Really Intelligent People
- Thread starter SpicyDuck
- Start date
Soldato
jamoor said:
Sounds like me! Unfortunately my great gran died yesterday. When I heard the news it was a little shocking but I didn't really feel upset like wanting to cry or anything. I think its because I expected it to happen soon seeing as she was so old. I don't know, its just odd that I dont seem that affected yet most of the family seem devastated. Perhaps I handle death well. On the other hand I'm curtious and respectful to other's, Im not a cold *******.
Back on topic:
Intelligent people? Never met any
Man of Honour
Mickey_D said:
Mrs Poole teaches at a special unit in a school not far from OCUK. All her children (mostly boys) are autistic but have amazing skills like the Rain man etc.
One lad does complex maths, one can hear a song and play it on a piano, one can hear lyrics and recite them perfectly, one comes in speaking different languages etc. None of them have got real life skills though and a simple question that was put to the class the other day was - What number comes after 4? Not one of them could get it. Other questions are - What is happening in this picture? (a dog playing with a ball) and none will actually say that but will instead say its a dog or a ball.
I have a Brother In Law who is a Professor at Liverpool University but he hasn't got a clue about real life and sometimes its like talking to a 5 year old.
Suspended
For every person like this, though, I know ten more who are incredibly gifted but still have 'interpersonal skills' or 'life experience' or 'common sense' or whatever it is that gets you by in the world without stabbing yourself with scissors.dmpoole said:
It's not like there's a magic balance, and if you're naturally gifted to be an incredible mathematician/musician/artist then you invariably lack people skills. Most incredibly intelligent people are otherwise perfectly normal.
Nature or nurture has a big role to play in this kinda of discussion. I believe that people are either born naturally intelligent or normal, unless an illness is involved.
Take Thomas young for example. He was the last person alive who, it was believed and considered, knew everything. He could speak fluent english by ~2 and latin by ~3. He developed countless theories in physics and nearly all of which were correct. Young's modulus and youngs slits are just two examples. Of course this was all in his spare time, he was a GP by living.
Now my argument states that would he have been able to do all of that if he wasnt taught or nutured from a very young age?
Ok i know this is a single example of true genious, and is very rare, but it begs the question, could we all do a lot more with our brain and mind if tought better at a young age? Could there have been more "genious" people if this was the case?
And so from my first paragraph, if naturally intelligent people were nutured to a higher standard than currently, and everyone else were also taught more intensivly, would the world advace quicker than it is?
On a side note it might sort out the chav problem in time as well
Woody
Take Thomas young for example. He was the last person alive who, it was believed and considered, knew everything. He could speak fluent english by ~2 and latin by ~3. He developed countless theories in physics and nearly all of which were correct. Young's modulus and youngs slits are just two examples. Of course this was all in his spare time, he was a GP by living.
Now my argument states that would he have been able to do all of that if he wasnt taught or nutured from a very young age?
Ok i know this is a single example of true genious, and is very rare, but it begs the question, could we all do a lot more with our brain and mind if tought better at a young age? Could there have been more "genious" people if this was the case?
And so from my first paragraph, if naturally intelligent people were nutured to a higher standard than currently, and everyone else were also taught more intensivly, would the world advace quicker than it is?
On a side note it might sort out the chav problem in time as well
Woody
Soldato
Arcade Fire said:
I think Arcade Fire's right here. I don't think there's a 100 units in everyone and they're distributed through-out your character sheet like an RPG game. I know many people who are gifted with a lot of intellect and aren't social recluses or suffer from any other sort of anti-socialnalism (made up word? You bet it!). I just think people tend to either label extremely gifted people, or don't realise that your mate who scored all As in his A-levels and often goes out with you to get wasted is 'gifted'.
-RaZ
Associate
We used to have a guy that went to our school who almost all of us wanted to be! he had the perfect balance. He was very very smart and was one of those people who didnt listen to the teacher always got phone calls home but would somehow just Pull A* out of the bag at the last minute and the teacher would be put in her place. he always said his aim was to make teachers look a fool.
One teacher who was called Mr Smith (actual name) phoned his parents because all he did was drew pictures of monkeys in his book and told them he WOULD fail the test. he got full marks i beilve
but he wasnt a dork or anything quite the oposite all the girls used to fancy him and he was among the most popular people in our school.
he always amazed us in the fact that he had a social life and still was ubber smart!
Lucky git
*S
One teacher who was called Mr Smith (actual name) phoned his parents because all he did was drew pictures of monkeys in his book and told them he WOULD fail the test. he got full marks i beilve
but he wasnt a dork or anything quite the oposite all the girls used to fancy him and he was among the most popular people in our school.
he always amazed us in the fact that he had a social life and still was ubber smart!
Lucky git
*S
Soldato
I think generally at the extremes there is some truth in the "every has 100%" theory. If someone is exceptionally intelligent academically (And I don't just mean gets straight A's) then there is a higher chance that they will lack social skills. It works the other way too, if someone is quite poor academically then are more likely to have better social skills. But this is a general trend rather than a rule. There are plenty of people who are very smart and have good social skills.
Unfortunately for me, I tend towards the former. I'm not a genius or anything but my academic ability is a bit higher than average and I find my social skills to be lacking sometimes. Sometimes I wish I could be more balanced.
Here's a question for Mickey_D: Is it known what causes a child to be autistic? What is it about their brains that cause them to be different?
Unfortunately for me, I tend towards the former. I'm not a genius or anything but my academic ability is a bit higher than average and I find my social skills to be lacking sometimes. Sometimes I wish I could be more balanced.
Here's a question for Mickey_D: Is it known what causes a child to be autistic? What is it about their brains that cause them to be different?
Man of Honour
I've not read all of this thread so sorry if i'm repeating somebody's post.
I think there are subtle differences in people's brains, whether that be the anatomy or physiology. I also think that there are sometimes other factors e.g. the person's upbringing that CAN come into play.
Children at either end of the intelligence spectrum of Autism/Asperger's syndrom have been found to have "different" brain consistency. (But that's not to say that all children with those disorders have different anatomy)
For example, when the had a look at Einstein's brain they found an abnormal number of connections and the consistency of matter to be a lot lighter than average.
Also the brain has to be continuosly stimulated. Alcoholics that do nothing but drink for 30 years have later found to have very poorly structured brains, but conversly those alcoholics in professional jobs have for some reason had relatively normal brain structure.
Abandoned babies who were neglected in the Soviet era were found to have portions of their brains atrophied (cell death of the Basal Ganglia) through what was hypothesised (sorry I can't spell this morning) social neglect. (These kids were basically orphans, and they were kept in deep steel boxes with little or no interaction or social play.
I think there are subtle differences in people's brains, whether that be the anatomy or physiology. I also think that there are sometimes other factors e.g. the person's upbringing that CAN come into play.
Children at either end of the intelligence spectrum of Autism/Asperger's syndrom have been found to have "different" brain consistency. (But that's not to say that all children with those disorders have different anatomy)
For example, when the had a look at Einstein's brain they found an abnormal number of connections and the consistency of matter to be a lot lighter than average.
Also the brain has to be continuosly stimulated. Alcoholics that do nothing but drink for 30 years have later found to have very poorly structured brains, but conversly those alcoholics in professional jobs have for some reason had relatively normal brain structure.
Abandoned babies who were neglected in the Soviet era were found to have portions of their brains atrophied (cell death of the Basal Ganglia) through what was hypothesised (sorry I can't spell this morning) social neglect. (These kids were basically orphans, and they were kept in deep steel boxes with little or no interaction or social play.
Associate
There was a very interesting program about one such person who had incredible abilities with maths and languages. He learnt fluent icelandic in a week, memorised pi to 20,000(or there abouts) digits and could perform amazing calculations instantly.
As in most cases like this he was found to have autism but it was only mild autism. His social skills barely suffered. This allowed scientists to ask questions that more autistic savants were unable to answer. They found that is mathematical abilities were synesthetic, when his mind processed a number he saw a distinct shape, while performing calculations the shapes transformed and merged to instantly produce the correct answer in the form of a new shape. When we try to do maths it is a conscious process, we think to ourselves and work through the numbers. For him it was purely unconscious.
I think it's all down to the random connections our brains make while we develop. Most peoples brains develop along very similar lines and so people tend to have pretty much the same basic abilities. But every now and then, either by chance or due to a head injury or minor stroke the brain goes a bit of track and makes some weird new connections. For example, connecting the part of the brain that deals with numbers directly to the part that deals with shapes. This person now has an enhanced abilty to deal with numbers because he has a whole new way to process them that we simply don't have.
But this random rewiring can be just as harmful as beneficial. The most complex parts of a machine are always the most fragile, and with our brains that means our consciousness. Even a tiny error can make someone catatonic , or completely unable to function socially.
So if enough rewiring was done to allow these amazing gifts with numbers, just imagine the damage done to the part of the brain that we use to think and feel emotions with.
I believe that you can in theory have everything. You can be a brilliant speaker, poet, artist, physicist, mathematician and anything else you can think of. Just a question of having the right setup. Since brains develop randomly the results are equally random, but theres an outside chance someone with all this and more will one day be born. Or more likely we'll learn how to program a brain to be like that.
As in most cases like this he was found to have autism but it was only mild autism. His social skills barely suffered. This allowed scientists to ask questions that more autistic savants were unable to answer. They found that is mathematical abilities were synesthetic, when his mind processed a number he saw a distinct shape, while performing calculations the shapes transformed and merged to instantly produce the correct answer in the form of a new shape. When we try to do maths it is a conscious process, we think to ourselves and work through the numbers. For him it was purely unconscious.
I think it's all down to the random connections our brains make while we develop. Most peoples brains develop along very similar lines and so people tend to have pretty much the same basic abilities. But every now and then, either by chance or due to a head injury or minor stroke the brain goes a bit of track and makes some weird new connections. For example, connecting the part of the brain that deals with numbers directly to the part that deals with shapes. This person now has an enhanced abilty to deal with numbers because he has a whole new way to process them that we simply don't have.
But this random rewiring can be just as harmful as beneficial. The most complex parts of a machine are always the most fragile, and with our brains that means our consciousness. Even a tiny error can make someone catatonic , or completely unable to function socially.
So if enough rewiring was done to allow these amazing gifts with numbers, just imagine the damage done to the part of the brain that we use to think and feel emotions with.
I believe that you can in theory have everything. You can be a brilliant speaker, poet, artist, physicist, mathematician and anything else you can think of. Just a question of having the right setup. Since brains develop randomly the results are equally random, but theres an outside chance someone with all this and more will one day be born. Or more likely we'll learn how to program a brain to be like that.
Associate
I believe in "giftedness" to an extent. Someone like Kim Peek is gifted. He can recall anything he reads, which he reads at breakneck speed. This isnt something he has cultivated, it is seemingly natural. But what skills has he cultivated? From what I can tell, absolutely none.
Einstein was quoted as saying that he was no more gifted than the next person, however, what distinguished himself from all others was that he persisted with the problem at hand for far longer than anyone else.
I believe, truly believe, this is what seperates the very best from everyone else.
You see, to call someone gifted is a complete insult, because it presupposes that the individual in question was somehow magically endowed with their abilities. Heaven forbid it should cross the minds of others that the root of a so called "gifted" persons abilities was sheer, unwaivering hardwork, persistance and personal belief in oneself?
In a world of laziness and lack of personal responsibility such as ours, its all to easy for most to simply label those who persist and work very hard as gifted, because it exonerates those who couldnt be bothered to put in the time and effort, of the shame they feel, deep down inside, that comes along with submitting and hoisting up the white flag in the face of a problem.
Einstein was quoted as saying that he was no more gifted than the next person, however, what distinguished himself from all others was that he persisted with the problem at hand for far longer than anyone else.
I believe, truly believe, this is what seperates the very best from everyone else.
You see, to call someone gifted is a complete insult, because it presupposes that the individual in question was somehow magically endowed with their abilities. Heaven forbid it should cross the minds of others that the root of a so called "gifted" persons abilities was sheer, unwaivering hardwork, persistance and personal belief in oneself?
In a world of laziness and lack of personal responsibility such as ours, its all to easy for most to simply label those who persist and work very hard as gifted, because it exonerates those who couldnt be bothered to put in the time and effort, of the shame they feel, deep down inside, that comes along with submitting and hoisting up the white flag in the face of a problem.
Associate
Old Turkey said:
Very good post.
And that's coming from someone who was 'Gifted' academically, but got tired of getting beaten up at school, and finding it too easy, that I ended up becoming lazy, only attended 5 weeks in the final year of school and with some persistent harrasing from my mother and tests the school gave me to take, i got put in for my GCSE's. I was only entered at intermediate, because I had missed so much coursework, and I still came out with 5 C's and a B.
I do not have great social skills, I can sit on the internet in chat rooms, or on the phone talking to people for hours on end, but put me face to face with someone and the story is completely different.
In fact, my 'Gift' has now faded, although there are a lot of contributing factors, the main one is my laziness. Like muscles and other parts of the body, eyes, ears, etc, if you stop using your brain, it's effectivness decreases. Other substances like alcohol, durgs etc, also have a negative effect on your ability to deal with things.
But i strongly believe that my upbringing had a lot to do with it. My mum was overly protective of me, I didn't have any friends until I started pre-school because i wasn't allowed out to play, so I spent most of my time learning. I could read very well by the age of 3, and could write too. I found maths very easy, but only because that was all i did as a kid, because i had no other outlet. This also led directly to my deprivation in social skills.
Oh and i'm Left-Handed, for those people who were commenting about brains. This means I predominantly want to use the right-hand side of my brain. As most people were Right-Handed in days gone by, the world has been constructed to use the Left side of the brain. Consequently I naturally use the Right side and use the left side which has been forced upon me by the right handed world. That may also have something to do with it, but then again not every 'gifted' person is left handed.
Well hey, that's my life story out of the way...............
Last edited:
Ohhh, a nice collection of great posts here.
So, in conclusion, I think it's safe to say that the people who work hard, deserve their "gift" and that others are lazy or maybe don't have the time to devote to certain subject areas, like learning a new language.
It's my belief that everyone has the capacity to train their brain in whatever area they wish. Soul Rider, their is no doubt in my mind that if you went out and just simply forced yourself to talk to people, communicate and be open about your thoughts, that'd you'd simply learn to become a lot better at face to face social situations.
The world in which we live in is hectic, and not many people are fortunate enough to develop themselves fully, or simply because of the pressure they put themselves under from the word "Go", by telling themselves "I've never been good at languages, I can't learn Chinese" when, in reality... they really could learn it with no problems.
The placebo effect can work the other way, too. If you believe you can do something, then you can.
Three years ago, I never thought I'd be sitting here learning 5 languages at once whilst also finding it quite easy. As time has gone by it has become a lot easier for me to understand, learn and use different languages.
This will simply be because;
A) I want to
B) I believe I can, and;
C) My brain has grown used to and made more permanent connections in the area of shape recognition (Japanese, for example) and grown used to differences in word order/usage and sentence construction.
For me, the social aspect has always been lacking, but it is something which I've developed and worked around. It's no longer an issue.
Nice conclusion I think, and a very interesting subject if you sit alone for a minute and actually think about it.
Phil.
So, in conclusion, I think it's safe to say that the people who work hard, deserve their "gift" and that others are lazy or maybe don't have the time to devote to certain subject areas, like learning a new language.
It's my belief that everyone has the capacity to train their brain in whatever area they wish. Soul Rider, their is no doubt in my mind that if you went out and just simply forced yourself to talk to people, communicate and be open about your thoughts, that'd you'd simply learn to become a lot better at face to face social situations.
The world in which we live in is hectic, and not many people are fortunate enough to develop themselves fully, or simply because of the pressure they put themselves under from the word "Go", by telling themselves "I've never been good at languages, I can't learn Chinese" when, in reality... they really could learn it with no problems.
The placebo effect can work the other way, too. If you believe you can do something, then you can.
Three years ago, I never thought I'd be sitting here learning 5 languages at once whilst also finding it quite easy. As time has gone by it has become a lot easier for me to understand, learn and use different languages.
This will simply be because;
A) I want to
B) I believe I can, and;
C) My brain has grown used to and made more permanent connections in the area of shape recognition (Japanese, for example) and grown used to differences in word order/usage and sentence construction.
For me, the social aspect has always been lacking, but it is something which I've developed and worked around. It's no longer an issue.
Nice conclusion I think, and a very interesting subject if you sit alone for a minute and actually think about it.
Phil.
Associate
Folk do have time to learn! They, however, have no desire to. When you think about it, most people in general do not harbour the necessary beliefs, values and virtues.
People, in general, live life on autopilot doing the same things that are comfortable and familiar, because the constant and continuous repitition has bred a habit. If ones surroundings and culture consists of intellectual laziness, where spending 'me time' peaks with sitting in front of the television or participating in any other kind of activity which does not stimulate and challenge, one will end up doing that on autopilot without any conscious recognition of it, permanently. I think only close introspective examination of oneself will enable one to recognise this, which will lead to realisations about oneself, empowering that person to make changes consciously, in my view.
I too truly do believe that if you harbour the right beliefs you can do anything. Just imagine what you could achieve if you held the belief that you cherish learning, that you do not believe in mistakes, that failure does not exist, that you found learning an incredible and exciting adventure. You would resemble a dog fanatically straining at his leash! Wouldnt you? Absolutely!
People, in general, live life on autopilot doing the same things that are comfortable and familiar, because the constant and continuous repitition has bred a habit. If ones surroundings and culture consists of intellectual laziness, where spending 'me time' peaks with sitting in front of the television or participating in any other kind of activity which does not stimulate and challenge, one will end up doing that on autopilot without any conscious recognition of it, permanently. I think only close introspective examination of oneself will enable one to recognise this, which will lead to realisations about oneself, empowering that person to make changes consciously, in my view.
I too truly do believe that if you harbour the right beliefs you can do anything. Just imagine what you could achieve if you held the belief that you cherish learning, that you do not believe in mistakes, that failure does not exist, that you found learning an incredible and exciting adventure. You would resemble a dog fanatically straining at his leash! Wouldnt you? Absolutely!
Soldato
Old Turkey said:
Perhaps a lack of intellectual stimulation and a society of "intellectual laziness" or "autopilot" , as you put it, can be related to the growing rates of obesity to.