Is being a genius genetic, a talent or an illness

zoobyshoe

I think this constitutes a Continuum Fallacy. That fallacy manifesting here in that, since you and the author can't agree on what constitutes a genius, the concept of a genius must be taken as meaningless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_fallacy

I think the concept of genius can be discussed perfectly well by the dictionary definition:

gen·ius/ˈjēnyəs/
Noun:
Exceptional intellectual or creative power or other natural ability.
A person who is exceptionally intelligent or creative, either generally or in some particular respect: "musical genius".

Despite Dyson, calling Einstein a genius is clearly reasonable. I think it's also reasonable to speak of different kinds of genius: "X is only a genius in the sense that he has an exceptionally high I.Q. score. He's never achieved anything to speak of. Y, however, has done some astonishingly brilliant work."

Insisting there be a clear, scientifically determined cut off point before we apply a term is to perpetrate a continuum fallacy. There is no scientifically agreed upon point where we can call someone bald, yet baldness would be a perfectly valid subject to discuss in this biology forum.

uperkurk

Either I'm not expressing my question clearly or you guys are not totally sure what I'm asking, no fault of yours as I'm terrible at getting my point across but let me try this.

This may belong in neurobiology but has there been a case where someone who was extremely smart has passed away and had their brain examined and is it different in anyway?

Like kim Peek for example, I know he was a savant but I'd love to know HOW their brains are designed which makes them different to an average persons. Everyone has different ways of processing and remembering information but clearly some people have an extraordinary ability to remember things and process information and I don't believe it's just "through practice" but the hardwiring of their brains are different. Evolution if you will.

SW VandeCarr

If we could correlate, say findings on a fMRI with a subgroup of exceptional people to the point where we could say this fMRI is the fMRI of a genius and this fMRI is not, then I would agree that we could define "genius". As far as I know, we are not anywhere close to that. By the way, functional MRIs are a much better way to study brains then waiting for the subjects to die and looking at their chemically preserved brain.

Also, there may not always be much of a difference between a genius and an idiot. Robert E Lee was a very audacious and creative general. He completely confused and outsmarted his opponents because he did not follow the "rules". In one battle he faced a Union army of 60000 men against his own force of 40000. What does he do? He splits his smaller force in two and sends one force on an overnight march around the Union right flank. It's against every rule of military tactics. He won the battle. He's a genius! If he'd lost, he would have rightfully been called an idiot.

SW VandeCarr

We can talk about partial baldness or a continuum from a full head of hair to complete baldness. Can we talk about a partial genius? We can talk about, say a musical genius who is otherwise ordinary. But that's a categorical distinction. Can we talk about a partial musical genius?

Pythagorean

Einsyeins brain was passed around and diced up quite a bit. One finding I remember is that it had high levels of glia (not sure what kind... not at a computer). Astrocytes have been implicated in working memory, among other neural processing tasks.

uperkurk

So it's pretty accurate to say that you're either born a genius, or you're not. Because nothing I eat, smoke, drink or anything is going to increase the things in our brains that are responsible for memory, data analysis and information processing. Which is a shame because I'd love to be smart :(

SW VandeCarr

Cognitive abilities are at least partly determined by genetics, but the term "genius" has no precise scientific meaning. You may have a particular talent for something specific that rises to the level that would be described as "genius" by some, possibly influential, people. Even if not, there should be no reason why you can't be successful, maybe even more successful than a lot of "geniuses". Self-discipline and focus are important factors in success whether you're someone's idea of a genius or not.

Ryan_m_b

Genius is a subjective and contextual term. There's little reason to think that it's a real trait, let a lone a biological one. Consider that someone who produces a specific piece of art at the right time and at the right place that just so happens to make a specific impact can be called a genius. A scientist who comes up with a paradigm shifting theory can be called a genius. A crafstman who spends years perfecting their work to produce unique and fantastic artefacts can be called a genius.

All of these things are a product of training, personality (a product mostly of nurture rather than nature), context and "intelligence". But given that general intelligence isn't even a well defined (or observed) phenomenon I'd say this thread is begging the question.

If you want to be more "intelligent" I suggest education. It's not just the boost it will give you through knowledge but also experience of different ways of thinking, different ways of tackling problems and the experience of reading/viewing a wide variety of topics that you find interesting will give you a greater base to work from.

OmCheeto

OMG!

Did you know that I once smooshed a gnat on my bathroom mirror one morning, and discovered that gel shaving cream is the worlds ultimate defogging material?

I would have run off and patented the idea, but I thought I'd just share it.

That kind of reminds me of why I never interfere with over-unity crackpots, as it might be one of them that develops the worlds next generation of bearing.

OmCheeto

Not that we, as in you, shouldn't ban them, mind you.

It gives them more time to develop those stinkin' bearings.

uperkurk

Everybody is entitled to their opinions right? I think anyone who believes in god is narrow minded, but I won't say that god does not exist, because I do not know that.

I believe in extraterrestrial life, but I don't expect to be called a crackpot nor laughed at. Then again I won't say aliens exists because once again I do not know for sure.

zoobyshoe

The question, I think, should be: can we talk about morons and idiots? Intelligence and creativity must be on a continuum with those on one end and genius on the other. This is how we conceive of it anyway. If it is possible to scientifically study people of exceptionally low intelligence and imagination it must be possible to study people of exceptionally high intelligence and imagination. We can't designate a cut off point between genius and, let's say, sub-genius, but that doesn't mean there is no genius, or baldness, or hot. It would be quite acceptable to ask about the possible physiological causes of extremely low intelligence here. I don't see the problem in asking about the people at the other end of the spectrum.

In any event, it's completely clear to me what the OP is asking about. The vagueness of the term hasn't prevented me from understanding what he's after.

zoobyshoe

Here's your problem right here.

No one has mentioned Edison's definition of genius yet: "Genius is 2% inspiration and 98% perspiration."

I read a book about autistic savants and they described a study done to determine whether normal people could attain the calculating skills of autistic savants. They got a math student and taught him the algorithms for determining what day of the week dates would fall on. Then they got him to drill himself in doing this in his head. (I believe he was required to drill at least 3 hours a day.)

After something like two months of this, he did, indeed, cross a threshold and suddenly became able to do it instantly, without thinking.

If you really want to have some kind of impressive skill like this you have to buckle down and do some serious practicing.

The authors of this book believed that autistic savants got good at this kind of thing because they had nothing else. The world is bewildering to them, so they retreat to the comfort of numerical calculations and do it constantly in their heads all day long. That's the thing to realize: they're doing it all day long, day in, day out. 98% perspiration. Eventually it becomes automatic.

If this model is true, then the illness is what drives them to retreat from the world, but it is the constant practice that makes the calculating automatic.

uperkurk

Yes, ofcourse practice would eventually get you to cross certain thresholds but you can't learn every single equation off by heart. I mean one guy I watched was given things like 98 to the power 13 and he just closes his eyes for like 3 seconds, then reads out the number and goes behond the decimal place of even the computer. Also doing outrageous calculations like 7.14256 factoral and other crazy stuff.

Which is impressive but the most impressive thing I ever saw which occurs in some savants, they sit them infront of a TV and for 1 second on the screen a random number of dots will appear, typically anywhere from 100 - 300 and after 1 second the image dissapears and they can instantly say how many dots there were...

Ryan_m_b

The point Zooby was trying to make is that these people are good at these things because their autism makes them practice similar things constantly.

Whether or not that is the case some or all of the time though is besides the point given your post earlier about becoming more intelligent. Whilst calculating large sums quickly in your head or remembering every conversation (etc) are cool traits they really aren't the killer app you seem to think they are. If you want to be intelligent and productive then you really can just work at it until you have it. You might never work out sums in your head really fast but so what? The vast majority of mathematicians can't, they don't need to. What they need is a broad knowledge of the subject matter, a good understanding of what to apply and when and the determination and creativity to use this to achieve their goals.

It's a boring answer but I'm afraid there really isn't anything you can eat, drink or smoke. What you need to do is study hard for a long time and immerse yourself with people who do the same.

uperkurk

That's the best answer so far. The hardest problem I have is reading maths questions, reading the formula etc but my knowledge of maths is literally that of a GCSE student. I have a very very long road ahead of me. I've been recommended this website www.khanacademy.org

Ryan_m_b

Everyone starts at the front of a long road. Even PhD students have to approach new fields like beginners! I've heard good things about the Khan academy, best of luck with it. Personally I'd also advice reading a lot and reading anything you find interesting. Books really do push your horizons.