[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 66 KB, 462x648, Musical_Genius.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8279318 No.8279318[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Is it possible that non-STEM people are the true geniuses?

Why is it that an enormous majority of the people with real talent (something they have that others do not no matter how hard they work for it) become singers, actors, musicians, artists, etc?

Is it because nearly all positions in all fields in STEM are achievable through hard work alone, and only those at the absolute pinnacle of their field possess verifiable talent?

I mean look at how many nameless STEM people there are who will never contribute anything more meaningful than "me too-ing" their name onto a few research papers.

Now compare that to the endless sea of famous non-stem artists/musicians/etc.

How many STEM giants actually get real recoginition and praise of genius OUTSIDE the STEM fields?

Einstein? Tesla? Elon Musk? Michio Kaku? Neil Degrasse Tyson? Bill Nye? (look how quickly that devolved to pop sci)

Now off the top of your head, think of all the artists and musicians people outside their "field" consider to be geniuses? Countless, right?

Face reality: STEM is all about hard work, not talent. That's why so many people who "are only good at book smarts" become STEM majors, and why STEM has such an inferiority complex about IQ and intelligence.

Because they can't prove they are a genius, whereas everyone can recognize genius outside of STEM.

>> No.8279320

>>8279318
yeah omg tyga is a genius

>> No.8279324

>>8279318
>pop "musicians" have talent
>repeating a 14151451 pattern over and over again and writing retarded teenage angst lyrics

>Is it possible that non-STEM people are the true geniuses?
no

>> No.8279332

>>8279318
Those "talents" you speak of are actually different types of intelligence.

If someone trains on a balance beam or trains with science books, in theory they should then do well in that field.

Anyone who excels in their field can be considered a genius, in that field.

>> No.8279335

>>8279332
that is just a generous title that dilutes the significance of true genius.

>that kid has a 95 average in physics? he must be a genius!
vs
>that kid scored a perfect SAT at age 8 and a bachelors in physics at age 13, PhD at 16

i'm talking about true genius, of which STEM is sorely lacking for reasons above.

>> No.8279337

>>8279332
>Anyone who excels in their field can be considered a genius, in that field.

Is JK Rowling a genius?

>> No.8279341

>>8279337
JK Rowling isn't a good writer

>>8279335
your "reasons" are retarded. it's basically "hurr STEM people aren't popular". no shit.

>> No.8279344

>>8279341
What are you talking about? JK Rowling is one of the best selling and best recognized (if not THE best recognized) authors alive today.

>> No.8279350

>>8279318
If more people are becoming singers, actors, etc. than scientists, doesn't that mean that their talent is cheaper and that the lesser-populated STEM field is the refuge of the truly exceptional?

>Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see. -Arthur Schopenhauer

That's why everyone can recognize ''''genius'''' outside of STEM.

>7/8 got me to respond

>> No.8279353

>>8279320
nobody considers tyga a genius. someone people would call a genius is kanye. kanye is super super autistic and that makes him good at what he does as a legitimate innovator and cultural figurehead.

>> No.8279354

>>8279344
popularity is not ability

>> No.8279358

>>8279353
>kanye is a legitimate innovator and cultural figurehead
hahahaha holy shit

>> No.8279363

>>8279354
>my arbitrary metric a priori rules out anything i disagree with

>> No.8279366

>>8279358
shit son tell me why not.

>> No.8279369

>>8279318
Non sequitur. Famous doesn't make you smart. Working memory is something you develop and improve. Science requires data and skilled labour, so me too-ing can actually be useful.

>> No.8279375

>>8279363
JK Rowling isn't a good writer.

>> No.8279387

>>8279375
She succeeded greatly in her field, by your very definition she would be a genius.

>> No.8279392

>>8279387
she excelled at making money selling books, sure
not at being a great writer

>> No.8279403

it's because those non-STEM 'geniuses' you talk about get more exposure due to their profession
ask somebody on the street if they've heard of alexander grothendieck or jean pierre serre and they're likely to answer no
STEM produces more geniuses, but nobody cares because the things STEM geniuses do can't be seen or heard by common people

>> No.8279404

>>8279366
stop acting black when youre a white suburban teen

>> No.8279410

>>8279403
well shit do

the guy had a growth on his dick mayne

>> No.8279431
File: 166 KB, 877x1024, Rubens_Peale_with_a_Geranium.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8279431

>>8279318
Why do STEM majors engineer the finest shitposts?

>> No.8279437

>>8279404
not white, not suburban
you've made no counter. kanye has bad press because he's a literal autist and can't talk but if you're at all interested in hiphop/musicingeneral he's done great stuff.

>> No.8279438

>>8279437
*not a teen either

>> No.8279613

>>8279403
This.
STEM geniuses are only able to "express" their geniuses through advanced mathematical equations and calculus, stuff that 99% of non STEM people can't understand. It's like another language to them. Most true geniuses in music don't get that much exposure either because their music is too obscure and non normie friendly, it's really the same deal there

>> No.8279636

everybody can listen to a popular song and admit that it's catchy
99% of people don't even know what a matrice or an integral is
how do you expect them to appreciate a mathematical genius?
seriously OP your idea makes zero sense

>> No.8279640

real geniuses make art AND do math

>> No.8279642

>>8279318
Most study STEM for the easy money. Consider all the poo in the loos.

Follow the herd...

>> No.8279645

>>8279636
This.

>> No.8279675
File: 74 KB, 300x339, 1471338126956.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8279675

>>8279636
Not really, only people exposed to that type of music might find it catchy, someone who'd never listened to music before might find it horrendous noise.

You've been conditioned to appreciate matrices and integrals.

>> No.8279894

>>8279318

Music, film etc. produces more "geniuses" because anyone can understand those things to some degree. You may not understand the structure of a musical piece, but you can enjoy it nonetheless and define the creator as a genius based on the emotional content of the piece.

You can't really do that with science, as it is so formal.

Being a famous genius really depends on the accessibility of the field. You cannot recognize a "genius" if you do not understand what he or she does at least on a surface level. You know the person is smart, but you have no measure of how smart or ingenious.

That's it.

>> No.8279899

>>8279324
>not writing the chord pattern with Roman numerals

Pleb

>> No.8279915

>>8279894
>Being a famous genius really depends on the accessibility of the field.

Few people understand the nature of genius in art or music, they have to be told why it is the work of a genius. The same is true for maths and physics.

This is why you get people saying "I don't know what art is but I know what I like".

>> No.8279986

>Is it possible that non-STEM people are the true geniuses?

Being good at maths is only a tiny fraction of being a genius/gifted or having high IQ. It is the most popular in pop culture and people associate high intelligence with it but it isn't the only defining feature of a smart person. Sometimes people of high intelligence suck at math too, though that mostly comes down to lack of effort from their part.

>> No.8279993

>>8279915
>The same is true for maths and physics.
No, it's not. Mathematics and physics are measurable and clear, a musical "genius" composes a pattern of notes that is entirely up to the listener to judge.

>> No.8280003

>>8279993
Not him but how Mozart being able to re-compose a musical piece from memory after hearing it once not an objective sign of being a musical genius?

>> No.8280016

>>8280003
That's an objective sign that he has incredible memory and a good ear, it says nothing about his musical ability.

>> No.8280017

>>8279993
>Mathematics and physics are measurable and clear

This is precisely why genius in the arts is much harder to judge and hence STEM students are unnerved by the humanities, preferring instead the formulaic nature of the sciences.

This is also why so many Asians like STEM, it's rigid and predictable structure appeals to their hive psychologies.

>> No.8280029

>>8280017
No, calling someone an artistic "genius" has no meaning because your subjective criteria for being a genius is arbitrary and worthless.

Explain why your opinion is any more valid than a 14 year old girl who worships Justin Beiber and calls him a genius.

>> No.8280039

>>8279318
Praise, especially by uneducated, ordinary people, means nothing to a genius.

>> No.8280045

>>8280016
You're just taking it down to the basics of what being a genius is.

What you said applies to genius stem people as well, ergo by your logic there are no objective stem geniuses.

>> No.8280048
File: 2.86 MB, 604x340, AMS 2016-08-11 14-25-56-95.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8280048

Having a good subconscious feel for handling situations in realtime is what impresses me most.

And I'm not just talking about physical activities, but also more subtle activity such as meditation and exhibiting that "in the zone" or state of tranquility in high pressure situations which would make normal people choke.

>> No.8280053

>>8280045
Not at all, re read my post. Newton did not discover calculus because he had a good memory.

>> No.8280069

Genius is a categorization of prestige and merit from others in your field, yes?

>> No.8280087

>>8279437
hip hop isn't music

>> No.8280090

>>8279318
Answer: no
/thread

>> No.8280098

>>8280016
>Having perfect pitch has nothing to do with musical ability

>> No.8280110

>>8279899
Kek

>> No.8280115
File: 125 KB, 766x960, 1471529442709.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8280115

>>8280029
>No, calling someone an artistic "genius" has no meaning because your subjective criteria for being a genius is arbitrary and worthless.

No, it's based upon a very hard to grasp notion of quality.

>Explain why your opinion is any more valid than a 14 year old girl who worships Justin Beiber and calls him a genius.

Exactly what way could Bieber be compared favourably with Mozart?

If anything you demonstrate how the modern society is part of a cultural dumbing down. STEM as a phenomena is part of that.

>> No.8280116
File: 24 KB, 625x626, CzVdZ7n.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8280116

>>8279318
sage


reported for shitposting also

>> No.8280125

>>8280115
>That which is genius is of very high quality, that which is of very high quality is genius

>> No.8280158

>>8280125
>>That which is genius is of very high quality, that which is of very high quality is genius

You're starting to get there.

In STEM it's a lot more clearer cut.

>> No.8280191

If you believe that musical/art geniuses got there through talent alone and not hard work you are clearly deluded

>> No.8280220

>>8279318
>real talent
Unfalsifiable nonsense. You cannot prove that people with "real talent" didn't just work harder/better than people without.

>> No.8280260
File: 137 KB, 640x640, 1462267149604.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8280260

>>8280220
>You cannot prove that people with "real talent" didn't just work harder/better than people without.

"Genius is 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration."
- Einstein

>> No.8280265

>>8280220
>lmao anybody can be Terry Tao
>again
Let's not do that again. For genius, you need both.

>> No.8280286

>>8279358
He has literally shown an ability to innovate within hip-hop. Just because you think it's not a legitimate artform doesn't change this.

>> No.8280298

>>8280260
>driving a meat coated skeleton

>(((driving)))

that implies that you are in charge, which you are not. free will is an illusion and does not really exist. you're being driven, you are not the driver

>> No.8280322
File: 52 KB, 357x365, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8280322

>>8280298
People actually believe this?

>> No.8280336

>>8280322
how can you not?

>> No.8280362

>>8279318
You do realise, that most of "genius artists" are just a face of big money making machine. Real geniuses are writers, scenographers and producers.

>> No.8280366

>>8279358
He set the precedent for much of today's hip hop.

>> No.8280378

Artistic genius here, not even baiting.

Sometimes, I wish I could be better at science. I'm pretty average, but patterns are something I'm good at.

>> No.8280382

>>8280378
post your work

>> No.8280398

>>8280048
>uses a cute game to demonstrate his point
That's pretty adorable anon, no lie