to explore, and advanced classes.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  14. Local Genius Groups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I needed some geniuses but couldn't find any that were qualified and I said to myself, "well, gosh, can’t we find some geniuses that are also qualified?" so I contacted some local genius groups and said, ‘Can you help us find folks?’ And they brought us whole binders full of genii.

    1. Re:Local Genius Groups by SternisheFan · · Score: 1

      Could you be Mitt Romney posting as an AC?

  15. Look in the Swiss patent office by Jeff1946 · · Score: 0

    Or Silicon Valley

  16. Just go to Genius Bar (NT) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just go to Genius Bar (NT)

  17. Sociopathy Training by Bob9113 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    'If you are very open to new experiences and if you have psychopathic traits (yes, as in those shared by serial killers) such as being aggressive and emotionally tough, you are more likely to be considered a genius.' ... 'Offering a greater variety of enrichment activities to children will cause many more hidden talents to surface. And accelerated classes and psychological coaching are essential for nurturing talent as early and vigorously as possible.'

    We should also have people they trust randomly hit them with no explanation, to nurture that desirable sociopathic trait.

    Now, wait... That doesn't sound right. In fact, it sounds so wrong that there must be some other explanation. How about this:

    Perhaps the answer is not to hold sociopaths up as geniuses just because they succeed in an economic system that can be exploited by sociopaths. Perhaps when Scientific American discusses genius, it should not accept the average idiot's perception but should delve a bit deeper and even explain why sociopathic business success is not a good measure of genius. Perhaps Scientific American should focus on actual geniuses rather than merely people in the top 1% in intelligence, who are also willing to harm society to win.

    Or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe Scientific American's role is to reflect the average man's perception of genius. Perhaps Scientific American should report on the coach of the next Superbowl winning team, since that is what all the beer-soaked fat-part-of-the-curve folks at the pub seem to shout after the game, "That coach is a genuis!"

    1. Re:Sociopathy Training by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2

      Who said anything about business? Pure projection on your part. You're thinking about it all the time, so naturally it spills out of your brain without you even thinking about it.

      I note both your condescending, spiteful attitude towards both Scientific American, a respected publication, and average people. Where is your empathy? Have you taken the sociopath test? Let's see, off the cuff in your post I see superficial charm, grandiose self-worth, expressions of irritability, annoyance, impatience, threats, aggression, and verbal abuse; inadequate control of anger and temper; acting hastily. No evidence of promiscuity or juvenile delinquency though, so it could be just that you're an asshole.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:Sociopathy Training by chihowa · · Score: 1

      This is the second Scientific American article I've seen today glorifying psychopaths. I wonder what the deal is?

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    3. Re:Sociopathy Training by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      We threatened to kill their families if they didn't.

    4. Re:Sociopathy Training by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 1

      Other than Edison, who approached discovery like a factory and employed many people to whack away at the best filament for a lightbulb, I don't know off the top of my head any great geniuses that would fit this description of "sociopath".

      I look at people like Einstein, Feinman, Jobs, Richard Branson, to name a few -- there are so many "genius" people in the arts, creative endeavors, science. It seems to me that Creativity and dreaming are #1. They also are a horny lot and even when they are single-minded, or very poor socially, they do have a huge compassionate streak.

      I've always had the create part myself -- but not the discipline. Einstein was just really lucky he had any ability to function in a "daily routine" at all. His head was truly in the clouds. It was exceptional that he was able to describe his visions with math -- otherwise, he would have been just another dreamer.

      But it doesn't matter how calculating or "smart" you are -- unless you have a mind that can visualize and perhaps look at things in a way nobody has before, the rest doesn't matter. I'm guessing compassionate people who've been isolated are going to develop the "discipline."

      It sickens me to hear Psychopaths described as "mentally tough" -- not, they are basically brain damaged and are missing things that other people have. While it can help you in business -- it's only a screwed up system that allows this to take place. There's no "cheating" in science. The Universe doesn't care that you will walk over other people to find an answer -- you first have to have a clue.

      Sounds like the author describing Genius is more a fan of fascists than humanitarians -- but I doubt one group has a monopoly on Genius.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    5. Re:Sociopathy Training by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have been labeled as having a High IQ. I often find that when working with someone who displays genius as outlined in the article, they are often crippled by their lack of emotion and being flooded by the amount of information available to them. I help them to be able to filter out the noise and use them to focus on single tasks which they are most helpful for.
      It is best for one to not have so called "emotional toughness" but rather be able to use your emotions to gather the full spectrum of life and to control them to be able to extrapolate the knowledge to someone on a genius level.
      so yes those who have genius can be useful and in the right environment then can be used. However i find it highly unlikely that our places of "higher education" will contain people of high enough intelligence to guide and control these genius.
      so any focus on looking for these would be an impractical use of resources. the best we can hope to do is find these deviants and confine them so they do not pursue their own reckless course.
      (ps. the original anonymous coward is below 5 lol)

    6. Re:Sociopathy Training by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some of the men described in your article were just naturally gifted or super intelligent, see the difference. They used ppl who were simply geniuses to do their tasks, to control them (seen in the apple camp as employees of the genius bar. obviously not genius but the illustration stands).
      The traits you describe them as having eliminate them as being genius but rather gifted and having higher intelligence. Do you understand now the limitations of genius? Do you understand the mislabele that has been applied? Also DNS and Bind your response is somewhat hypocritical, no? what category do you feel you belong in then?

    7. Re:Sociopathy Training by Zapotek · · Score: 1

      The deal is simple, emotional detachment/hyper-rationality provides an objective view of things. An objective view allows you to see what's really going on instead of what most people perceive to be going on. And yeah these are psychopathic traits although they can be developed by non-natural-born psychopaths as well, with the right conditioning.

      Also, psychopath != sociopath, so please do quit bitching (not you specifically, although I keep seeing this assumption pop up a lot around here). Just because someone doesn't care about your silly ass problems doesn't mean he's evil, or even marginally mischievous.

    8. Re:Sociopathy Training by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Sounds like the author describing Genius is more a fan of fascists than humanitarians -- but I doubt one group has a monopoly on Genius.

      I'd bet into the humanitarians having a overwhelming majority of them. But then, the author looks much more like somebody that only knows a psycopath from the TV (or, more likely can't identify one) than a fan of them.

    9. Re:Sociopathy Training by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sociopathic or psychopathic?

      Not the same.

      I am certainly more in the psychopathic camp, but I am at pains not to prey on others as a sociopath might. I aggressively want to win, but don't want to do it at someone else's expense. I am committed to doing the right thing more and more every day. I am ruthlessly efficient and unemotional, but that doesn't mean I expect everyone to be like me. I do everything in my power to respect others individuality.

    10. Re:Sociopathy Training by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Armchair psychologists - does anyone like them?

      Pure projection

      That is not projection.

    11. Re:Sociopathy Training by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because someone doesn't care about your silly ass problems doesn't mean he's evil, or even marginally mischievous.

      That may be true, but history makes it very clear to be wary of sociopaths.

    12. Re:Sociopathy Training by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Scientific American is a business, and thus has managers and editors who are likely sociopaths. Describing them as geniuses is just a discreet method of brown nosing.

    13. Re:Sociopathy Training by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      While it can help you in business

      Actually the trend in management guru circles has been strongly away from that in the past decade. The 70's and 80's saw a rash of "How to Be a Jerk" business fad books, but they've fallen almost completely out of favor; experience has shown that while sociopaths' performance looks good on paper, in the short term, they also do irreparable harm to the business that harbors them. Some of the books now have bits on how to ferret these guys out and get rid of them, and virtually all of them nowadays are all about how cooperation, teamwork, and happy customers and employees are the most vitally important assets for a successful business.

        Sociopaths are made out in our media to be these dangerous, exciting creatures, but really, they're just immature, like children in adult bodies. They are emotionally stunted at the level of empathy and social understanding seen in a five-year-old. That's not beneficial for anyone, really.

    14. Re:Sociopathy Training by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What. The. Fuck. Sociopaths/Psychopaths are not hyper-rational.

      They are extremely self-destructive and hopelessly unable to control their own impulses. I hate this glorifying of socio/psycho-paths because it's frequently done by people with no experience of the real thing.

      We also tend to forget that you don't need to have no remorse/empathy to be a massive ruthless jackass. Most of the worst dictators, serial murderers and genocidal lunatics were fuelled by shame or social exclusion or many of the other things that a psycho/socio path wouldn't even be bothered about.

    15. Re:Sociopathy Training by shiftless · · Score: 1

      You aren't a psychopath or a sociopath. You're just a man. Just because a bunch of pasty geeks on Slashdot love to scream about psychopathy every time they meet someone with a pulse or a scrap of ambition, doesn't mean shit.

    16. Re:Sociopathy Training by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe he's just angry for seeing the world as it is?

    17. Re:Sociopathy Training by BonThomme · · Score: 1

      It puts the article in the magazine, or it gets the hose again....

    18. Re:Sociopathy Training by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Absolutely true. A psychopath... as Hare's checklist defines it (the accepted definition) is incapable of the kind of patience and dedication needed to reach highly skilled jobs... they just can't do it.

      They thrive in environments where it's all mouth and where results are measured in days/weeks - so that would be your modern corporate CEO.

  18. Step #1 by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Navigate away from /.

    --
    I got here through a series of tubes
    1. Re:Step #1 by SternisheFan · · Score: 1
      "Alcohol is my anti-drug."

      Actually, the FDA has classified alcohol as a 'legal' drug for more than 2 decades now.

    2. Re:Step #1 by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 1

      Hello, I'd like you to meet my friend Irony .

      --
      I got here through a series of tubes
  19. Mit Zer GeniuzDiscuvernScope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Zo, vad elz is nu

  20. Left Behind by Un+pobre+guey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    because they are focused on helping those students most likely to be left behind.

    Wrong. Schools focus on the kids roughly within the first standard deviation limits on the normal curve, not because they care but because they are usually a one-size-fits-all solution. People above or below the first standard deviation or so are too different to work well under those circumstances, so they start falling out of the system. Ironic that someone felt the need to link to the No Child Left Behind Act wikipedia entry. That law was an exemplary piece of parent con job, government pork for companies that provide utterly worthless metrics that in no credible way have improved education, and I challenge everyone to refute that in a credible, empirically, and extensively documented fashion. To the contrary, "teaching to the test" has become synonymous with "education" in the US. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but we will pay a steep price for that in the not too distant future.

    1. Re:Left Behind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well.... I challenge you to prove it. So there!

    2. Re:Left Behind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because they are focused on helping those students most likely to be left behind.

      Wrong. Schools focus on the kids roughly within the first standard deviation limits on the normal curve, not because they care but because they are usually a one-size-fits-all solution. People above or below the first standard deviation or so are too different to work well under those circumstances, so they start falling out of the system. Ironic that someone felt the need to link to the No Child Left Behind Act wikipedia entry. That law was an exemplary piece of parent con job, government pork for companies that provide utterly worthless metrics that in no credible way have improved education, and I challenge everyone to refute that in a credible, empirically, and extensively documented fashion. To the contrary, "teaching to the test" has become synonymous with "education" in the US. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but we will pay a steep price for that in the not too distant future.

      Well, well. An intelligent answer. A refreshing change from the auto-responder-political-nothink.

      I was going to be more terse and simply point out that the setup was designed with the idea that half the students had an IQ of less than 100, but that would have just set off a different set of auto-responders.

    3. Re:Left Behind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ... Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but we will pay a steep price for that in the not too distant future ...

      Firstly, the US relied on high wages to import the brightest people from around the world. The 'land of opportunity' allowed their brilliance to be monetized and exported to the world. Both of those practices are declining. Education on a global scale means there are many bright people living outside the USA and making other countries smarter, with a higher disposable income. Increased competition means the USA must find bright people in its population.

      About one-third of the population has the brilliance and creativity to enrich a country/culture. So a meritocracy must be developed which gives more opportunity/education to those citizens. This is vital so that a tiny fraction of them will be 'in the right place at the right time', to make a great contribution to their country/culture. An education system that emphasizes universal mediocrity over occasional brilliance will not become richer. Worse, an economy that employs its brightest to gamble on the stock-market, cannot grow its manufacturing sector, which is already vulnerable to global commerce.

  21. Creativity and Independent Thought... by Grog6 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...were treated as a disease to be cured, by any means necessary, by the time I got to 7th grade.

    I could read at 4, and was encouraged well by my parents, who spent a great deal of time defending me to Administrative staff.

    My HS Principal taught me Karate for several years prior; he knew I wasn't a problem, no matter how bad the asshole teachers hated me. :)

    I survived, and managed to do well while my detractors have mostly died off thru poor genes and stupidity.

    Odds are, I designed something, somewhere, in a machine that almost everyone here or their relatives have been in.

    Sorting out the geeks early is a Great Idea, as long as we can keep the other idiots from either exterminating us, or keeping us in concentration camps. (yes, the TSA isn't the Gestapo, but it's a 'like organization'...)

    What times we live in... :)

    --
    Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
    1. Re:Creativity and Independent Thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ...were treated as a disease to be cured, by any means necessary, by the time I got to 7th grade.

      I could read at 4, and was encouraged well by my parents, who spent a great deal of time defending me to Administrative staff.

      My HS Principal taught me Karate for several years prior; he knew I wasn't a problem, no matter how bad the asshole teachers hated me. :)

      I survived, and managed to do well while my detractors have mostly died off thru poor genes and stupidity.

      Odds are, I designed something, somewhere, in a machine that almost everyone here or their relatives have been in.

      Sorting out the geeks early is a Great Idea, as long as we can keep the other idiots from either exterminating us, or keeping us in concentration camps. (yes, the TSA isn't the Gestapo, but it's a 'like organization'...)

      What times we live in... :)

      Talk about sense of entitlement... You can't expect to talk down to the masses and be held up on their shoulders at the same time.

      I can just see something like Corlianus playing out all over this page. People who think they are God's gift to man, but certainly not leaders of men, and they want special treatment, well... just because. Good luck with that, friends.

    2. Re:Creativity and Independent Thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      My 3rd grade teacher had me sent to a child psychologist because apparently she thought I was fucked in the head.

      Years later my dad told me that the psychologist woman that did the testing called me "a smart, smart ass kid. And the teacher who said I should be examined is stupid and should retire".

    3. Re:Creativity and Independent Thought... by russotto · · Score: 1

      I can just see something like Corlianus playing out all over this page. People who think they are God's gift to man, but certainly not leaders of men, and they want special treatment, well... just because. Good luck with that, friends.

      Ah, so you recognize no form of greatness other than leadership? There is no place in your world, aside from the very bottom, for those who can do and do well, but not lead? Have it your way, but don't be surprised when you find yourself without their services.

    4. Re:Creativity and Independent Thought... by shiftless · · Score: 1

      Talk about sense of entitlement

      No, talk about insecurity. Look in the mirror.

  22. They spot you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (Tap on shoulder, startled) Stop that! Get back in your seat. I don't consider myself a genius, but school was a bit like that for me. It was like... oh crap, these people are teaching me?

  23. Toni Morrison? by srussia · · Score: 5, Funny

    "People attach the label Ãoegeniusà to such diverse characters as Leonardo DaVinci, Bobby Fischer and Toni Morrison. The varied achievements of such individuals beg the question: what defines a genius?

    False. It raises the question. We've been over this.

    Blithely assuming that Toni Morrison is generally considered a genius is begging the question.

    --
    Set your phasers on "funky"!
    1. Re:Toni Morrison? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes indeed. After all, she's only won the Nobel Prize in Literature, the Pulitzer, and the Presidential Medal of freedom for her writing.

      We should focus our praise instead on writers who dream up new ways of putting large-breasted, beautiful women wearing bikinis in zero gravity. Because that's what takes REAL genius.

    2. Re:Toni Morrison? by epyT-R · · Score: 3, Interesting

      argument from authority.. having a bunch of awards bestowed by society doesn't make someone a genius. Usualy, geniuses are the forgotten ones who die penniless. many times they are pariahs of the societies they were raised into. The people who get all the awards and trappings of 'intellectual achievement' are called 'overachievers.' they bust their asses and/or are politically well-connected and have wealthy parents.. The problem is that many of these trappings are not really based on merit. All they require is an average effort from a well connected person.

    3. Re:Toni Morrison? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bill Gates comes to mind. A well connected prick who felt entitled to everyone's money in exchange for some other guy's ideas.

    4. Re:Toni Morrison? by shiftless · · Score: 1

      Usualy, geniuses are the forgotten ones who die penniless.

      Seems your definition of "genius" varies from mine.

    5. Re:Toni Morrison? by MickLinux · · Score: 1

      Okay... first, there is the smart genius. He's somebody like euler. Now, school doesn't have to coddle him: he can take care of himself.

      Then there's the psychopathic genius. This is usually somebody who is (using the term loosely) in love with themself, and he is all about number one. He gets the term genius, because he pursues it. Somebody like Edison comes to mind. That kind of a person also doesn't need schooling, because he'll school himself. Aside from that, he's all about taking, so he'll take whatever he needs.

      Then there's the plain psychopath. He also is all about taking. However, he doesn't pursue the goal of genius, because some other bright shiney attracts him instead. You might know him as a local guy at the street corner who gets busted for posessing a crack pipe every few months. He also doesn't need to be coddled by the school systems. What he needed, back whenever, was perhaps proper parenting.

      As far as I'm concerned, this is all a non issue. Schools at best are there to help the poorer students, who want to do well and otherwise wouldn't, understand how to fit into our society and do reasonably well.

      caveat: that doesn't mean that I support no child left behind. NCLB was brought out by the NEA in an attempt to destroy homeschooling. Instead, it has destroyed public schooling, and should be abolished, with extreme apologies, ASAP. A certified teacher with a 30:1 student-teacher ratio is never going to outperform an invested parent with a 1:1 - 3:1 student-teacher ratio, who believes he/she can handle the job. In our own family, my wife can handle homeschooling one child, maybe two if they are well behaved. So we homeschool until the next comes along, and then pass the child on to the public schools. The last will probably be homeschooled the whole way [we both have engineering degrees], but maybe not. Works for us, works for them, and I don't expect too much out of the public schools.

      --
      Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
    6. Re:Toni Morrison? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blithely assuming that Toni Morrison is generally considered a genius is begging the question.

      Which question?: "Is Toni Morrison a genius?" or "How did you manage to misspell 'Jim?'"

    7. Re:Toni Morrison? by Jmc23 · · Score: 1
      There are different types of genius, not just eggheads with no social skills.

      Stop looking in the mirror while thinking you're looking at the world.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
  24. How do you spot a genius? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sara Connor is trying to kill him.

    Oh, and he's Japanese, apparently.

  25. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've heard numerous variations of this by parents trying to justify why their precious snowflake doesn't do well in school. Usually it is the teacher's fault, and their child is just so much smarter than the other students. BS. If your child is so super intelligent that ordinary schoolwork bores them, they should be smart enough to breeze through the tests. They should just "play the game" while at school and do their own learning at home, or in additional enrichment programs (most are free for low income).

    It is much more fun to pursue your own course of study in whatever you feel like learning about than be lead in some school based program. It will be tailored for the child because you come up with the plan yourself. If you want additional ideas, there are plenty of teachers/counselors/professors that would be glad to provide ideas. Look at how many things that are available now that weren't a few years ago on the internet. You can learn astronomy, poetry, language, engines, math, physics, programming, etc., etc. Stop expecting everyone else to do it for you.

  26. Wrong idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Gifted programmes as they have been developed over the last 30 years are in fact probably the worst thing for someone with exceptional ability.

    Too often gifted education:

    - stigmatizes children in a way that causes a wide disconnect between their self-esteem and self-confidence.
    - encourages kids for being "smart" or "intelligent" which rewards them for something they cannot control, and causes weird neuroses.
    - isolates kids from their peer group based on criteria they don't understand, and prevents them from forming natural relationships with their classmates.
    - presumes that these "gifted" kids can be engineered somehow into whatever the popular ideal of citizenship is. For example, gifted kids are not encouraged to do sports are a part of their enriched education, primarily because of middle-class ideas of "intellectuals."
    - discourages solving problems with discipline and work, which is why you see so many "gifted" drop outs and burnouts.
    - shields "normal" kids from the disruptive exposure to intelligence that they too should understand and adapt to.

    I spent much of my education in these programmes and they are misguided, idealistic, and reinforce the astonishingly stupid idea that intelligence is a kind of secular holiness.

    Should we have streamed classes? Absolutely, but enrichment should be available as an option for kids who are up to it, perhaps with qualified interest, but not the fatuous anointment it has become.

    If you ever resented not being in the gifted class, I can assure you that you dodged a bullet.

    1. Re:Wrong idea. by Knuckles · · Score: 1

      Gifted programmes as they have been developed over the last 30 years are in fact probably the worst thing for someone with exceptional ability. ......

      I'd mod you +1 interesting if I had points

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    2. Re:Wrong idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you ever resented not being in the gifted class, I can assure you that you dodged a bullet.

      I wasn't. Precisely because my parents wanted to avoid this. The bullet that hit me because I was kept amongst the normals was just as bad. Not only did I not fit in, I missed out on many of the opportunities that only get offered to the gifted because I wasn't in the crowd when the goodies got handed out.

    3. Re:Wrong idea. by russotto · · Score: 1

      Too often gifted education:

      - stigmatizes children in a way that causes a wide disconnect between their self-esteem and self-confidence.

      I think it's more likely the intelligence of the child which stigmatizes them.

      - encourages kids for being "smart" or "intelligent" which rewards them for something they cannot control, and causes weird neuroses.

      Right, we should constantly knock them down, making their intellectual prowess not a thing of pride but just an inborn advantage they should feel vaguely guilty for possessing.

      - isolates kids from their peer group based on criteria they don't understand, and prevents them from forming natural relationships with their classmates.

      Again, their intelligence alone will do that in most cases -- unless you group them with other intelligent kids.

      - presumes that these "gifted" kids can be engineered somehow into whatever the popular ideal of citizenship is.

      True of school in general, though I will grant that the "ideal" for the gifted kids tends to be different.

      - discourages solving problems with discipline and work, which is why you see so many "gifted" drop outs and burnouts.

      Damn you brat, don't solve that problem the easy and intelligent way; struggle through it hard way we told you; tedium is good for you.

      - shields "normal" kids from the disruptive exposure to intelligence that they too should understand and adapt to.

      Normal kids already understand intelligence -- it's a reason to call a kid names and physically abuse him.

    4. Re:Wrong idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Being chippy isn't really a sign of intelligence either. I've met a few geniuses and the thing that links them is indeed a kind of benevolent curiosity about others.

      I thought one in particular used to spend time around some really dumb and lost people, and he didn't seem to care how misguided and stupid these people were. It wasn't until years later that it occurred to me that he was at a level so far from the norm that what I saw as such an obvious difference in those people was so marginal from his perspective that he was just indifferent.

      It's like a billionaire seeing someone who made $50k/year and someone who made $750k/year as essentially in the same wealth bracket.
      My points about the errors of gifted education would seem to stand.

    5. Re:Wrong idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly, the reason you failed was because you were actually special. It's this bloody Harry Potter myth that people want to be a part of.

      If you were smart, you would have figured out that success is a function of either very hard work in isolation, or fitting in and getting along. There is nothing in between but mediocrity.

      The other thing is that nobody respects intelligence. It doesn't matter. The only thing anyone respects is work. If you are hyper intelligent, just imagine what you could accomplish if you worked almost as much as the dumb ones who struggled while trying to get along. If you didn't succeed, then it's really your own fault.
       

    6. Re:Wrong idea. by Miamicanes · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You overlooked the #1 argument in *favor* of gifted class -- for many kids, it's the first time in their lives they get to spend extended amounts of time with "their people". I made my first real friend within a month of getting into the class. I was in middle school. It was literally the first time I'd met anybody who was equally smart, and was into the same things I was. I ultimately became friends with pretty much everyone in the class, and we all *might* have tripped over each other in high school (maybe in math club or later, in the Amiga users' group), but the point is that it meant I could finally have real friends after an utterly friendless elementary school experience, in a large school that nevertheless did an amazing job of keeping kids anonymously away from each other.

      My brother's mother in law is a gifted teacher, and she agrees 100% that a major need for gifted class is to give kids who've always been untouchably-geeky outsiders a safe environment where they can make friends & avoid self-destructing before high school.

    7. Re:Wrong idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn you brat, don't solve that problem the easy and intelligent way; struggle through it hard way we told you; tedium is good for you.

      No. No. No matter how smart you are, without discipline and hard work, you are nothing. Take drawing, for example; a skill which many people mistakenly believe requires some innate talent to succeed at. Without hard work and discipline to further your skill, no matter how good you are, eventually other people catch up. And then you're left with no outstanding skill and an attitude that pretty much prohibits you from ever getting better.
      How many people have succeeded by giving up when facing a problem for which they had no immediate answer?

    8. Re:Wrong idea. by Kim0 · · Score: 1

      Work harder, not smarter!

      This is the real message I got from employment.

    9. Re:Wrong idea. by Yaztromo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      - isolates kids from their peer group based on criteria they don't understand, and prevents them from forming natural relationships with their classmates.

      Sorry to burst your bubble, but as someone who was both inside and outside such classes, this is certainly not true, in significant part because being in an integrated class makes the problem worse.

      Picture a kid in grade 4 (~9 years old) who could generally read, write, and speak at a grade 12 level (~17 years old). Put that kid in a class of children who may or may not even be able to read, write, or speak at a grade 4 level. What do you think is going to happen? Do you think all of those kids are going to socialize well with that kid, no matter how gentle, friendly, or outgoing he was, when they can't communicate ideas at the same level? Or do you think they'll just go with the simple route of ostracizing (and eventually try bullying) that kid?

      I was that kid, and let me tell you -- it didn't work for me at all. In the times when I wasn't in an enriched class (at one point because my parents felt as you did, and worried I would somehow be socially stunted), I was usually ostracized by my classmates because it simply wasn't cool to be with the smart kid, or because I didn't have the same interest in music or fashion that the other kids did. Indeed, during these times I often socialized more with kids in later grades than myself, as the communications gap was much smaller. When I was in enriched classes, I had lots of friends and good relationships with my classmates, even when I didn't always share the same interests with them.

      Putting all the kids in the same class doesn't magically make socialization easy when there are vastly differing levels of communicative ability. Indeed, virtually every class stratifies into groups based on differing levels of communications and interests, and if you're the one ultra-smart kid in a class of regular kids, you'll quickly find yourself in a strata all your own -- and kids can be merciless to other kids in their own strata (and not just due to intelligence -- I saw the same things happen to kids from less frequently represented religious and ethnic backgrounds face the same struggles, which is probably why most of my best friends throughout grade school were the Sikh, Muslim, and Hindu kids in my predominately white grade schools).

      I don't necessarily disagree with everything you said above, but you totally missed the mark on that one.

      Yaz

    10. Re:Wrong idea. by stymy · · Score: 1

      You talk about gifted programs as if kids are placed in solitary confinement in them. I went through one of those programs in Ontario, and I am glad that I did. The people in my classes were all at least smart, and while some didn't study, they were smart enough to do well anyways. I got along with most people in my classes, and made plenty of friends. Admittedly, most people in the program came from middle or upper-class family, and were almost all white or asian, but we still ended up forming natural relationships with classmates. As far as sports, I was on the school's rugby team, and out of the 22 players on the team, only one wasn't in the gifted program.

    11. Re:Wrong idea. by shiftless · · Score: 2

      If you were smart, you would have figured out that success is a function of either very hard work in isolation, or fitting in and getting along.

      And how does the "forced to sit in a desk learning by rote in a classroom of 30 kids" help either scenario?

    12. Re:Wrong idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think a lot of "gifted" people are simply not very social. As a kid and now as an adult, the people I think are the smartest are also the most socially awkward and in some cases stunted. I am "gifted" and a very social person. I get along great with "normal" people (and did when I was a kid), but have difficulties relating to other "gifted" people in areas other than academic/professional achievement.

      I don't think "gifted" kids need to be isolated (which I agree with the GP is what those programs do). I think they simply need support so they can develop into socially capable geniuses. If they only make friends with other geniuses, they won't fully develop.

    13. Re:Wrong idea. by Jmc23 · · Score: 1
      I agree with most of this. We were called TAG(talented and gifted) fags and had no other classes with normal students except for PE (yeah, which genius came up with that).

      However, I disagree about the hard work, at least where i was, we actually had project calendars to keep track of the extremely heavy workload compared to the regular kids.

      Needless to say I dropped out as soon as possible to try and interact with normal kids.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    14. Re:Wrong idea. by previewlounge · · Score: 1

      fascinating. quite refreshing to read this, cheers. if i had the mod creds, i would award many modpointi.

  27. Not exactly shocking news by ubrgeek · · Score: 5, Informative

    In a 2010 article, Svetlana Holt & Joan Marques wrote the following:

    "Supporting Brown ... assertions about the transition of narcissistic tendencies from business schools to business
    organizations, Pepper (2005) reveals a concerning fact about narcissism in business leaders. While this quality is
    often sought in corporate leaders, because the right dosage of narcissism can lead to optimal innovation, there is often
    only a thin line that distinguishes brilliant thinking narcissists, such as Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Oprah Winfrey and
    Jack Welch, who are also charismatic and visionary, from psychopaths such as Bernie Ebbers and Dennis Koslowski,
    who use their skills in harmful ways that we have all come to witness in recent years. Andrews and Furniss (2009) take
    it a step further and link excessive narcissism in business organizations to psychopathic behavior. They assert that,
    perfectly matching to the description of a psychopath, these business executives are superficially charming, grandiose,
    deceitful, remorseless, void of empathy, irresponsible, impulsive, lacking goals, poor in behavioral controls, and
    antisocial."

    (The doi in case anyone wants to see the whole article is http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0951-5 )

    --
    Bark less. Wag more.
    1. Re:Not exactly shocking news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "there is often only a thin line that distinguishes brilliant thinking narcissists, such as Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Oprah Winfrey and
      Jack Welch, who are also charismatic and visionary, from psychopaths such as Bernie Ebbers and Dennis Koslowski,
      who use their skills in harmful ways that we have all come to witness in recent years. "

      There's a line?

      Bill Gates and Steve Jobs were "harmless"? Jack Welch was/is harmless?

      I'd say more like there's constructive psycopathic behavior and destructive psychopathic behavior and the main difference between the people is how much of the destructive behavior they indulge in.

    2. Re:Not exactly shocking news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oprah Winfrey brilliant?

      What?

  28. You are all wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get a picture or me and look at it! You will see THE genius.

    1. Re:You are all wrong. by Randym · · Score: 1
      Get a picture or me

      I'd rather have the picture. When I look at you I just see a narcissist.

      --
      DNA is a Turing machine. You, however, being dynamic and emergent, are not.
  29. Its Obvious! by gpronger · · Score: 1

    Wearing a /. 15th Anniversary T-shirt!

    1. Re:Its Obvious! by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure how this would help - does the t-shirt include a built-in genius detector?

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:Its Obvious! by gpronger · · Score: 1

      Hey! That's Mean!


      (But the '93 Escort Wagon, was actually a pretty decent vehicle.)

    3. Re:Its Obvious! by BonThomme · · Score: 1

      (don't tell him it's actually just a wifi detector)

    4. Re:Its Obvious! by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      (But the '93 Escort Wagon, was actually a pretty decent vehicle.)

      Mine's still running, actually. Of course we're now at the point where I take a somewhat perverse pleasure in driving a 20-year-old beater.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
  30. Ain't gonna happen by PPH · · Score: 2

    We need to train teachers to spot giftedness, which may take a variety of forms and often needs to be accompanied by creativity, drive and passion. Offering a greater variety of enrichment activities to children will cause many more hidden talents to surface.

    Parents of Bubba the jock are going to make damned sure he gets into all the 'gifted' classes. Just so he'll look good getting into a decent university. And perish the thought of putting him into a remedial class because his IQ is on his football jersey. There will be no charter schools to place actual gifted students into. Not if they can send the losers back to the general population. Bubba's parents watch this stuff very carefully.

    So you have an educational system that fails both ends of the curve.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  31. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And why should we expect our kids to "play the game" and waste 7 hours a day 5 days a week of their youth? They're kids. The only way to get them to do that is with hard core stimulant cocktails like aderrall. I'm not pretending that all of these people who make excuses have a genius child, nor am I suggesting that the teachers really are at fault, but you're attitude is the prevelant one in the public school system and it's why the public school system is failing in most parts of the nation. Unfortunately, No Child Left Behind just reinforced this attitude into an unescapable foundation of the establishment.

  32. Interesting the factors involved by Grayhand · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Most have some brain disorders like dyslexia. There's something about the type of brain wiring involved in certain disorders that frees up the problem solving areas of the brain. I think part of the hard work involves overcoming the disorders. Most geniuses are unconventional thinkers. I remember a quote that genius was being about to connect A to C without going through B. It's that out of box thinking that defines true genius. Being able to take an equation with 12 steps and reduce it to 3 or 4.

    1. Re:Interesting the factors involved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was diagnosed with dyslexia and one of the problems I have is finding words to say something, even relatively simple words. I just forget whole groups of similar words, so I cannot simply take a synonym. So instead I often have to quickly think of another way of expressing myself. This yields sometimes in very comedic descriptions of what I want to say.

      Anyway, I was thinking about what you wrote. And maybe I can skip step B, because I have practiced trying to go via another way for the whole of my life because of this issue.

    2. Re:Interesting the factors involved by RabidReindeer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Most have some brain disorders like dyslexia. There's something about the type of brain wiring involved in certain disorders that frees up the problem solving areas of the brain. I think part of the hard work involves overcoming the disorders. Most geniuses are unconventional thinkers. I remember a quote that genius was being about to connect A to C without going through B. It's that out of box thinking that defines true genius. Being able to take an equation with 12 steps and reduce it to 3 or 4.

      Genius is being able to jump from A to C, then go back in and fill in B.

      Insanity is being able to jump from A to C when B doesn't connect to both of them. A lot of political thought falls into this category.

    3. Re:Interesting the factors involved by sjames · · Score: 2

      Perhaps closer, genius is the ability to quickly see a B shaped void between A and C, then find B.

    4. Re:Interesting the factors involved by shiftless · · Score: 1

      Insanity is being able to jump from A to C when B doesn't connect to both of them.

      Stupidity is when A and C actually do connect to B, but you don't have the mental horsepower to see it, so you just dismiss it as insanity.

    5. Re:Interesting the factors involved by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Perhaps closer, genius is the ability to quickly see a B shaped void between A and C, then find B.

      touché!

    6. Re:Interesting the factors involved by CBravo · · Score: 1

      For me, creativity of the special kind, involves seeing A, B and C. Then to notice A, B and C are choices and those can be changed to see what happens. Everybody can do ABC. Create a different word.

      --
      nosig today
  33. Start by looking somewhere other than slashdot... by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

    This place is overrun by people who qualify for something far, far, from genius.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  34. From personal experiene... by Genda · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In 6th grade I was tested for a number of things when I broke the standard tests. The best guess pegged my IQ at around 165-170. By that time I had mastered algebra, had a firm grasp on a couple dozen sciences, and created a number of interesting small inventions (I reinvented the DC motor and came up with a simple rotary engine.)

    The next 3 years of my education inside the LA School District involved watching old movies, repeating the times tables, taking field trips (which in fact I found quite enjoyable) and creative writing. This was an attempt to keep me occupied while my peers caught up, which of course never happened... for obvious reasons it couldn't. However, they pissed away the most important educational period of my life. I could have accelerated and been done with my traditional education by the time I was 13 or 14, and moved on to college perhaps completing that by the time I was 18. Our schools are not designed to teach the bright, and in fact, are often punitive to intelligent and creative young people. In a time when we most need these traits fully empowered and present in our culture, such behavior from our leaders and institutions is criminal. However, it is consistent with the large scale conversion of the American mouth-breathing public into obedient, subservient consumption units in the vast corporate engine that is our culture.

    Perhaps it time for a new revolution. One in what's possible for being human.

    1. Re:From personal experiene... by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      A brain the size of a planet, and somehow along the way you didn't learn empathy for those you obviously consider below you. Maybe you're not as smart as you think.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:From personal experiene... by Thagg · · Score: 5, Interesting

      My personal experience matches yours up until sixth grade, when I was chosen as part of the Study of Mathematically and Scientifically Precocious Youth at Johns Hopkins University. They performed a huge battery of tests on us, and offered us accelerated courses in math on weekends (which was great, because you are right, there was nothing that was at all interesting being taught in middle school/high school). I dropped out of high school after 10th grade (all A's) and entered college at 15.

      And got kicked out of college at 18 for being too immature. And going to work for five years, developing some life skills, and going back to college to graduate at the age of 22 maybe a year after my high-school peer group.

      It's tough to know what to do with the outliers. These days with the availability of college courses on the internet; I would suggest that these precocious kids should stay in high school taking courses like creative writing and metal shop; learning about life -- and spend half the day taking online courses. Starting college at a very early age is probably not a good idea; although starting college with a great background is.

      --
      I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
    3. Re:From personal experiene... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Fully agree. I attended a very intensive science and math boarding school as a result of my scholastic aptitude and I'm really not sure it did me any favors. I spent years killing myself to get into top-tier research schools while stunting my emotional and social growth, got into all of them, went to a state school because (surprise!) I was too poor to pay for it but too well off for the government to pay for it.

      I would have been far better served to cruise through school making all As, work on my own software projects on the side, and hit college fully prepared instead of burnt out and disappointed. I'm sure it is difficult to know what to do with geniuses (I'm not one) but only marginally less so for the merely talented.

    4. Re:From personal experiene... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hahaha so true. It makes me think of the assholes who were born to rich parents and look down upon those less fortunate as though they deserve to be struggling and working pay check to pay check, while it's obvious to them that they're rich because they deserved it.

    5. Re:From personal experiene... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally if I were to coin someone as a genius, it would probably because they'd kept learning regardless of what was on the curriculum. Some people are great at passing tests and being spoon fed information and thats a great thing to be good at. However, a genius would be expected to break new ground, thus as much as you feel any education has potentially failed you, its actually that you've just failed yourself.

    6. Re:From personal experiene... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it is time. But we must do it humanely.

    7. Re:From personal experiene... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually brain size only has a tiny impact on intellect within the same species :D

    8. Re:From personal experiene... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can only guess that you came to the conclusion that the parent poster doesn't possess empathy because he used the term "American mouth-breathing public".
      Since when did feeling mentally superior to someone/something preclude feeling empathy for them/it?
      If he truly didn't possess empathy he wouldn't give a fuck about the fate of society and wouldn't be toying with the idea of revolution.

    9. Re:From personal experiene... by sjames · · Score: 1

      If Usain Bolt makes the comment that me catching up with him on the track is out of the question, it's not because he lacks empathy or looks down upon me, it's just that he is seeing things for what they are.

      It's funny how the obviously physically talented are never called out for expecting to excel in their specialty against a couch potato.

    10. Re:From personal experiene... by Genda · · Score: 1

      Forgive the description of the general public. My lack of empathy is with a government and an educational system that would spend more energy on making people into said "Consumption units" than rational, self evolving, intellectual beings capable growing and developing into wise and learned members of a society who love truth and knowledge for its own sake. Instead the average American get's his daily dose of thought from corporate owned infotainment, and that's the ones who even bother with the news. I volunteer a tremendous amount of my time tutoring and working adult literacy, so please don't assume I lack either compassion or empathy. I simply find myself angered by the ignorance and depravity of those whose job it is to dispel ignorance.

    11. Re:From personal experiene... by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      empathy for what? why exactly does he owe them empathy?

    12. Re:From personal experiene... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, so you must be the asshole who for some reason (extreme insecurity) feels the need to comment anonymously on every single insightful post in this discussion, shooting the author doing and claiming he's egotistical, arrogant, full of himself, etc. Look in the mirror. Clearly you are getting EXTREMELY DEFENSIVE for some reason.

    13. Re:From personal experiene... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a difference between recognising that you have an above-norm intelligence that most of your peers simply cannot achieve, and considering them below you.

      My own IQ is a little below your parent poster at about 155, but I encountered much the same educational issues. In my entire time in school I only met one person who could match me intellectually, but that doesn't mean I considered everyone else beneath me. Most of my peers had better emotional intelligence than me, I could never be a "leader" despite my intelligence. Most of them had more sporting prowess, or better hand-eye co-ordination. I'm not a better person than them, but I am different. As such, my educational needs were different and largely went unfulfilled. I've achieved much since that time, but I do sometimes wonder how much more I could be had I been given the support I needed.

    14. Re:From personal experiene... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. You equate empathy with intelligence. You assume he has no empathy. And you base this on the fact that he wanted to be moved ahead due to superior intellect?

      You are a textbook anti-intellectual.

    15. Re:From personal experiene... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very true and very honest of you.

      Most of the self-proclaimed geniuses in here have nothing to show for their geniuses except rant at the educational system for letting them down. Let's face it, if you are a true genius then the educational system cannot possibly let you down because your genius will help you find a way to fulfill your potential. Many so called geniuses are just flash-in-the-pan kids who have a mental age above that of their peers but lacking the discipline, hard work, and motivation to make use of it. Then, when their peers catch up with them mentally, all they do is complain about how the system has failed them.

    16. Re:From personal experiene... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what are you doing now with your immense intellect?

    17. Re:From personal experiene... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It's tough to know what to do with the outliers. These days with the availability of college courses on the internet; I would suggest that these precocious kids should stay in high school taking courses like creative writing and metal shop; learning about life -- and spend half the day taking online courses. Starting college at a very early age is probably not a good idea; although starting college with a great background is."

      An excellent point.
      The public education system is not, nor should it be, designed for the gifted. It aims at the middle because the gifted can take care of themselves while the slow cannot really cope. Identifying gifted kids in the classroom is not rocket science; being able (for the school/teacher) to do something about it is an entirely different matter. Here the gifted kids and his parents have to take some responsibility for learning, not bleat on about how boring school is. One learns far more outside of school than within so start reading and studying at home. As the poster suggests, take advantage of the school for acquiring social skills and for personal growth and benefit from non-academic courses such as typing, shop, home economics, music, art ,whatever. Two of the most useful courses I took in high school were typing and Latin. The utility of typing skills is obvious: the utility of Latin less so but it was a great way to learn and understand English grammer.

  35. Re: education vs. learning by riker1384 · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've heard numerous variations of this by parents trying to justify why their precious snowflake doesn't do well in school. Usually it is the teacher's fault, and their child is just so much smarter than the other students. BS. If your child is so super intelligent that ordinary schoolwork bores them, they should be smart enough to breeze through the tests. They should just "play the game" while at school and do their own learning at home, or in additional enrichment programs (most are free for low income).

    You aren't allowed to just breeze through the tests. You are also required to do hours and hours of repetitive, mind-numbing homework that is below your level and serves no useful purpose if you're smart enough to just listen to the lecture and then ace the test. If you don't do the busy-work, you receive a failing grade regardless of how well you do on the tests.

  36. Nothing New Here.. by jmd · · Score: 1

    My father was a research professor in curriculum and foundations @ ohio state univ from mid 60s to mid 80s. he would suggest genius is an irrelevant term. misleading at best. he would never tell me my IQ test results as a kid. IQ was not a good measure of anything. creativity, discipline and a host of other factors contribute to the overall picture.

    he is rolling over in his grave if he looks at the state of public education today from early childhood development through post secondary education and graduate degrees. education in his mind was not meant to obtain a better job, but mostly to increase one's understanding of the world around them.

    our public education system has failed... and since we have a pretty uneducated public, so will the democracy we live in.... (or has it already?)

  37. Re:We Geniusess by Ol+Biscuitbarrel · · Score: 1

    You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on.

  38. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm an actual genius - 146 IQ. You have no idea what you're talking about.

    If your child is so super intelligent that ordinary schoolwork bores them, they should be smart enough to breeze through the tests. They should just "play the game" while at school and do their own learning at home, or in additional enrichment programs (most are free for low income).

    That works for about 3-4 years. At some point you just stop trying.

    Here's a video on division. I know you already know how to divide... that's the point. I want you to watch it. It's about 10 minutes long.

    Have you gotten through it yet? Yes? Great. Now go watch it 10 or 15 more times.

    I'm serious. Because that is what it is like trying learn with normal people. I got it the first time it was explained... but the teacher wants to explain it over and over and over and over again so that everyone gets it.

    In 2nd grade I was reading 8-9th grade science books. There were YEARS in elementary school when I did not learn a single thing.

    It kills a persons soul to sit through lectures on things they already know for that long.

    After fighting with teachers to get me into higher level courses, I was finally pulled from school, and was home schooled. I was in 6th grade, and studying junior-level college material.

  39. GATE program? by NinjaTekNeeks · · Score: 1

    "The Gifted and Talented Education (GATE) program, authorized by Education Code (EC) sections 52200-52212 (Outside Source), provides funding for local educational agencies (LEAs) to develop unique education opportunities for high-achieving and underachieving pupils in California public elementary and secondary schools who have been identified as gifted and talented. Special efforts are made to ensure that pupils from economically disadvantaged and varying cultural backgrounds are provided with full participation in these unique opportunities. "

    Source : http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/gt/gt/

  40. Don't look for geniuses by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Look for smart and motivated people who do brilliant and interesting stuff instead. You won't always know who those are at age 9, and who qualifies will change over time as some really bright kids decide to spend their time killing their brain cells while some not-quite-as-bright kids choose to hit the books.

    Slapping the label "genius" on a kid doesn't help them, and arguably stunts their social development. Taking any kid that wants to do something awesome (and reasonably safe) and giving them the help they need to do it helps any kid whether they're a genius or not. If the kid wants to do some science, great! If the kid wants to compete in a chess tournament, great! If the kid wants to play the violin, great! Find a way to make that happen.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  41. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is modern life for the most part. Even in college you have to play the game. For most jobs you have to play the game. In the military you have to play the game. For many social situations you have to play the game. That is part of life.

    It is unrealistic to expect any fix for this in lower grades if it is not fixed at the college level. In college there are endless numbers of brilliant people that would have many ideas on how to address this in college -- but look, there is no fix for above average college students! (except in the rarest of circumstances, of course)

    You don't have to waste your time in class, they can't control your mind. Fill your brain after hours and then you can carry it and re-live it anytime. Your mind can be racing figuring things out while you are waiting for the other students to catch up.

  42. We can't all live in a GATEd community. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/gt/

  43. Re: education vs. learning by JonySuede · · Score: 1

    Aderrall is for poor people, Vyvanse is the fancy stuff and Desoxyn (adderral made of a tenth of the mg but with meth salts instead) is on the rise...

    --
    Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
  44. By looking at by mrmeval · · Score: 1

    the ones getting beaten while the teachers laugh at their little cockmonger bullies antics.

    --
    I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
  45. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was lucky enough to be put into "individual education"-high school here in the Netherlands, which meant you could go through the courses at your own speed. Although the test would normally be done at fixed periods together with the rest of the class you could do them over as you wish. The homework was separated from the tests, although you still had to do the homework.

    Of course I never did the homework and aced all the tests when they were given. My mom took me from school the last two months of the year, and she just made me do all the homework in one go. When I got back to school I handed in stacks of notepads to each of my teachers with all my homework for the year. I believe they were not entirely happy with grading a whole year of homework at the end of a school year.

    It is much easier to scram through a whole year of boring homework in a couple of months than to spread it out over a year.

  46. I look in the mirror! by kawabago · · Score: 0

    duh

  47. It is even worst. by stanlyb · · Score: 1

    The current education systems is not only ignoring the genius, but it is even worst: they are chased, bullied, put in prison, declared state enemy, and in the best case scenario they become just another psycho next your door.

    1. Re:It is even worst. by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      You had a rough life, didn't you?

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    2. Re:It is even worst. by stanlyb · · Score: 1

      Lol, man, thanks, but i am not genius :D

  48. Don't look for MENSA members by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everyone I've known who was in MENSA thought they were much smarter than the rest. And they were always wrong.

  49. Me, obviously by aoeu · · Score: 0

    Look no further. Send money . . .

    --
    All your database are belong to U.S.
  50. Re: education vs. learning by stanlyb · · Score: 1

    Can you tell me the result of 2+2? Is it 4? Really?
    And again.....
    And again.....
    .............
    How many times you need to repeat it until you become mad?

  51. Determination over cognitive abilities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Leonardo da Vinci did not become the genius he was by sitting on his ass. IMO his amazing drive and motivation to explore and produce had a larger impact on his work than his cognitive abilities which I believe is the reasion why he is considered the icon of genious.

  52. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks for making that point, in the way you did. Wow, did I ever hate school. I learned most of the things I needed to know the first time I heard about them; sitting through repetitive lessons and lectures would have damaged my psyche if my teachers hadn't tolerated my reading habit.

    For the last four years of elementary school, I read a novel a day. Junior high was a nightmare, and in high-school I used drugs to cope with the boredom. Somehow, I made it through to college, left with a 3.85 GPA, and returned to school to do real learning (research).

  53. How Do You Spot a Genius? by EvilSS · · Score: 3, Funny

    Well duh! They are they guys wearing the blue shirts behind the bar at the Apple store!

    *ducks for cover*

    --
    I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  54. Maria Montessori by michaelmalak · · Score: 5, Informative

    There was a set of circumstances that allowed Maria Montessori to express her genius. She was born smart and put in the effort == yes, she had those two components -- becoming the first female physician in Italy, and having majored in engineering prior to that.

    But then something happened to propel her into the work for which we know her today.

    She became pregnant -- recall this is circa 1900 Italy -- and the father of her child refused to marry her. So she secretly gave up the child to an orphanage and was heartbroken over missing the child as well as the father of the child, and actually more over the latter. It was at this point that she launched herself into the scientific study of children.

    She loved the study of children and appears nurturing of them in photos, yet her writings speak of the children in a cold and scientific manner. Oh, there is a lot of purpose expressed in her writings, a lot of "this is the future of the world," and "this is how we will achieve world peace," but the day-to-day observations are eerily at arms-length. It is just so natural for the rest of us -- too natural -- to "think of the children" with emotion rather than intellectually and scientifically think of the children. My personal theory is that her mothering nurturing was prematurely ended when she gave her son up for adoption.

    One of her biographers theorizes that the reason she restricted her study of children to those 3 years old and up -- until 50 years into her career when she was 80 years old and relented to creating a toddler program -- was because it would remind her of her son.

    And no one since Maria Montessori seems to have been able to scientifically analyze children and create a resulting pedagogy. Tallying filled scantron bubbles is too narrow -- Maria Montessori was able to observe motion, behavior, and motivation. And other pedagogies are derived from preconceived notions, much as pre-Renaissance "physics" was.

  55. Re:Start by looking somewhere other than slashdot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't look anywhere there are many people. Big minds tend to need a lot of space.

  56. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Nothing like an article about "geniuses" to bring out people who believe they're "geniuses" on the internet. IQ means very little to true intelligence.

  57. No one understands my genius by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

    Calvin: I tell you, Hobbes, no one understands my genius.
    Hobbes: How did you get downstairs with both legs in one pant leg?
    Calvin: I fell down a lot. Why?

  58. Not how you'd expect (i.e. not likely a prodigy) by divisionbyzero · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Believe it or not there are thousands of people we'd call prodigies... and not many of them ever become geniuses. And conversely not every genius is a prodigy. As the article says it's a combination of determination and above average intellect. Obviously that doesn't have the sizzle and flash of a Good Will Hunting but seems to be accurate. I think the article is a little over the top in emphasizing the eccentric aspects though. Everyone wants to ascribe a little madness to genius but I think it's more a matter of communication being difficult due to a vast gap between the way they see the world and the way everyone else does. The real geniuses are able to bridge that gap.

  59. I got a good ba ba brain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=U-n_zk7e0ZU#t=40s

  60. Exactly what I was going to say by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

    Great minds think alike.

    1. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by slick7 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Great minds think alike.

      If this is true, then what about the abilities of magnets, where like poles repel and opposite poles attract?
      Also, the educational system of the sixties ensure people that excelled, but didn't have the financial wherewith-all. were made to conform to a lower standard just to make them like everybody else. I still haven't conformed and have no intentions of doing so. Mensa is a joke. you have to pay a fee for like-minded people to stroke your ego, whoopee. Everything I have become I did out of sheer cussedness. I have a long way to go and I cannot and do not expect assistance. Every time I ask for help I have my ass handed to me. Oh well. I have come to the thinking that only small steps, under the radar, so to speak with my own money is the only way. Striving for notoriety, money, degrees are for lamers. True genius looks at the long term without compensation, for the good of the greater populace. Tesla was screwed by big money and mediocre people like Morgan, Edison (a real hack). It's the little man with too much money and too few morals that really shit in the punch bowl.

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    2. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So... you're a self-diagnosed genius who hasn't achieved anything of note. You may have aspergers!

    3. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by davester666 · · Score: 1

      Obviously, you don't think like anybody else.

      Therefore, you don't have a great mind.

      QED

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    4. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by dcollins117 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Great minds think alike.

      If this is true, then what about the abilities of magnets, where like poles repel and opposite poles attract?.

      Well, you see, magnets can't think. If this analogy is an example of your "brilliance" then count me as a skeptic.

    5. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by Kim0 · · Score: 1

      Magnets are not minds.

    6. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Duh, your puny little mind never heard of electromagnetics? Must everything be spoonfed to you?

    7. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

      Great minds think alike.

      Fools seldom differ.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    8. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Great minds think alike.

      If this is true, then what about the abilities of magnets, where like poles repel and opposite poles attract?

      While a magnet might indeed be considered to have a mind on the account that it perceives and reacts to something (magnetic field), that mind can hardly be called "great".

      BTW, I kinda like the idea of viewing sentience as a continuum rather than an on/off thing - from subatomic particles to atoms to molecules to single-celled organisms to insects to humans there's a gradually increasing complexity of behaviour and thus sentience rather than a sudden cutoff point. It avoids a lot of problems in both biology (who was the first sentient human being?) and AI (what problems should an AI be able to solve to be considered "strong"?) and avoids magical thinking (such as the persistent attempts to "explain" human mind with quantum mysticism).

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    9. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yikes.

      Genius may spring from love and curiosity, but notoriety and compensation are unrelated. There have been plenty of geniuses that were virtually unknown, well known by accident, or borderline obsessed with notoriety. Some were poor, some comfortable, some wealthy. I know we all like to think of genius through Star Trek glasses, but that's inconsistent with reality.

      And by the way, Mensa membership is something like $63, and nobody claims it makes you a genius... a high IQ is just a requirement for membership. People pay far more than that in dues to join clubs with far more bizarre criteria. While I sincerely doubt I'd qualify, I know better than to pass judgement on a person or group based on whether or not they have annual dues.

    10. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

      You obviously don't speak EMF.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    11. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by Jmc23 · · Score: 1
      Are you sure? What if minds are magnets? If you move past the maya of the physical world and see everything as fluctuating fields of energy, then what?

      If humans as collections of emf's evolved in emf's do you not suppose there might have been some evolutionary advantage to detecting emfs? Well, in fact we did. The next question would be what kinds? Have higher functions such as speech and vision drowned out more subtle tools?

      Science is quickly finding out that we can to some extent decode and match up brain emfs. Certain thought processes, even pictures as dreams just posted, generate certain emf patterns. So people that think similarly will actually produce similar fields. Is it possible that humans are subliminally aware of this?

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    12. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by slick7 · · Score: 1

      Great minds think alike.

      If this is true, then what about the abilities of magnets, where like poles repel and opposite poles attract?.

      Well, you see, magnets can't think. If this analogy is an example of your "brilliance" then count me as a skeptic.

      If it were not for magnetic fields, would you be able to think?

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    13. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by slick7 · · Score: 1

      Obviously, you don't think like anybody else.

      Nobody thinks like anyone else. There may be similarities, but that's as close as it gets.

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    14. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by slick7 · · Score: 1

      You obviously don't speak EMF.

      CEMF!

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    15. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by slick7 · · Score: 1

      Magnets are not minds.

      But are minds magnetic?

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    16. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by slick7 · · Score: 1

      Analog vs. digital

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    17. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by slick7 · · Score: 1

      No.

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    18. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by slick7 · · Score: 1

      No, no.

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    19. Re:Exactly what I was going to say by GrantRobertson · · Score: 1

      If it were not for magnetic fields, would you be able to think?

      Actually, yes. But not without electrostatic fields.

  61. This article doesnt cover the full spectrum by Osgeld · · Score: 1

    only the Steve Jobs / Mark Zuckerberg "rock star" types whom turned their talent for being ruthless pricks into piles of money

    1. Re:This article doesnt cover the full spectrum by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      ...and what those guys pulled of doesn't require genius, just a complete lack of morality.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    2. Re:This article doesnt cover the full spectrum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep telling yourself this, and keep patting yourself on the back for not being "immoral" or what the fuck ever, while Steve Jobs' name lives on and yours fades into obscurity. Hope it makes you feel better.

  62. that and Iraq are GWB's legacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Iraq and No Child Left Behind, the two things George W Bush will be remembered for. I'm glad I graduated before No Child Left Behind came to fruition.

    1. Re:that and Iraq are GWB's legacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No Child Left Behind isn't the only problem with the public education system. The public education system has been flawed... since forever, actually. Sure, it might have been slightly better in the past, but it has always been boring, less effective than it could be, and soul crushing.

  63. It's the ears. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Studies have shown that ear-length is directly proportional to genius.

    Now if you bookahs will excuse me, I have research to get back to.

  64. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Eh, yes, maybe...145 IQ, so I guess you are more genius than I. Sure I got picked on...worst was when 2nd grade teacher in public school whacked me for asking too many questions. Left marks on my face where she slapped me..the nails dragged a bit. So my Mom went back to work full time so we could afford private elementary school. SATs 797 and 800. Half a dozen "Achievements" in the 800s. Out of 12 in my class, 3 to Yale, 2 to Harvard, 1 to Cornell, 1 to Princeton. We even had teachers thanking us at the end of a year because we were such fun to teach, even the one I used to correct regularly for mis-remembering something in the text..

    Contribution to society? Have helped a couple of dozen small businesses break the million dollar barrier.

    I'm still learning and grooving on it. That's what matters.

  65. what is "True" intelligence? by mbkennel · · Score: 3, Interesting

    IQ or psychometric 'g' means something specific and robust: that within a single person the performance on some categories of cognitive skills (and other even low level neurological tests) are quite correlated with the performance of other cognitive skills. Think of a test with dozens of subscores, each with one kind of problem.

    Why is it that people who are good at word analogies somehow are also good at number sequences? No a priori reason, but it's true. Which is why the common human experience for thousands of years is that some people are smart and others are dumb.

    Clearly this correlation does not extend as strongly or at all (barring major developmental defects) to other tasks which certainly involve neurological capability, such as catching a ball, recognizing faces rapidly, recognizing emotions in faces, tapping rhythm accurately, or seducing women.

  66. Re:Not how you'd expect (i.e. not likely a prodigy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Genetic Studies of Genius project has been going on since 1921 and has pretty much proved children with genius level IQs rarely turn out any better.

    [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_Studies_of_Genius[/url]

  67. Re: education vs. learning by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

    Well, I did just the amount of homework required to have a passing grade, and compensated it on the exams. (That's for the homework that counted toward my grades, the rest I just ignored and took the respective warnings.)

    But then, I was wrong in doing that. Every great thing you may want to do requires huge amounts of mindblowing boring work, and doing boring work is moething that we learn, it's not inate. I could have learned it by the time I was at school, but passed the chance.

  68. Two criteria: by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    1. Look like a dweeb
    2. Have a super hot girlfriend

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  69. I fit where I sit. by TapeCutter · · Score: 3, Insightful

    People can control your emotions only as much as you allow them to. Don't give them that power!

    Thanks for posting something intelligent. Post after post from self proclaimed geniuses who couldn't work out how to amuse themselves at school were starting to bore me. And yeah, everyone is forced into a situations where they are powerless to one degree or another, working through that takes more than intelligence, it takes 'character'. Newton is recognized as one of the greatest polymaths of all time, but I've read two biographies on the guy and (unlike Eisenstein, Feynman, Sagan,...) his social skills were as sharp as Sheldon's.

    At the end of the day intelligence is contextual, a genius in the lab is very different to a genius in the boxing ring. Muhammad Ali, Voltaire, Sun Tsu, Mozart - all geniuses, the only thing they have in common is they extend their chosen art, rather than just practiced it to the best of their ability. However being a genius in one context often comes at the cost of being a complete moron when the context changes, eg: from a warm basement full of wizz-kid toys to a cold class room full of other children.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    1. Re:I fit where I sit. by SternisheFan · · Score: 2
      When people say to me, "He/she made me feel bad", I say to them,"No, you 'allowed' them to make you feel bad.". If you let what someone says to you determine your mood for the rest of the day or longer, then you're letting them rule you and control your emotions. And if that is happening, then you are their fool, and I choose not to be anyone's fool in life.

      When someone tries to use anger as a bully tactic on me, I recognize it right away (practice makes perfect), and I think how glad I am that I'm not 'that' a%#*ole. Then I'll try to shake them off like a dog shakes off a flea, and go on with my day. If after a while they think they can keep up with their bad behaviorr, then I have to stop and call them on it and scold them, explaining to them, sometimes with a raised voice, that they have no right to speak to me that way and tone. "I didn't give you that right, I don't speak to you that way, and I expect common courtesy in return" They'll probably glare at you, (so what?), then stomp off not knowing how to reply. If you can, do this when alone with the person, it's between you and him really, but with spectators works good too. :-)

    2. Re:I fit where I sit. by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      So, what are you advocating? When the teacher makes a kid do pointless homework they should refuse to do so, and then if the teacher gives them a failing grade find some way to effectively coerce the teacher into changing their behavior as any unpassionate psychopath would?

      Sure, you get to choose your attitude, but that doesn't change the fact that a kid is forced to sit for six hours a day in pointless lessons.

  70. Maybe by notdotcom.com · · Score: 1

    Maybe we don't want to be "spotted". Er, I mean "Maybe THEY don't want to be spotted".

    --
    Grandpa: My Homer is not a communist. He may be a liar, a pig, an idiot, a communist, but he is not a porn star.
    1. Re:Maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One also has to consider that some people are geniuses at slacking. They may actually be pretty damn smart compared to the average person, but they're not going to show much because that means more damn work.

      More or less, laziness tends to work as an effective scabbard for those who would otherwise wield a sharp and possibly dangerous mind.

      The only time such geniuses are found out is if they find some intellectual or technical pursuit intriguing/entertaining enough to have as a hobby. Even then they still tend to fly below the radar. The internet only serves to make that easier because such geniuses can give advice to others which will serve to point them in the right direction. In turn the slacker-genius may end up not taking any credit, but stay true to the slacker-genius nature of not doing much of the work either. (As long as the desired end results are obtained, such as useful features in open source software, that's all that matters.)

    2. Re:Maybe by russotto · · Score: 1

      The internet only serves to make that easier because such geniuses can give advice to others which will serve to point them in the right direction. In turn the slacker-genius may end up not taking any credit, but stay true to the slacker-genius nature of not doing much of the work either.

      If they'd just take the credit, they wouldn't be decried as slackers but hailed as leaders.

    3. Re:Maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WE....are....the 47%
      WE....are....the 47%

  71. Yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is amazing how many people with humble IQs point that out.

  72. Ask them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pretty easy, ask them if they are. If they believe they are then they probably aren't.

  73. Over-rated by onyxruby · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Genius is an accident of birth, and true genius can be as crippling as any mental health disorder you can think of. It means flunking out of school easily or being tested for things like ADD only to discover that you were merely bored. It can make a job that isn't challenging a living hell as your mind simply can't cope with the monotony.

    Genius level intelligence means a life of being shunned by school mates and later co-workers if you aren't careful to mask your intelligence. It creates a lot of social problems and can really hurt dating until you get really good at masking it. Genius is over-rated by those who lack it and rarely appreciated by those who have it. The most important skill a genius has to learn is how to mask their intelligence, so that those around them don't consider them to a 'genius'. Kind of sad when you think about it.

    If you have a genius level child, the most important thing you can do for them is help them to develop their social skills, it will be their greatest challenge.

    1. Re:Over-rated by volmtech · · Score: 1

      If your children are very bright with no social skills, chances are that's the way you are to. If you don't have social skills how can you help them? The only reason I was able to have children was their future mother had enough social skills to ask me out. My children aren't geniuses but one has a PhD and the other a law degree.

    2. Re:Over-rated by onyxruby · · Score: 1

      Excellent question, and I think you have a really good point. The best thing I can think of is to try exposing your kids to other kids early and often to things like sports and other organized activities. Like any activity, if your child practices something from a very young age social skills will become better. Remember if they are geniuses that the intelligence based attributes will come out regardless.

    3. Re:Over-rated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have a genius level child, the most important thing you can do for them is help them to develop their social skills, it will be their greatest challenge.

      Yes, but for the love of all that is good, do not turn this into a bat to beat the child with, talking about how emotional intelligence quotient is more important than IQ in a way suggesting that the child's own interests (quantum physics or whatever) are sub-standard. Don't turn being social into a chore that is actually a euphemism for spending time with people that the child wants no connection to. Encourage activities that oh-by-the-way happen to be social, don't belittle the child for wanting to do something else. The worst thing you can do is frame being social as something external that is imposed on the child rather than as a natural self-directed motivation that comes from inside the child. Genius level children don't have an inherent deficiency in social skills anyway, what they usually have is a lack of peers and ready availability of something very interesting that involves no other people and is encouraged by the power structure like their parents. No child is likely to develop social skills to a normal level under those circumstances.

    4. Re:Over-rated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you - that's exactly what we're doing. Mine taught himself to read and write before age 3, but didn't interact well. Many years were spent focusing on exactly that - now he more or lives on the sports field, being seriously good in 2 of the 3 sports he plays, scares the crap out of people when he plays xbox and is doing extremely well at school.

      I doubt he'd be doing so well if we had not focused on improving his interaction because it enables the most important thing of all: he's happy.

      Which is the most important thing in the world.

      For reference, I'm in the top 1% but totally hopeless at deeper social interaction. I don't, however, consider myself a "genius" - I don't have that type of ego. I'm just happy I can often see a solution where others are stumped, but to me that has more a basis in the wider base of knowledge I have, not because I happen to be a bit brighter. Accounting, for instance, still stumps me completely :)

    5. Re:Over-rated by volmtech · · Score: 1

      The trouble is most geeky kids are not athletic and get bullied for being inept. With determination, and a few karate lessons, that can be overcome. As an adult you can socialize with your equals life is fun again.

    6. Re:Over-rated by onyxruby · · Score: 1

      Agreed, and as you said the kids tend to inherit traits of their parents. When the parents grew up as geeks it's hard for them to see value in sports or similar activities. The result is that geeks often raise geeks and trends like bullying can continue through the generations. It's critical to disrupt the trend of a lack of social skills, and that is what I was trying to make my point on.

      Put a kid in athletic activities (karate, soccer etc) from an early age, let them pick what they like and they will get athleticism simply through exposure. The hard part is getting a parent who doesn't see value in sports to be willing to put value in sports for their kids.

    7. Re:Over-rated by gizmod · · Score: 1

      If your children excel academically in any way I would say that helping them develop socially is your greatest challenge. Most intellectuals, genius or not, really struggle with that facet of life. I know I did. I'm not saying I'm really smart of by any means a genius or something, I'm just saying that I was one of those nerdy kids that really *loved* math and science and was largely ostracized by most kids because of it.

    8. Re:Over-rated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Masking your intelligence is sure to be taxing, and to breed cynicism and contempt, which I believe I detect in what you've written. You have to develop emotional intelligence in equal proportion to intellectual intelligence. The right thing to do it is to cultivate empathy, patience, and humility, and never apologize for or try to hide your intelligence. In my experience, this gets you worshipped instead of shunned, miraculously enough.

    9. Re:Over-rated by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

      Seems like the current generation of geeks is more and more into staying in shape after discovering it in early adulthood. Hopefully we produce more children who are better rounded.

  74. Here's how to spot a genius today: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    He's the guy who can't see the TV screen, because the book he's reading is in the way.

  75. genius isn't disadvantaged, unfortunately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There has intermittently been funding for gifted children in school, but these days, in California, it's like $20-50 per gifted student per year. The problem is that funding for groups which have some aspect that adversely affects them is easier to sell, politically. That is, remedial classes are easier to sell than enrichment classes for gifted students.

    Frankly, most people thing that gifted children already have an advantage, and the last thing they need is extra help. (the word "gifted" after all doesn't exactly cause tears to rise about oh, those poor disadvantaged children).

  76. You shouldn't hold students back, but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Students that are excelling in particular subjects don't need any special extra nurturing, they can develop on their own. I really didn't enjoy being given special assignments in school, I didn't mind the work but it makes you an oddball. You don't want to be an oddball when you're 10.
    This is all bullshit, just focus on the kids having trouble.

  77. Various ways to spot a genius by NikeHerc · · Score: 1

    Paint, magic marker, or my personal favorite: dog poop saturated with indelible ink.

    --
    Circle the wagons and fire inward. Entropy increases without bounds.
  78. Re:We Geniusess by camperdave · · Score: 1

    You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on.

    That would make a great sig.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  79. Re: education vs. learning by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

    and serves no useful purpose if you're smart enough to just listen to the lecture and then ace the test.

    Actually, it doesn't serve any useful purpose under any circumstances.

    --
    Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  80. Re: education vs. learning by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

    Every great thing you may want to do requires huge amounts of mindblowing boring work, and doing boring work is moething that we learn, it's not inate.

    Right, so let's just force kids to watch paint dry and record its progress. Not only is it still a waste of time, but it would keep kids from actually learning anything useful!

    --
    Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  81. Re: education vs. learning by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

    He probably would have wasted less time and learned more. Of course, any excuse to keep the awful public education system as it is is sufficient...

    --
    Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  82. Spot a real genius? by Culture20 · · Score: 1

    Stay awake at night in your dorm room bed. He might enter or leave your closet, leaving no trace. That's when you know you have a Real Genius.

    1. Re:Spot a real genius? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, look for people who win a large percentage of the prizes in a sweepstakes with no limit on the number of entries. After all, geniuses have certain material needs, too.

  83. This is just some blogger by Animats · · Score: 1

    The article is the personal blog of an editor at Scientific American. Not, as we say on Wikipedia, a reliable source.

  84. Re: education vs. learning by sjames · · Score: 1

    Take any group of adults with normal intelligence and conscript them into a 'school' where they must circle the shape that doesn't belong over and over. Nothing complicated, just Sesame Street level. Make it clear that it isn't going to change for the next 12 years. They'll score perfectly for a short while but will likely start not turning in their work, doodling on the tests, and just circling random shapes soon enough.

    If any are still doing 'OK' after a year, tell them they're 'gifted'. Their 'gift' is double the number of worksheets, naturally. See how well that de-motivates them.

  85. Re: education vs. learning by sjames · · Score: 1

    Yep, pump enough meth into them and you can have then knick-knacking with the rest of the class in no time.

  86. A different point of view by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps genius and/or intelligence can be nurtured:

    When my wife was in elementary school, and she was selected to be in an advanced "gifted" type of program, one of the schools participating inadvertently reversed the rating scale for all of the kids testing. In other words, they sent the kids who tested lowest, instead of highest.
    They struggled at first, but quickly came up to a similar level of performance as the rest of the group. It could be because of the way they were treated, etc.

    This wasn't one of those fluff "gifted" bullshit programs (I had some of that when I was younger), but seemed to be one that really pushed kids to excel.

    Just my two cents...

  87. Troglodytes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Giftedness in what? In school subjects? There are other forms of giftedness than giftedness in science. We have to remember that reading, books and school are quite new inventions and science is also a quite new invention. What was giftedness before modernity? I think gifted programs select people who are good at some thing, but no one can be good at everything (a strength is also a weakness). For example, if someone is good at physics, he or she might lack social skills and other skills in life, such as taking care of hygiene, and encouraging people to concentrate on one narrow subject on the expense of more well-rounded development is sick. Are we trying to develop people into some kind of one-sided specialists who do not understand the whole or be able to function in society?

  88. No need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's good to motivate children of all levels in school.

    However, there's no need to "spot geniuses." Society doesn't have a specific need for geniuses. They don't need to be groomed, celebrated, worshipped and sacrificed. The sciences, culture and economy fare perfectly well without dedicated genius programs.

    The school system should concentrate on bringing up ~100% of the citizens to the level of educated voters with skills useful in the economy. That's more important to a nation than winning Nobel prizes every year.

  89. Personal evaluation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    - High intelligence. Check
    - Socially awkward. Check
    - Opportunity. Check
    - Thinks differently. Check
    - Effort. ....

    Bummer. Guess I'm not a genius. I'm waaay too lazy.

  90. Genius by Yogiz · · Score: 1

    “Some men come by the name of genius in the same way as an insect comes by the name of centipede - not because it has a hundred feet, but because most people can't count above fourteen”

    1. Re:Genius by cheros · · Score: 1

      That is a truly epic quote.

      Thanks, from definitely-not-a-genius-before-coffee :)

      --
      Insert .sig here. Send no money now. Owner may sue, contents will settle. Batteries not included.
  91. Re: education vs. learning by shiftless · · Score: 1

    I've heard numerous variations of this by parents trying to justify why their precious snowflake doesn't do well in school. Usually it is the teacher's fault

    Agreed.

  92. Re: education vs. learning by shiftless · · Score: 1

    This is modern life for the most part. Even in college you have to play the game. For most jobs you have to play the game. In the military you have to play the game. For many social situations you have to play the game. That is part of life.

    No, that's your life. Stop projecting. I am self employed and I do what I want. I hope you're content with your fucked up authoritarian "educational" system and your life of corporate slavery.

  93. Re: education vs. learning by shiftless · · Score: 1

    Well, I did just the amount of homework required to have a passing grade, and compensated it on the exams. (That's for the homework that counted toward my grades, the rest I just ignored and took the respective warnings.)

    I didn't do any of it.

    But then, I was wrong in doing that.

    No you weren't.

    Every great thing you may want to do requires huge amounts of mindblowing boring work, and doing boring work is moething that we learn, it's not inate. I could have learned it by the time I was at school, but passed the chance.

    "Doing necessary boring work" is not a skill that homework teaches you. If anything it just wastes your time you could have spent doing something more productive. If you can ace the test and understand the subject without doing any homework, then homework is a waste of time. I fail how to see completing some mind numbing work forced on you by a third party makes you a more driven or better person. If anything you are only training yourself to obey orders. How are you going to prosper in a business of your own, making your own decisions, if all you know how to do is meekly cow to authority and wait for orders from the boss?

  94. Re: education vs. learning by shiftless · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You're a fucking moron.

    Like the GP I'm also a genius (IQ 130+) and I had the exact same experience growing up in school. I never took notes and I never did homework, in school and in the university classes I took. I can skip half the class and still ace every test. I remember every school year being the exact same goddamn thing; 4th grade math? 5th grade math? 6th grade math? All teaching the same shit, over and over and over and over. Of course through all this we never made it even halfway through any of our textbooks, let alone finished one; how can you finish a textbook when you have to read and learn from it at the rate of the slowest and dumbest person in a 30 person class?

    I know exactly where he's coming from. In 6th grade I was reading multiple novels a week and had a college reading level. I know exactly what it's like to sit in a classroom while the class slowly, haltingly stumbles, one student at a time down each row, through reading one paragraph at a time from the textbook aloud to the class. I'm lost in the book, reading 7-8 chapters ahead as usual, so of course when the teacher gets to me and I "don't know my place", I get in trouble. So then I had to learn the skill of covertly reading ahead but still keeping track of the classroom's progress so I didn't get in trouble.

    Obviously you don't have the first fucking clue about anything, so why you bothered commenting here is a mystery to me. If you just wanted to stroke your ego by poo-poo'ing on the GP's claim of genius, then you should have at least attached your name to the comment so we could all know who you are and how smart and brilliant you must have been to make that observation!

  95. Insecurity by shiftless · · Score: 1

    In the flesh

  96. You sound like me by shiftless · · Score: 1

    Your boss isn't a psychopath, he's just an asshole. I'm kinda the same way as you may be, in that I always show up to places exactly on time or 5 minutes late; can't be bothered to be early, for some odd reason, which later in life I found out is because I have a deep seating revulsion to wasting time, as well as a strong need to be independent. It always mystified me why stupid ass bosses would go SO FUCKING UPTIGHT AND MAD about somebody being a few minutes late, when that person is the most valuable member of your time who (as you said) stays late and fixes problems. Some people are just way, way too married to routine and schedules. Fuck that shit. Self employment is the only possibility for me. Maybe you are the same way.

    1. Re:You sound like me by shiftless · · Score: 1

      Grammar fail. Slashdot can you add an edit button already? Jesus

  97. I do not think it means what you think it means by shiftless · · Score: 1

    The word "sociopath." I wish clueless people would stop using this word to describe every single person they don't like or understand. This seems to be a slashdot-specific phenomenon for some reason. Some guy is successful, or an asshole? WHY, he must be a SOCIOPATH! Fucking idiots.

  98. Schools? by pubwvj · · Score: 1

    "Our schools devote few resources on nurturing nascent genius"

    No... Our schools work to actively suppress the gifted, the intelligent, the geniuses. Public school in particular is about warehousing and assembly line instructing children to be cogs in the machine. The highly intelligent and highly creative are a problem for them. The best and the brightest don't fit well in square holes so they are trimmed, squashed and reshaped in the form of mediocrity to fit society's needs.

    The best thing you can do for your children is to not send them to school but to homeschool them so they will have a chance of meeting their full potential.

  99. Re:Not how you'd expect (i.e. not likely a prodigy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rarely? You meant "often." Yes, there is a positive correlation between increased IQ and "achievement" in life, up to a certain point.

  100. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm an actual genius - 146 IQ. You have no idea what you're talking about.

    Your boasting about some IQ test tells me that you're actually not so smart. And genius is something entirely different. High IQ doesn't mean genius.

  101. Re: education vs. learning by MickLinux · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Without that repetitive, mind-numbing homework, you can't just breeze through the tests. One of the huge problems I had with our kid's public school, is that they spent most of the time [literally] training for test-taking, and very little practicing the basic math they were learning. As a result, the teachers were saying that our son was one of their best sutudents, and was just a little slow on the tests, but it's okay because he got good grades, and Algebra (or geometry) should be no problem.

    He couldn't add 8+7 except on his fingers.

    My fix? I said that when he comes home, he is *first* responsible for doing an hour of that repetitive, mind-numbing math addition problems, until he could get the 60 3-digit addition test in 150 seconds (as specified by the book we have).

    Once he got that, then he could go on in the book. He does those repetitive mind-numbing practice problems until he gets the answers perfectly.

    Then he goes on.

    At some point, he's going to speed up, because he has truly mastered the previous topics. Well, he already has.

    He's also then responsible for an hour of active play. After that, comes homework. If he gets it, fine and well. If he doesn't, so be it. But I am just about done with caring about how well he learns nth degree metephysical imaginary-world architecture (or how he does on his 20th autobiographical display board).

    Maybe next time he does the autobiographical display board, he can show two addition problems: one the left, 3+5 =6 (more or less). On the right, 3+5=8. In the middle, can be written " ... lots of pointless mind-numbing drill ... "

    --
    Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
  102. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is correct. My IQ was 183. I am posting AC because I think that IQ-baiting is ridiculous.

      What IQ is *supposed* to measure is how quickly you learn. What it actually measures is (1) reading ability (2) certain spatial abilities (3) when you took the test. (4) whether you have an older brother who has taught you a lot of what he learned, ahead of time (5) game-translation ability and game-playing ability. I was tested in 3rd grade. Take a test earlier, and high IQs (>100) go falsely higher. Take a test late, and low IQs go falsely lower.

    A high IQ means that, yes, you probably have some innate ability. Normalized to a single age (which IQ does not do well), then having a number higher by 30-50 points or lower by 30-50 points probably means ...

    ... something.

    I'm just not sure what.

    And no, I have nothing to do with mensa, and never will.

  103. More nonsense by Sqreater · · Score: 1

    "Offering a greater variety of enrichment activities to children will cause many more hidden talents to surface. And accelerated classes and psychological coaching are essential for nurturing talent as early and vigorously as possible."

    All this will do is interfere with true genius. Subgeniuses creating programs for true geniuses will develop all kinds of ways to delay and deflect true geniuses. Genius finds its own way. It needs self-focus. It needs time. Most of all, it needs free time and even boredom to create the mental paths that lead it naturally to creative results. Genius is born with a "thought vector." It does what it does; it thinks what it thinks because it must. True genius also needs adversity. Making it easy for it deprives it of the fight it needs to energize itself. In short: leave it alone. All that can be accomplished with programs is to encourage the excellent mediocrity of mere talent while destroying the true genius with too much structure.

    --
    E Proelio Veritas.
  104. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Indeed. It's hard to say what my IQ is precisely, but when I've been tested it was 142. The reason it's questionable is that I have learning disorders and a radically different arrangement of neurons from most other people.

    But anyways, the things that IQ represent are valuable, but as you note they're hardly the only things necessary to contribute immensely to society. If you don't have the organization, focus and drive to use it, then you might as well be a moron because you're not likely to ever achieve much.

    And yeah, when I look at the things that I've achieved through things that my IQ measures and the things that I've achieved due to the excessive flexibility in my brain, and the things that come from hard work, it's more significant the further you get in the list. I actually think I'd accomplish more with a lower IQ and less need to seek new areas to test my brain.

  105. First step toward spotting genius by hessian · · Score: 1

    Separate "what is considered genius" from "what is genius."

  106. Need to train teachers to spot giftedness? They do by D4C5CE · · Score: 1

    We need to train teachers to spot giftedness

    ...and many then play whack-a-mole on the gifted, to hammer any outstanding heads back into a "standard", "average" lower-level line.
    Some will even encourage/solicit/welcome the bullies' help to this "noble egalitarian end"...

  107. I'm no genius (130-135 IQ on tests) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    However, for those here that feel they are, I have 1 important question:

    WHAT HAVE YOU DONE WITH IT?

    (As that is one of the most important results of this alleged "genius" those of you here MAY indeed, possess...)

    * The MAIN REASON I ask, is that I've been exposed to literal geniuses with great potential AND 150++ IQ's over time in both academia, and in the professional working world as a computer programmer (mostly that, sometimes doing administration of networks too) however - funny part here? Well - Only some of them actually did anything noteworthy in the end... (yes, the "game isn't over yet" for us, but my point still stands).

    E.G.-> 1 example & a good pal of mine from my academia experience (2 degrees, 1 straight CSC @ AAS level (90/120 credits into finishing it for B.S. eventually when I have time & money of course), even won an EMMY award of all things for designing a set-top T.V. gaming console for an ISP (for example, of 1 of them that did something unusual, crossing "boundaries & genres" in fact!).

    He is/was one hell of an exception & was SO smart, lol, in a 'clever "criminal" kind of way', to bill that company $150/hr. & then hire on Russians he knew for only $5/hr. (or some ridiculously LOW figure) overseas, & to pocket the rest + CONSISTENTLY come in under budget on projects too... he made V.P., really fast, and I am FAIRLY SURE he's a millionaire from it also.

    Others, didn't...

    ---

    Which told me that without drive & motivation + hard work, all the intelligence in the world doesn't make a difference...

    ---

    E.G.-> 1 fellow on this page had me curious on this note actually more than anyone:

    http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3197707&cid=41710707

    Again/after all - I'm no genius, and can make the SAME CLAIMS he did (and more), like being a lettering athlete thru highschool AND college in the NCAA in the sport of Lacrosse too (1985 letter "K" here -> http://www.lemoynedolphins.com/sports/mlax/history/mlaxletterwinners in the 18th best school of its kind (not that I believe in ratings like the ones that are given) -> http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/le-moyne-college-2748 ) and, more importantly, being able to SHOW something I claimed, not merely just stating it. Anyone can do that.

    However, I figured I'd address the REST of the "geniuses" in here on this very note... just to see the results! Why?

    Simple: ALL THE "BRAINS" IN THE WORLD ARE WORTH SQUAT IF YOU DON'T USE THEM TO YOUR FULLEST POSSIBLE POTENTIAL, & that means hard work...

    ---

    Edison said it best:

    "Genius is 1% inspiration, & 99% perspiration"

    ---

    (He was totally correct... otherwise, the "gift" is wasted!)

    APK

    P.S.=> And, yes - I've done a few "cool things" over time in the computer sciences arena - quite a lot in freeware & shareware too, some becoming parts of commercially sold products by certified MS partners that also did VERY WELL in publication review (Windows IT Pro magazine) & 2 yrs.-in-a-row @ MS Tech Ed 2000-2002 in its hardest category, SQLServer Performance Enhancement (mostly in the way of information systems since they're the most prevalent form of work out there imo & experience since 1994-1995 professionally) & again, no "genius" here - though I enjoy coding & creating things for people to empower them & make THEM stronger? I am not a "natural" @ it, it can be work @ times... apk

    1. Re:I'm no genius (130-135 IQ on tests) by shiftless · · Score: 1

      I read your comments here and on your reply to my post and I agree with your thoughts. I haven't done anything particularly extraordinary with my life just yet, but it's still early in the race and now I feel more than ever like I am on the right track. I am in my late 20s now and I have spent the last ~5 years basically reforming and improving my mind, body, and thoughts in various ways, as well as working to develop several profitable (potentially quite lucrative) lines of business. I feel like with any kind of real help or guidance in life I could have been a millionaire many times over already, but due to having to stumble through life practically on my own in a lot of ways, and learning the hard way, it has taken me longer to get things turned around and situated and on track for success. The way things are moving now I expect to be a multi-millionaire within 5 years, 10 tops. All this is big talk now of course but watch and see.

      Of course one can't post about being smart or successful on slashdot without insecure dweebs crawling out of the woodwork to tear someone down and point out how much better or smarter they are. And of course when I said my IQ is around 135 in the other post, I got the stereotypical snobby pedants chiming in to retort that genius only starts at 150, or some other pedantry. Well I don't really know what my actual IQ score is, if there is such a thing; that number is only an estimate based on one test, and I'm sure I could raise it higher if I spent the slightest amount of time doing or practicing the type of crazy visual problems on that test. All I know is, I've spent my entire life almost always being the smartest person in the room, intutively and easily understanding and envisioning things 30% of people probably will never understand no matter how hard they try. Can you call that a genius?

      I don't know, and I truly don't give a fuck, because I'm not some dweeb trying to join MENSA so he can compare his mental penis to other dickwads who have no lives. All that matters in the real world (and to me) are results. That is the true definition of success. Like Malcolm Gladwell said, higher IQ is an advantage to a certain point but beyond that, what good is having an IQ of 180 if you have zero social skills, no business sense, no financial intelligence, and only a narrow range of knowledge on obscure topics?

  108. A QUESTION FOR YOU... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3197707&cid=41714569

    APK

    P.S.=> Thanks for showing up & MAINLY because in YOUR case? I am geniunely curious as to what you meant here:

    "Odds are, I designed something, somewhere, in a machine that almost everyone here or their relatives have been in." - by Grog6 (85859) on Friday October 19, @06:25PM (#41710707)

    Same here (one of around 30 "industrial strength"/"mission critical"/"enterprise class" information systems I've designed & built professionally since 1995 that span millions of lines with MANY "moving parts" since they're worldwide distributed client-server systems)... ever been to:

    ---

    1.) Boston Market
    2.) Burger King
    3.) McDonalds

    ---

    ?

    I built parts of their "bumpbar" system for kitchen personnel, as well as the portion that talks back & forth to "HQ" for franchise promotional info. & more, as well as financials... worldwide across 1,000's of their stores.

    So, thus, I am mostly just curious what you meant when you said what I quoted of you above! The reason I ask is simple: You can have all the brains in the world, but without motivation? They're nothing & wasted...

    ... apk

  109. Easy by slapout · · Score: 1

    Make him wear polka dots.

    --
    Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
  110. How do I spot a genius? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q: How do I spot a genius?

    A: With a sharpie. Poke. Poke. Poke.

  111. Hard work trumps "genius" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone with less ability and more work ethic can do more than a "genius" every time.

  112. Unfortunate inevitability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like others here, I'm gifted. I won't throw numbers around, but I scored perfectly on the Mega and Titan tests. I don't think they test high range intelligence as well as their proponents think they do and no one on Earth has an IQ of 190 or higher. End of discussion on that unless you have found a basic flaw in statistics and care to share it with the world.

    I figured out pretty early that academia wasn't for me. There was an intelligence range, significantly beneath mine, that excelled in an academic environment. I eventually decided it was a heartless bureaucracy and not worth my time.

    I also learned that there isn't a strong correlation between financial success and intelligence.

    Since then I've spent my time thinking, reading, and writing. It gives me more pleasure than I could ever gain through acquisition of a piece of paper proving I was willing to slow myself down and load myself with debt so I could have my lessers carry on about things they didn't really understand.

    It's not the place of the education system to accommodate people like me. How can they? They're much less intelligent than me. Even all of it taken as a single entity, they are much less intelligent than me.

    Why should we blame them for failure?

    Maybe if this was a technocracy we could blame them for failing to recognize and utilize the intellectually best of us. As it is a nation (a world) ruled by simpletons, we shouldn't expect anything different.

  113. A QUESTION FOR YOU... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3197707&cid=41714569

    * I felt that way in PUBLIC highschool (one of the best, if not THE highest rated @ the time in the early 1980's, in the N.Y. State area)...

    However: That "repetitive stress" for kids who didn't give a damn (mostly, they had other plans like being mechanics for instance)? That made it EASIER for me to do sports, work (damn near fulltime my senior year since I had my credits already by junior year to graduate), and have girlfriends too (lol). Not as much of a "workload" on academics (which changed, radically, in collegiate academia - this WAS an "adjustment" for me, time-mgt.-wise!).

    (Reading came early for me also, due to my father "inspiring me" with "The Mighty Avengers" #15 a used comic from the 1960's when I was 4-5 yrs. of age & it taught me to start to learn to read, & then "The Incredible HULK" too (not sure of issue # here though) - this, in turn, built up my vocabulary bigtime as well as spelling ability (mostly memory imo, "pictures" memory - hard to explain I guess, not 'sounding it out' etc.)).

    The schools wanted to "jump me grades" in 4th & 5th grade, my parents wouldn't have it - didn't think it was a good idea (I agreed), for social reasons. However, I stayed "in the system"... albeit, in "honors level" classes, which i personally thought were EASIER actually than std. classes were!

    APK

    P.S.=> Thanks for answering there, since I am attempting to prove a point here (something Edison said) - you're one of a very few I am pointing there in fact ("feel priveleged", lol)... apk

  114. Does 130 count? Also, a QUESTION... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1st, the question I am directing SOME of you to -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3197707&cid=41714569

    (Thanks for answering there...)

    ---

    Now, onto YOUR points:

    "You're a fucking moron." - by shiftless (410350) on Saturday October 20, @06:01AM (#41713511) Homepage

    LMAO - that wasn't necessary, but... it might be something a "genius" would say, out of "FruStRaTioN" I suppose!

    ---

    "Like the GP I'm also a genius (IQ 130+)." - by shiftless (410350) on Saturday October 20, @06:01AM (#41713511) Homepage

    Hmmm, I always BELIEVED that that rating came @ 150++ actually, but, I could have been misinformed too... 130-135 scores typically here on standardized IQ tests.

    ---

    "and I had the exact same experience growing up in school. I never took notes and I never did homework, in school and in the university classes I took.." - by shiftless (410350) on Saturday October 20, @06:01AM (#41713511) Homepage

    I could pull THAT in highschool, since they taught the SAME THING 3/4 of the week for the "slower" kids (mostly not stupid, but had other plans in life mostly I'd say, such as becoming for instance, car mechanics (a necessary & needed trade with no end in sight for customers & business - a good SMART outlook in & of itself imo))... but, not in college on my 1st degree (B.S. Business Admin major/MIS minor). I could though on my 2nd degree (AAS in CSC, 90/120 credits into the B.S. for it currently when I have time & money, of course) however, ONLY BECAUSE I WORKED THE FIELD FOR 15++ yrs. PROFESSIONALLY beforehand... & even then, I still had to write the programs + take tests (this I would do readings for but only cursory ones).

    ---

    "I can skip half the class and still ace every test" - by shiftless (410350) on Saturday October 20, @06:01AM (#41713511) Homepage

    That I can't claim, & 1 student I know who DID? Was a good pal of mine, I spoke of he in another thread here -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3197707&cid=41714569 HOWEVER, it "backfired" on him once in a C++ class we were in together (1994, taught by a Lockheed Martin Senior Software Engineer no less) - he would fall asleep in class, blow off classes, etc. & yet STILL was able to "out write" the professor (his father was a dual PhD out of Russia in both Math & CSC), since he had already been programming since he was 10 & was 19 @ the time... the prof. did NOT like that (I often had to "run interference" for him though, there was a language barrier is why & I grew up with 'accents' being from an immigrant family here, they don't bug me or interfere with my understanding MANY accent-bearing folks thank goodness).

    Well... one day, he's NOT going to make an assignment, & asks if he can "borrow" mine (while we're at a club on a Sunday night no less, lol, ah "youth") - I say "Sure, but 'change it around' don't be STUPID, or you'll get caught!"... well, sure enough, he didn't see some of my comments ended in "... apk" like I do on posts here, & @ the end of class one day the prof. asks me to stay after. I did. He asked if my buddy reamed my work & quick on my feet I said "No, we often work together, & you KNOW he's already a competent coder.... he helps ME more than I do he, by far!" which was true... didn't matter - the prof. KICKED MY PAL OUTTA CLASS, not me though thank goodness!).

    In the end? Well... per that link about him, his results are most likely FAR better than that of that prof. even (who was a good guy, don't get me wrong, but... I KNOW he didn't like my pal's attitude! Sometimes, I suppose, when you're that FAR AHEAD in a class? Attend anyhow, do some 'acting', since some instructors are perhaps rightfully so, insulted when you don't show, or fall asleep in class + yet get A's "across the boards"...)

    Ah, anyhow/anways!

    ---

  115. HEY, MY IQ IS 202038208! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's really funny to read posts of people claiming to have "alien"-level IQs, all in a single discussion. Firstly, those who have actually ever taken an IQ test, know that usually you report your PERCENTILE, not the IQ score (which is meaningless by itself, it depends on the scale used), secondly an IQ of "only" 131 in the SD15 scale - the level required by Mensa - is for people in the top 2% of the population.

    Reading the funny scores posted here by someone, I guess that on slashdot there're people in the top 0.0001%. Either new einsteins, or liars.

  116. Re:blind the sighted ... cripple the swift by BonThomme · · Score: 1

    Interesting how the man you castigate is the living counterexample to your thesis.

  117. A QUESTION FOR YOU... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3197707&cid=41714569

    * Thanks in advance for your time answering there...

    ---

    I like, and AGREE WITH, 2 points of yours:

    "Our schools are not designed to teach the bright, and in fact, are often punitive to intelligent and creative young people. In a time when we most need these traits fully empowered and present in our culture, such behavior from our leaders and institutions is criminal." - by Genda (560240) on Friday October 19, @06:49PM (#41710915) Journal

    Agreed... 100%: The kinds of people we get for our "leaders" politically is what makes me question this, the most - we're at a time we need HIGHLY INTELLIGENT and business skilled leaders (I cite this, since employment imo, is our MAJOR PROBLEM nowadays due to 1%'er "control" using foreign labor markets, vs. paying native local citizenry to foster a HEALTHY economy, since without disposable income on the majority's part? You have LITTLE to NO "economy"...)

    ---

    "However, it is consistent with the large scale conversion of the American mouth-breathing public into obedient, subservient consumption units in the vast corporate engine that is our culture" - by Genda (560240) on Friday October 19, @06:49PM (#41710915) Journal

    Here's the one I ABSOLUTELY agree 110% with - yes, that's "the goal", to make "skilled wage slaves" so they can sit back & enjoy competitive advantage (as well as farm away/brain drain foreign cultures for their "best & brightest" there as well), live off of stock dividends, and enjoy a GREAT LIFE where they don't work for their money, their money works for them... yes, genius in & OF itself, albeit, in a way that overall HARMS society (via nothing less than thieving greed, & hell with the rest of society).

    APK

    P.S.=> You're 1 of 4 others posting here I've asked it of is why: Out to make a point, regarding something Edison once said is all...

    ... apk

  118. How do you know me so well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's interesting that you have described me. I find your story dead on to my behaviors.

  119. Re: education vs. learning by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

    I still don't agree. It may be excessive, but the natural reaction of people is to fight the boring work, and it is a great opportunity to learn that just doing it will make the problem go away.

    But again, I can agree that it is too much and too early.

  120. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obviously you don't have the first fucking clue about anything, so why you bothered commenting here is a mystery to me

    He bothered, because it is (or should be) obvious that people will usually be quite responsive to such provocation. Many enjoy seeing folks get all riled up about something, which may be completely meaningless. Take it easy, man.

  121. Re:We Geniusess by Jmc23 · · Score: 1
    I believe that's both copyright and trademark of the Republican party.

    US election time is the best, there's just so much comedy gold lying around. I'd probably find it sad and depressing if I was a USian though.

    --
    Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
  122. Re: education vs. learning by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

    He couldn't add 8+7 except on his fingers.

    Growing up in Chernobyl is hard enough without being an unrecognised genius as well.

    --
    The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
  123. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The mensa members I meet often lack education. I guess IQ tests lie.

  124. Re: education vs. learning by CBravo · · Score: 1

    Thank god for Gaulois spaces.

    --
    nosig today
  125. Re: education vs. learning by Jmc23 · · Score: 2
    What seems to be the REAL problem here is that neither you nor the school are actually teaching your child anything. You just seem to be hoping and praying that his poor brain will eventually pick up the pattern.

    Unfortunately, this problem won't go away until the person teaching actually understands the material, not knows it by rote, but actually understands it. I can come up with at least 3 non-standard ways of doing arithmetic, each being slightly easier for different thinking patterns, but that's because i understand what is going on, and how different cognitive areas can be harnessed with different methods.

    N.B. They couldn't teach me math in school, they actually thought I was retarded. I couldn't multiply or do long-division at the start of grade 5. Thankfully, I was tested and they noticed my advance pattern matching skills. They didn't have the resources to really do anything for me, but they did hand me a grade 9 book on mathematical axioms. I shortly outperformed everybody, though frequently not reflected in my grades because I was unable to show my work for anything because I never was capable of learning their slow tedious methods.

    --
    Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
  126. Re: education vs. learning by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

    Ah genius. You do know that the lowest agreed upon cutoff for genius defined by IQ is 140 no?

    --
    Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
  127. Re: education vs. learning by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

    I was going to make some snarky remark about your IQ just barely qualifying for "genius", but I've noticed that usually the ones around 140 are more successful than those of us with much higher (others, i'm just 1sd above you) IQ's. IQ isn't everything, sometimes it just shows that we know how to fill up our brains, not whether we fill them with important things or things we know how to apply.

    --
    Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
  128. Genius is nurtured by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Usually genius results from genetic DEFICIENCIES, not from genetic superiority. People with deficiencies have to work harder, and genius is 50% perspiration, 40% don't-give-a-fuck-what-other-people-think-about-my-deas, and 20% dumb luck. That makes 110% percent because that's the effort it takes. People WITHOUT genetic deficiencies COULD easily be geniuses, but (at least so far) history seems to indicate these people usually don't have to work very hard to get anywhere in life.

  129. Re: education vs. learning by Guppy · · Score: 1

    I know exactly where he's coming from. In 6th grade I was reading multiple novels a week and had a college reading level. I know exactly what it's like to sit in a classroom while the class slowly, haltingly stumbles, one student at a time down each row, through reading one paragraph at a time from the textbook aloud to the class. I'm lost in the book, reading 7-8 chapters ahead as usual, so of course when the teacher gets to me and I "don't know my place", I get in trouble. So then I had to learn the skill of covertly reading ahead but still keeping track of the classroom's progress so I didn't get in trouble.

    Ah, I remember this game from childhood. Just count the number students ahead of you, and skip down that many paragraphs. Briefly take note of the first and last sentences of the paragraphs before and after your predicted section, just in case the teacher doubles-up a short paragraph or splits a large one.

    For bonus points: If you memorize your assigned section, then ostentatiously close your book and then recite it perfectly from memory, teachers will generally stop giving you shit.

  130. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not IN Chernobyl, but Silute was direktly in the fallout path

  131. Re: education vs. learning by shiftless · · Score: 1

    wat?

  132. Re: education vs. learning by shiftless · · Score: 1

    One day when I'm a trillionaire, you can argue about the book definition of genius all you like. I said 130+. That's 130 plus for those keeping track. Plus how much? .... Who gives a fuck?

  133. Re: education vs. learning by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

    One day when I'm a trillionaire, you can argue about the book definition of genius all you like. I said 130+. That's 130 plus for those keeping track. Plus how much? .... Who gives a fuck?

    Well, i'm just taking a guess here, but intelligent people are usually concerned with accurate definitions, and this sure as hell would bug any statistician. Now regardless of the criticisms of IQ in general, a 10 point difference from 130 to 140 accounts for about ~17% of the normal IQ range above 130 for adults. Not that much right? Well, except that only ~2.27% of the population has an IQ above 130, and only ~.4% has above 140. I left the last step of calculating the enormity of your error as an exercise for yourself, try not to hurt your brain :)

    Believe me, I use approximations in my in head calculations all the time and assume most geniuses do, but only with error rates below 1-2%. If geniuses had more socialization the only appropriate response to what you said would be

    "Wow".

    --
    Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
  134. Re: education vs. learning by myxiplx · · Score: 1

    Same here, I used to get marked A for attainment, and B or C for effort. I never could understand exactly what else I was meant to do when the work was so easy and I was bored out of my brains.

    At university I was so bored in lectures I got into the habbit of completing the previous weeks assignment during the lectures, and taking notes at the same time. Still got good marks, the biggest problem I had was staying awake.

    After taking a year out I realised real work had more challenges and more opportunities, and kept me interested in a way education never had. I quit my degree and have never looked back. I have two girls of my own now, and my main focus is to make sure they don't get bored at school and actually get to work to their level, whatever that may be.

  135. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By genetics, I know I'm from IQ 145 - 160 here. I don't care where though. When I'm lazy, or in other words if I don't bother because I've figured out the how to solve the problem but don't care to perform the labor to do so (a common trait and failing in 'gifted' people), I assume any IQ test I take would show something like 70.

    Gifted-ness (I hate that word since it's not really a 'gift'...) isn't defined by IQ alone or solving cognitive problems. For example, there are those who can interpret movements, sounds/music, etc and they are also considered gifted. If you are gifted, it behooves you to identify it within yourself. (Or anyone else.) Assuming we're already all adults on here, google for 'Gifted Adults' or take a look at a list of characteristics like this: http://www.santafecoach.com/gtest.htm

    If you ARE indeed gifted, then you'll know what to do from here if I say, simply, "Go ahead and research the topic. Discover it for yourself and learn in your own way as only we are capable of. And pave the way for others."

  136. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wish my parents pulled me out of school and home schooled me. I had the same exact problem. After the 5th grade, I actually stopped caring about doing any work, and I really stopped caring about the teachers. I would read entire text books from every subject I had in class out of boredom while the rest of the class would stumble along a paragraph a day. I knew all the answers in every subject, it was just ridiculous having to go back through it to prove to them that I know it over and over again. Sometimes out of sheer boredom, I would ace tests to baffle my teachers when I knew half the class was going to do badly. In my language classes, the teacher would always call on me to read out loud from a book because no one in my class even knew how to pronounce the most basic words (Yes, this is how terrible my public school was). I had a few teachers try to push me to do their repetitive work, but I refused to conform. I've only had one teacher realize my potential and gave me college level materials to work with, but that was short lived after the next grade level and I was back to the regular years of torment.

    After high school, it took me a few years (Yes YEARS) to wash off this affect, that I realized I don't need any of these people and I was finally free from them and this horrible system. I ended up getting my degree (actually did great academically when it was all under MY terms and of course my money) and ended up running an architectural and engineering business. I hope you didn't have that lingering experience after you were pulled out of that mess, because it was hard for me.

  137. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well if you were so smart, you'd know that IQ tests have an error bar of fifteen points. Statistically, 145 and 146 are indistinguishable.

    Man, geniuses. What a bunch of idiots.

  138. Re: education vs. learning by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 1

    Take hope. After the fifth or sixth time, you get to move on to 3 + 3.

    --

    You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

  139. if you dont like classical music by KingBenny · · Score: 1

    you wont spot the next mozart or chopin. If you do road construction you might not spot the next einstein and the greatest physicist in the world might be blind to the qualities of the greatest builder ever lived. I think you spot a genius by word of mouth. A bit like advertising ... but ... different. I dont think einstein got spotted as a genius before he checkmated a few people who then like spread the word a bit etcetera, might be the same in most cases

    --
    Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
  140. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm an actual genius - 146 IQ. You have no idea what you're talking about.

    Agreed. I'm a 147. Until about 8th grade I was considered at best above average in math, and above average in science. Starting with algebra I greatly outpaced my peers, taking prizes at the state level in competitions. For science the challenge didn't really start until 10th grade, and I did better than I did in math, ultimately pursuing it as a career.

    I won't claim to be Nobel Prize material, but I can imagine for somebody who is the problem would be even more pronounced.

    I really didn't put forth a lot of effort in the earlier grades, as the material just wasn't that engaging. I'd read books outside of school to learn. Most of elementary education was just applying the same principles to larger and larger numbers, or testing of rote memorization.

  141. Re: education vs. learning by Rich0 · · Score: 1

    Well, i'm just taking a guess here, but intelligent people are usually concerned with accurate definitions

    As an intelligent person (TM), I know that the definition of a word is whatever two people agree it is. You say genius is 140+, he says it is 130+. Great, now you and anybody with an IQ of 100+ can understand what you're saying. Anything else is quibbling for its own sake.

  142. Re: education vs. learning by Rich0 · · Score: 1

    Without that repetitive, mind-numbing homework, you can't just breeze through the tests.

    That is hardly true. I breezed through numerous tests without doing homework for classes I excelled at. I really only did homework to the extent that it was graded, and that was essentially a waste of time. Forcing some kids to do work because other kids need to do it teaches the wrong lesson - that work is arbitrary and has value for its own sake.

  143. Re: education vs. learning by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

    I hate to explain it but I was referencing the number of fingers that guy had

    --
    The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
  144. Re: education vs. learning by Jmc23 · · Score: 1
    No, I wasn't stating my opinion. I was merely stating the lowest agreed upon cutoff by the experts in the area. Which is exactly what I said.

    I actually think the bar should be set at 4 sd's from the mean for IQ. 130-140 just seems to be the point where you can start to have an interesting conversation with someone with their own thoughts(some) and not parroted societal/cultural beliefs. Besides, seeing all the stupid things my siblings have done it's just so hard to consider them geniuses :)

    N.B. you can score 130-140 just by repeating facts, I believe real genius is in novel combinations of previous knowns. It's about seeing new patterns not rote memorization.

    --
    Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
  145. Thanks for your reply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I found this part VERY funny:

    "I don't know, and I truly don't give a fuck, because I'm not some dweeb trying to join MENSA so he can compare his mental penis to other dickwads who have no lives." - by shiftless (410350) on Sunday October 21, @08:45PM (#41724913) Homepage

    Agreed, 110%... been offered to join them, but I don't know WHY they'd do it, based on a 130-135 IQ test score... it's NOT "genius" as far as I have heard tell, & I certainly didn't feel like being "the odd man out" (lol, the 'special person' spelled sideways = retard in the room!)... but, hanging around intelligent people TENDS TO "RUB OFF" on you too, so... I don't know. I didn't take them up on it in the end. Same with the MASONIC order (who probably would have been a HUGE asset to me, but... I turned them down also, 3 times over the past 30 yrs. now).

    ---

    "All that matters in the real world (and to me) are results.." - by shiftless (410350) on Sunday October 21, @08:45PM (#41724913) Homepage

    Try keep 1 thing in mind on your way there (and, you'll probably do well if you keep up your "5 yr. plan" so-to-speak): It's not just about money... that can bring problems (a dog with a diff. set of fleas & EVERYONE wants a piece/has their hand out), and it does too.

    ---

    "That is the true definition of success." - by shiftless (410350) on Sunday October 21, @08:45PM (#41724913) Homepage

    It is, & it isn't (from my experience @ least + viewing that of others) - keep in mind what I stated just above prior to this...

    ---

    "Like Malcolm Gladwell said, higher IQ is an advantage to a certain point but beyond that, what good is having an IQ of 180 if you have zero social skills, no business sense, no financial intelligence, and only a narrow range of knowledge on obscure topics?" - by shiftless (410350) on Sunday October 21, @08:45PM (#41724913) Homepage

    Right... you STILL have to deal with "normal people" - especially those with the CA$H to "back you"...

    APK

    P.S.=>

    "I haven't done anything particularly extraordinary with my life just yet, but it's still early in the race and now I feel more than ever like I am on the right track" - by shiftless (410350) on Sunday October 21, @08:45PM (#41724913) Homepage

    That's ok - since it's ALL "relative" anyhow! One man's garbage = another man's treasure, same with accomplishments also. YOU have to feel like you're a success in the end, since nothing attracts or helps MORE than projecting the image of success imo!

    Now, when you have the actual RESULTS to go with that? You're there... lol, but you won't feel like it I bet - you'll want more & feel like "is THIS it? Is THIS all there is??" (more headaches, lol)...

    ---

    "I am in my late 20s now and I have spent the last ~5 years basically reforming and improving my mind, body, and thoughts in various ways, as well as working to develop several profitable (potentially quite lucrative) lines of business." - by shiftless (410350) on Sunday October 21, @08:45PM (#41724913) Homepage

    Right move to make, I was much the same (did what I had to before it education-wise & resume-wise from jobs)... takes time, but stick to your guns? You'll do well... "aim for the stars, & be glad you made it to the clouds" pretty much!

    ---

    "I feel like with any kind of real help or guidance in life I could have been a millionaire many times over already, but due to having to stumble through life practically on my own in a lot of ways, and learning the hard way, it has taken me longer to get things turned around and situated and on track for success." - by shiftless (410350) on Sunday October 21, @08:45PM (#41724913) Homepage

    Right place @ the right time, with the RIGHT people (those with the finan

  146. They will resent that effort. by Captain.Abrecan · · Score: 0

    I have heard from gifted individuals that there is absolutely nothing more annoying, invasive, patronizing and outright disrespectful to them than being tailored for in school and being driven to do things that other people think are important. Turns out most geniuses just want to get on with life, ironically like Will Hunting.

  147. Re: education vs. learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I understood. But ironically he did grow up in Silute for 3 years.

  148. Re: education vs. learning by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

    That's sort of funny in a bad way.

    --
    The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
  149. Re: education vs. learning by shiftless · · Score: 1

    No, I wasn't stating my opinion. I was merely stating the lowest agreed upon cutoff by the experts in the area.

    Define "expert". LOL

    What you "merely" stated is that you are a pedantic twit. And I agree.