/sci/ - Science & Math

>>1935050
So does you mother

I totally agree with this.
If you've ever read Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell you would know that it takes an average of 10,000 hours of dedication in anything to be considered skilled in it.
Obviously there are a few people whose brains just work differently than others and they can process information a lot faster but for the most part, a genius is someone with an incredible work ethic. Of course, people who disagree with this don't realize that "genius" can be stumble upon.

OP, you have to admit that you do need a certain IQ to grasp higher level math right?

I mean, no one with an IQ of 70 is ever going to pass a linear algebra class, unless they're a savant. Never ever.

A high IQ, and an addition of hyper-focus/drive, is what leads people to genius discoveries. But you can be a genius (IQ 145+ or 160 depending) and never accomplish anything because you don't have the focus to do so.

You're confusing an IQ score with success.

genius has 3 parts:

1) Ability to comprehend and analyze new information, mostly gained from genetics and early childhood practice. If you're older than say 4 years, you have no hope of improving this.

2) Hard work. This is the universal effort -> advance trait, regardless of your developmental level, you can always work harder and get better at something.

3) Luck. Some people are just lucky by no act of their own and this can't be traced to genes. People don't typically like to admit how large a role chaos plays in our every-day lives, but it does.

From my observation and experience, the 3 are in about equal parts contributing to genius.

intelligence is a result of both nature and nurture, if you have parents both of very low IQ, it will be very difficult to be intelligent, and will require a lot of hard work.

parents both with high IQ's will pass on the genes for a child to also probably be destined to be naturally intelligent. but if they are locked in a dark room all their life and not taught anything, they will still be a complete fucking idiot that cant even speak.

>>1935073

>but if they are locked in a dark room all their life and not taught anything, they will still be a complete fucking idiot that cant even speak.

Untrue. While they may not be able to speak they still wouldn't be an idiot. Knowledge != Intelligence. They'd be able to grasp concepts faster than you could when they did learn to speak.

Our brains are set up so that a lot of how they develop is based on how they are exposed to the world in early childhood. Genes leave a lot of the details out on purpose; an animal that can be born into any environment and adapt has a better chance than one who has all it's instructions pre-coded. That said, how one is "brought up" most likely has more to do with one's intelligence potential than their genetics.

Experiment: take a couple with iq > 150 and a couple with iq < 75. Switch their babies at birth. I bet the baby to the dumb couple raised by the smart couple winds up much smarter than the other one.

TLDR: early childhood experience influences intelligence more than genes.

I would say a 160IQ is required in order to jump from Algebra II -> Linear Algebra and Ring Matrix.

>>1935072
If you look into that persons past. You will almost certainly find that they have never had exposure to many fundamental intellectual concepts; they would never be able to build the skills necessary to understand high level maths. Due to this they may never understand it. However, if they took the time to learn the fundamentals and built it up, I believe almost anyone could grasp high level maths.

I have 121 for my IQ. Is that ok?

>>1935089
Are you sure? If you look at feral children, not a single one has learned to function in society, never has a pure feral child learned language. Early childhood experience is vital.

>>1935132
Doesn't matter. Mine is 129 and I know people at or around 100 that can do math better than me. Way better.

IQ just measures your ability to reason easily. Kind of a useless statistic, really, since anyone can learn to reason easier with practice.

>>1935146
I would agree with you, I'm just stating that a feral child or a child 'locked up in a dark room' will be completely useless and extreemly impaired.

>>1935042
>I'm sick of all the narrow minded crap that gets posted on /sci/ these days.
Then stop posting them.

>>1935089

only after you start teaching them. they need nurture, thats my point, they already have the natural ability. they can pick up concepts but only after being introduced to them, so they are being taught, and are learning.

>>1935146
It's often more an assessment of how much you know than it is how well you can reason.

I have seen few written questions on IQ tests that can accurately gauge a person's inductive or deductive capabilities - and even those abilities can be improved through practice.

Intelligence is a lot more fluid than a simple IQ score can ever tell you.

Captain Chair himself said that IQ tests are bullshit.

Can we just lay this to rest? The only people I see who go out of their way to take them are incredibly insecure.

A genius is someone who excels at something requiring mental activity
Its not reserved to science and math as someone could be a genius on other aspects.
For instance Mozart, John Lenon, Bethoveen, Leonardo Davinci, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Aristotle, Edgar Alan Poe, Shakespeare etc...
A neckbeard on the other hand is someone's who's supposed IQ exceeds the amount of money(dollars) he has at any given time

>>1935201

i agree, its not a test of objective intelligence, your IQ is just a score that shows how good you are at doing IQ tests, and, as with anything, practise makes perfect, so if i keep repeating IQ tests my score will increase, but has my natural intelligence magically gone up as well? of course not.

tl;dr IQ tests are bullshit and unnescecary.
inb4 'you're just butthurt because you did a test once and got a low score' (fag-guess) because i was in the 130's. not that i really care, ive taken a few and its varied, usually between 110 and 140, it varies quite a bit, which also shows how they arn't to be trusted as objective truth.

>>1935204
>Shakespeare
>genius
please tell me you're trolling

A genius is romantic.
A genius is wise.
A genius perceives life in his/her own way.
A genius is imaginative.
A genius puts aside all prevailing superstitions and taboos.
A genius is 0.

How can I has genius?
I am 18 years old but uber slacker.
Mathematics is my thing.

>>1935222

...erm, no

>>1935216
He is a genius
He's one the bests if not the best playwrights that ever lived
He also enriched the English language with new vocabulary and made it what it is today.
There isn't a single English teacher that doesn't worship him.
Hell he even was the first to use the word wormhole

>>1935222
I got all that except I don't consider myself a genius or a zero
well I'm a bit of a loser, so you could call me a nobody :)))))))

Read this;

http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~djtaylor/genius.htm

>>1935234
Stop being a slacker then
Seriously you're not impressing anybody
Just do your goddamn work and stop playing WoW

>>1935247
Be a nobody, that way you are in a group of nobodies, alike anonymous. Or you be a somebody, and you are in your own group.

"secure trips are for faggots"

>>1935260
Hahaha it's funny you should say that actually because I got myself permabanned from WoW about 2 months ago.
I do my work, it's just always last minute etc.
I am like 3rd out of the 800 people studying mathematics at my college, makes me wonder how far I could go if I actually applied myself.

>>1935241
no, he was a pretentious douche which is exactly why every English teacher sucks his dick

>>1935275
you sir are a shallow simpleton
good riddance to you I say

If it wasn't for Shakespeare, I doubt we'd be as advanced as we are today. Entertainment keeps people sane and controlled, without it, good luck keeping a country at bay whilst you try to escape the planet.

>>1935312
yup, without shakespear people would've been bored shitless and probably would have fucked less

TBH most of the people here who claim high IQ are either:

A: Lying
B: Autistic or Aspergers sufferers, the same kind of crap that messes up your brain in reacting properly to social situations evidently also increases your ability or tendency to recognize patterns, which is what most IQ tests are. Pattern recognition and completion

>was rigatir

>>1935304
you sir should form your own opinion and not follow some mediocre playwright with the rest of the sheep
>>1935312
no

>>1935341
Even if you don't like Shakespeare you should be able to appreciate the complexity and lasting impacts of his plays.
Just like if you don't like Mozart, you should be able to recognize that he was genius.

>>1935073
I totally approve.

>>1935327
I just assume anybody I'm actually talking to who claims an IQ above 150 is lying. Probability is on my side.

I cannot focus, have a relatively high IQ.

What drugs can help?

>>1935846
Talk to a psychiatrist, not a lot of info in post.

Provigil is decent, though.

>>1935846
160IQ + Adderall = SUPER OMG WTF IS THIS

>>1935954
Okay, additional info.

I sit down to work on something, takes me ages to get into the swing of things, unless it's something that I've decided to do instead of set assignments.

most 'genius's just experienced academia from a very early age, they enjoyed reading texts and it is only about having the WILL to do it that counts, if you are born with 'an iq of 999999' but dont have to will to do anything. then you will contribute nothing.

i remember reading in one of asimovs books a short statement about a mathematician who was leader of a group, he became displeased about the group as he found out they just circle jerked about their IQ's and that was all they did.

sounds like anything you know?
(point prolusly)

I don't think IQ or academic success is the proper way to gauge genius. Actually, I don't think there's any way to measure genius, if someone really is a genius.

A genius ability means that a person has developed an understanding of the world which is so advanced that it's able to predict outcomes despite what other people think they know. So it's about a mental ability which cannot be built on purpose and cannot be measured or predicted. You cannot build or predict an ability which surpasses your ability to understand the world.

Therefore, I would say that a genius is the product of unique factors, most likely which make someone's life so difficult that understanding the world more than any other person is their main strategy of survival. So, a genius is a person whose survival depends on intelligence much more than other people's strategies of survival.