Well this might be quite random due to tons of pondering but I was just wondering whenever talent and genius truly exist.
Rather than using the common norm of our society to mark people who have good skills in a certain aspect as geniuses or talented people. I view this type of things as ignorance.
Yes, it might be a positive feedback i often see this as an excuse for people to disregard themselves and the person they are giving compliments with.
Most people have "talent" in something aslong as they pursue it and have the desire and motivation to learn and persevere through the ordeals that may block them. Yet, this people don't do it because they are afraid of mistakes(consequences), laziness, and not having enough time.
After reading a lot of books about the difference in abilities of a person and going through daily life looking at other people it always disgusted me how someone would just put on the term "Genius" or "talent" and even "prodigy" to someone they just saw having a good skill on a certain thing. People just disregard the hard work and effort the person went through just for a certain thing.
But anyways, I certainly believed people just have different kinds of levels in things they aren't good at and are good at.
To me there is no such thing as genius or talent but only different in potential and comprehension.
Sorry for this rant thread but I just want to say this for a while since the recent books I had read focusses on this type of topic in particular.(mostly blue period)
I just wanted to get this out of my heart for a while since I saw many who calls themselves inferior near me and I wanted to prove that to those who are trying to say they are talentless and has no skill in anything. I want to say that you should once take a look at something you wanted at the first place and take a look back at what was the reason you started in the it.
In my personal experience, "Genius", "smart," and "talented" are mostly just words we use to hold certain people to stricter standards than normal. We use them while we insult people with unreasonable expectations placed on them for behaving merely normal. Things like "Because you are smart, I know you could do better." I do not think of these words as positive or praise. They are words that describe the user's relationship to the subject, not words that describe the subject themself.
I thought up the foundation of the third most popular theory of quantum gravity at the age of 14. Admittedly, others have fleshed it out, and the discovery of gravity waves in 2012 has torpedoed my version, others continue to go ahead and try and get it to work.
I came up with multiple ways to completely destroy various federals laws when I was working for Bronson and Migliassio, turning them into the second largest collection law firm at the time.
The Real estate collapse of 2009? Sorry about that. MY BAD.
I worked out a way to end run the federal re-age program and in the process create millions of dollars out of thin air (legally), except they only could exist for 35 to 59 days before they vanished again, but it was long enough to allow Fleet Bank to Buy up half of Argentina's economic sector. (right before the bank collapse, mind you. Hey, I just figured out how to make legal virtual money, I didn't tell them how to spend it.)
Once I got over my Evil phase, i refocused on more productive outcomes
I wrote an encyclopedia (112 books) for the fun of it. It took 4 years.
Helped a friend make 311k cash in 16 months to help his parents (he did have to totally trash his credit in the process, but this was one of those Pay the medical bills or they die situations. Fuck CANADA.)
Worked on a suicide prevention line talking people out of killing themselves for a year. I was their best cold call taker and was frequently used as the second voice if anyone else felt they were losing someone. I suppose I've saved a few hundred lives.
I figured out a treatment program to help get my wife's uncurable disease under control and halt it's progression. She was supposed to be dead in three years, six years ago, and hasn't had any significant progression in her illness since she started the LDN. I taught myself everything I could figure out about pulmonology to do it. It's why I got invited to help on the Brute force decoding of COVID's RNA in Jan of 2020. Hanging out with the on-line virus community was just a hobby of mine.
My IQ was 146 the last time I had it tested.
Sorry. Raw natural problem solving talent exists. There are Geniuses. Here's the thing. As a genius, you don't know you are a Genius. If you are a Genius in a bad environment growing up, the chances of you using it in a positive manner is low. furthermore, having the ability to solve impossible problems does not mean you have the wisdom to know if you SHOULD solve a given problem. I've never felt smart, even if I am.
I like to put it this way, "I am so smart, I know how dumb I am"
What that means is, an idiot doesn't know his limits, and frequently goes too far, where as I know how little I know, so I know what I can solve and I what I can't. I also know when I am motivated, I can move mountains, as long as the price can be paid. Although I am 50 now. I'm getting slower and dumber. I'm no longer as sharp as I once was.
However, I was very, very, very angry when I was young. I did... horrible things. I regret it. Like I said, being smart doesn't mean you have wisdom. I do know this...
Don't get hung up on it. The only person you are competing with is who you were yesterday. I might be a genius, but I assure you, a normal person is much more likely to make the world a better place over all then I will. I dug such a hole in my vague desire for 'revenge', that if you balanced the scales, I will be in the negative for a long, long time.
If there is an afterlife, I assure you, there is a special place in Hell for me.
It can be more helpful for a striving mentality to think like that I suppose, but if the notion of "talent" is unfair to people's effort because it implies that they had to put in less, then I'd say "you got where you are by the work you put in" isn't much better.
I have no idea what the current state of science has to say about genetic vs raised skills, but a big part of the foundation for certain skills is laid before anyone could be reasonable considered responsible for it themselves in either case. So now apply the above statement to someone unsuccessful.
And as a personal take, if you go out of your way to interpret praise negatively you're either oversensitive to expectations or a snob.
I agree with most of what you said but I disagree with your claim that "there is no such thing as genius or talent." Not because your statements are false but that there is a missing understanding of genius and talent. Anyone can become talented or a genius through practice and study but some people are naturally gifted with certain talents without ever taking the time to learn or practice. These people would be considered prodigies. Some kids are just really good at math or reading or art or hell, a trade like woodworking without ever having been already taught such things.
I see thanks for everyone for clarrifying my thoughts. I genuinely thought people were just different due to their desire and comprehension but i still had a lingering thoughts whenever everyone just really are built different. But it seems like people who are extraordinary does exist. Thank you for sharing your thoughts
I see thanks for everyone for clarrifying my thoughts. I genuinely thought people were just different due to their desire and comprehension but i still had a lingering thoughts whenever everyone just really are built different. But it seems like people who are extraordinary does exist. Thank you for sharing your thoughts
Well this might be quite random due to tons of pondering but I was just wondering whenever talent and genius truly exist.
Rather than using the common norm of our society to mark people who have good skills in a certain aspect as geniuses or talented people. I view this type of things as ignorance.
Yes, it might be a positive feedback i often see this as an excuse for people to disregard themselves and the person they are giving compliments with.
Most people have "talent" in something aslong as they pursue it and have the desire and motivation to learn and persevere through the ordeals that may block them. Yet, this people don't do it because they are afraid of mistakes(consequences), laziness, and not having enough time.
After reading a lot of books about the difference in abilities of a person and going through daily life looking at other people it always disgusted me how someone would just put on the term "Genius" or "talent" and even "prodigy" to someone they just saw having a good skill on a certain thing. People just disregard the hard work and effort the person went through just for a certain thing.
But anyways, I certainly believed people just have different kinds of levels in things they aren't good at and are good at.
To me there is no such thing as genius or talent but only different in potential and comprehension.
Sorry for this rant thread but I just want to say this for a while since the recent books I had read focusses on this type of topic in particular.(mostly blue period)
I just wanted to get this out of my heart for a while since I saw many who calls themselves inferior near me and I wanted to prove that to those who are trying to say they are talentless and has no skill in anything. I want to say that you should once take a look at something you wanted at the first place and take a look back at what was the reason you started in the it.
some people can indeed learn something faster than others. I don't think it is a particularly enviable skill and calling someone a genius just for that is a bit of an overexaggeration. Like, yeah they could become proficient at thing A faster, but so what? I can learn something too, even if it isn't as fast, what's the big deal.
If it's calling others geniuses, then it is only appropriate when they can truly do something groundbreaking, something you wouldn't expect just a professional to do - something very special.
In that sense, I wouldn't say that is even is possible to be a scientific genius in the modern world, for example - since it is all about accumilation of common knowledge, following papers in a particular domain and playing around with the problems that arise and someone would either eventually tackle anyway, or a problem so abscure and worthless that nobody would bother with it.
Even when stuff like the special theory of relativity was discovered, given a few years it would be somebody else instead of Einstein who'd propose it and do the math.
Maybe it was different centuries ago when Laplace, for example, was venturing ahead of everyone like the absolude Chad munchkin that he was.
But not nowadays, it seems. Sigh. I don't even love science and think that the idea of scientific progress is bullshit - I still feel it is regretful.
Not that art is any different - it is basically a contest of who can be more outrageous in laundering money nowadays - that, or a carefully calculated product to attract consumers based on big data analysis, or just following trends.
And so am I. My friends consider me genius in computer coding but in reality I just knew it because I had prior knowledge to coding when I was a kid(I studied minecraft codes and got used to basic coding stuff)
Everyone is born different. Some have gifts like a proper upbringing, supporting family and a knack to be better at something than the rest of the people. That is how it is.
Yes, it sucks when you know that hardwork will not guarantee a win. Yes, it sucks to know that luck is a fickle bitch.
But look at the bright side, good has a plateau while bad is an endless abyss.
Like, yeah, some people have an easier time learning certain things than others... For example, I'm very good at learning stuff from listening to classes and noting things down. I was one of the best students at my high school, because I am simply good at learning from listening and writing... I never studied though, I never re-read my notes. I just wrote because it helped me remember things... And most importantly, I was good at learning with someone teaching me well.
Fast forward to my time at uni, I was one of the worst students, because I still didn't study, but I had lots of garbage professors and their classes weren't helpful in the slightest, so I was suddenly struggling horribly, because I didn't have a good teacher to teach me... And me and my ADHD were no good at studying at home.
You see someone go and discover a new mindblowing scientific thingy, and you may hear people call that person a genius... But if you ask the person, they'll probably tell you that they spent years and years studying that thing until they came to that conclusion.
Hard work is what creates the geniuses, for the most part.
Granted, as I said above, some people have an easier time learning certain things than others, so... Someone that has a tremendous ease with learning music from sound, might be considered a genius at the piano or something... But maybe they also struggle horribly with trying to learn the piano by reading music sheets. Maybe they can only do it well by listening to something and reproducing it.
Each person has the things they're best at. Investing on that will make you stand out. Figuring out what are the best ways you learn things will make you get better results faster... That's just understanding yourself, really. Figure out what you're good at and invest at it, then you can be the next "genius" at that field... For as long as it's a field that receives any recognition that is. Being the "genius" at retail will just give you an employee of the month badge.
Oh, and of course. A good environment is extremely important to nurture people's talents... If you lived your whole life being looked down upon and not having access to any resources to help you figure out how you do things better, then you're probably gonna struggle a lot more than someone who grew up in a positive environment that helped them nurture their talents.
Honestly, calling other people a genius is usually just an excuse to explain why you aren't as good as them at something...
Let me try giving some examples with my personal experiences:
When my boss asks me to review the work of other translators, he doesn't do it because I'm a genius translator or anything (in fact, I'm far from a great one), but because he knows I put the effort to actually make my translation read well... Which is what I check when seeing people who apply to work with him. If I see a translator apply to working with my boss, then the person made some dumb mistakes due to not paying attention to context, and some dumber mistakes due to a visible lack of proofreading... Then it's the person's fault. They didn't put in the effort of throwing a word in a dictionary to make sure their translation was accurate. They didn't put in the effort to proofread their translation to make sure all instances of a given name were consistently translated in the same way, so they failed.
It's honestly even a bit frustrating at times, because I've sometimes seen people that make the text flow really well, and that can make the translation enjoyable to read through... But they make dumb translation mistakes and don't proofread. They fail. I prefer to pass an application that makes a really stiff text that doesn't flow well in the slightest, but that has no obvious mistakes and that has proper proofreading, over a translation that flows well, but that has mistakes and no proofreading.
The person that had no "talent" to make a text that flowed well passed, because they put the effort to make their translation good. The person that had the "talent" to make a text that flowed well failed, because they put no effort at their translation... And well, the person that puts effort can always improve with time in making their text flow well too. I know my first translations were super stiff, but they now flow way better than they used to.
That's just how it works. Even if someone has an easier time than you at doing something, it doesn't really matter if they don't put the effort of making the final product a good one... And that same person that had an easier time than you, will probably also struggle a lot with something that is easy for you. Different people, different affinities. That's all there is to it~
Back when I was in uni, I was in the history major. I was in an internship to make tabletop games for teaching history.
Pretty much everyone else at the internship was a better student than I was. They were much much better at the uni subjects than me, I was struggling horribly, while they were getting amazing grades all the time.
... But at the internship? I was basically the person who organized everything. I was the one who pointed out all the problems with the games. About how the amount of time a given game was taking was not going to fit into something meant to be played in a classroom, and I was the one who proposed the solutions too.
Another group of the same internship made a game without my participation, and when they went to a class to test it out with high school students, I immediately noticed a major design flaw of the game, that was ruining the whole point of the game, and I offered a simple fix for it, that would solve the whole problem.
Why did that happen? Because I understand games well. It's not just that I've been playing a lot of games my whole life, but I've read plenty of game design articles, I've tried my hand on game design before (though never completed anything), I actively analyze the design of games I play and identify the problems... When I complain about something I dislike in a game, it's usually not on my feelings, but about how that design choice led to a terrible experience... I understand game design, that's why I was much better than the other people at a game design internship. It's because we were working on a field that I am good at.
But as I said before, I was a terrible student at uni, and I eventually dropped out. I was not good at it at all, all the other people at that internship were better students than I was... But when put in an environment that played on my strengths, then I could shine, even if I was having garbage results the rest of the time.
I had "talent" with game design... As in, I spent my whole life gaming, I read a lot of game design articles, I actively analyze the games I play and identify their design problems... That's my "talent". That made me good at it... I had a whole background related to game design (even if not a professional background) that the other people in the internship didn't have... I'm no genius game designer. I was just better at it because I had way more contact with game design than the other people there had.
One day I visited a friend's house, and we were going to play some games on their console. This was back in my uni days.
We tried playing Mortal Kombat, and like... I'm terrible at Fighting Games. My gamer friends always stomp me when we play Fighting Games.
Well... This friend I was visiting wasn't a gamer friend... And I was stomping everyone there. I just had basic notions of spacing, and what are common tricks that work out against people who don't know what they're doing in fighting games (as in, use a lot of jump kicks and low kicks)... That was it. That was making me unbeatable. I used jump kicks, low kicks, and I had a good notion of spacing...
That one surprised me, but I understood what was happening. I did play a fair amount of fighting games, so I knew the basic tricks that newbies fell for, due to sheer experience... I overwhelmed my non-gamer friends with experience.
Then, after a few matches, we changed to a soccer game. And I was never, never, never any good at soccer games. I almost never played them, and the few times I did, was back when I was 8 years old and I was just stomped by my brother. This one I was really bad at, for real.
... But I was winning. I didn't have the same kind of experience with soccer games as I had with fighting games... But I was winning. How was I winning?
Well, I was just... Moving to the corner of the field as I advanced (it was hard for them to steal the ball if I advanced to the corner instead of towards the goal), then I crossed the ball (something trivial that just requires holding Circle for a bit), then I tried making a goal with a headbutt (which is something that is purely luck dependent, AFAIK).
... And that was it. That's how I was winning... Essentially, I knew I was bad at the game, so I chose an attack pattern that required basically no skill to pull off at all, which allowed me to win by simply attempting the exact same things enough times, because the RNG would eventually help me out and make my headbutt create a goal.
I basically analyzed the game quickly and figured out what was the best way to do things without needing any skill... And I won through that.
Am I a natural born genius gamer or something? No, I was pretty bad at both games we played, and I knew this much... But in one case, I just had enough experience to beat people who were terrible at it. And on the other case, I just figured out what was the optimal way to play for someone without the skills to win normally... Basically, I have enough experience with games as a whole, to make me good at understanding the core principles of a game quickly, which lets me be better than complete novices at a given game.
It's just experience and analysis, really. That's what made me come out on top when compared to bad players.
... And at the same time, I'm plain incapable of winning against someone that is good at those games. I don't have the patience to practice those games, I struggle to improve at stuff that requires real time reactions in general, and I have a physical limitation of really sensitive fingers that start getting blisters if I play a fighting game for over 30min (at least on a controller. I don't have this problem on a keyboard).
So uhn... Yeah, I'm no genius gamer. I'm just someone who has enough experience with games, to come out on top when compared to people who don't have the same kind of experience, even if we're playing a game of a genre I know absolutely nothing about (like soccer games).
This got way too long... But it just annoys me when people talk about other people being geniuses or whatever. People with more ease at learning certain things certainly exist, but a "genius" is just someone who has put plenty of hard work into improving at something they had a good affinity at.
Basically, any fish will be considered a genius when compared with a cat in swimming, but any cat will be considered a genius when compared to a fish in climbing trees. The same thing applies to people.
We all have 300 IQ when we're high. Though this does remind me of the ancient Persian government that would propose new laws once while sober and another time while drunk. If the law is accepted in both states of mind then it becomes a new law. This was also how they abolished old laws.
I once heard that genius is somebody gifted with passion. The type of passion that motivated them to focus on something and not be distracted by other things.
How do you spend your time?
Growing up, I spent most of my free time playing games. I did well in grade school, but as soon as i finished what I had to do, i went and did what i wanted to do. Basically waste time. I didn't really gain much from it, but i did enjoy it.
Geniuses, did they do this? I'm unsure, but probably not. They spent their time following their passion, which was likely far different from mine. And through all the time spent learning, thinking, doing their passion they find understanding that is beyond what someone like I could know.
Neuroplacticity, have you heard of it? It's the idea that the brain is a muscle that changes based on how you use it. Habits, ways of thinking, ideas, problem-solving, perception etc. Each of them will be reinforced by the brain as it changes to improve that pathway you are using. One can also change their ways of thinking because of this process.
So I guess I'm saying that geniuses are motivated to do homework that is beyond what they need to do, because they love their passion. Because they spend so much time thinking this way, their brains have become supercharged to do it quicker. Especially if they started from a young age, when your brain is still growing and developing.
Theres probably some inherent aspect to it, but i don't really know much about that.
Well this might be quite random due to tons of pondering but I was just wondering whenever talent and genius truly exist.
Rather than using the common norm of our society to mark people who have good skills in a certain aspect as geniuses or talented people. I view this type of things as ignorance.
Yes, it might be a positive feedback i often see this as an excuse for people to disregard themselves and the person they are giving compliments with.
Most people have "talent" in something aslong as they pursue it and have the desire and motivation to learn and persevere through the ordeals that may block them. Yet, this people don't do it because they are afraid of mistakes(consequences), laziness, and not having enough time.
After reading a lot of books about the difference in abilities of a person and going through daily life looking at other people it always disgusted me how someone would just put on the term "Genius" or "talent" and even "prodigy" to someone they just saw having a good skill on a certain thing. People just disregard the hard work and effort the person went through just for a certain thing.
But anyways, I certainly believed people just have different kinds of levels in things they aren't good at and are good at.
To me there is no such thing as genius or talent but only different in potential and comprehension.
Sorry for this rant thread but I just want to say this for a while since the recent books I had read focusses on this type of topic in particular.(mostly blue period)
I just wanted to get this out of my heart for a while since I saw many who calls themselves inferior near me and I wanted to prove that to those who are trying to say they are talentless and has no skill in anything. I want to say that you should once take a look at something you wanted at the first place and take a look back at what was the reason you started in the it.
To an extent yes, but sometimes those geniuses and prodigies exist. The best way to find them is to ask their peers. Though for them to succeed they need to put in both time and effort into practice, just like everyone else. The only difference is that they get more from that time &/or effort than someone else.
Prodigies are those who reach a professional level of skill super quickly, they might have the skill of someone who has spent 10 years in the field after 3 years, usually they plato after some time. Think of someone who spent two years on chess, only to become a grandmaster shortly after, before staying as the average GM.
Next is the genius they put the same amount of time and effort, or less, into something as the average person in the field, but just do better. They are pretty common, think of that kid in school who didn’t study or do the homework only to get top grades on every test.
Next is the genius prodigies, they spend less time learning the skill to a professional, before outperforming literally everyone in the field until they plato, unless there are other genius prodigies. A good example would be Go Seigen or Mozart.
I personally think that there should be a distinction between a genius, a talent, and a prodigy. this is how I distinguish these three words.
Genius: someone who is capable of understanding things more quickly.
Talent: someone with the potential to do great things in a certain capacity.
Prodigy: someone that is a cut above the rest of the talented people.
