This thread is closed

Child Genii at Oxbridge

poulanck

I don't think I believe in genius but I do think it is a dangerous concept. I remember thinking "I don't have a maths brain" and "I'll never be able to be really good at it" but just tried hard work and have done pretty well since. I am sure there are many other people who don't try hard at maths because they think it takes a genius or someone different to be any good at it.

Well this is fair enough and its an attractive idea that we are all as smart as each other but some just try harder or whatever, but I just don't buy it. The achievements of some of these prodigies aren't just impressive, they are beyond any common notion of intellect. William Sidis, for example (as a very narrow snapshot of his achievements) could calculate mentally the day any date in history would fall at age six, passed MIT entrance exam at age eight, and knew every language in existence (around 200). I don't think skills like that can be taught! Dangerous or not, genuis does exist.

Reply 81

platinumki

10

I genuinely belive that anyone is capable of anything (OK, I'm unlikely to become a ballerina and if you are blind then the Turner Prize is out the window. Actually.... :rolleyes:

) It always appears to me that life is an unequal playing field. Some of us are born near the top of the hill and therefore we need less effort to score, but that doesn't mean that people further down the hill, if they work, can't ahem, dribble their way up. To continue the metaphor (which I don't really follow myself), this is where our parenets come in handy, why the buying of kit. Our background cannot be overlooked just as someone with hiking boots will find it easier going that someone in pink bunny slippers.

Did that make any sense at all? :p:

Reply 82

Clodagh

Alewhey

Well this is fair enough and its an attractive idea that we are all as smart as each other but some just try harder or whatever, but I just don't buy it. The achievements of some of these prodigies aren't just impressive, they are beyond any common notion of intellect. William Sidis, for example (as a very narrow snapshot of his achievements) could calculate mentally the day any date in history would fall at age six, passed MIT entrance exam at age eight, and knew every language in existence (around 200). I don't think skills like that can be taught! Dangerous or not, genuis does exist.

I'm scared now...*meeps and hides*

Reply 83

poulanck

Alewhey

Well this is fair enough and its an attractive idea that we are all as smart as each other but some just try harder or whatever, but I just don't buy it. The achievements of some of these prodigies aren't just impressive, they are beyond any common notion of intellect. William Sidis, for example (as a very narrow snapshot of his achievements) could calculate mentally the day any date in history would fall at age six, passed MIT entrance exam at age eight, and knew every language in existence (around 200). I don't think skills like that can be taught! Dangerous or not, genuis does exist.

Ok I accept your point - there are some people who obviously have learning difficulties and others who are at the opposite end of the scale. There are also those autistic savant kids who authors seem to love so much. However what I was meaning is that to equate learning ability with achievement is wrong. Maybe some people can learn a language a day or calculate/memorise pi to a zillion decimal places but that doesnt mean they will have insights ahead of their time.

Don't you ever find that you can be thinking about one idea in a book or hear someone quote something and not quite get what it means but you sort of acknoweldge its importance and store it somewhere in your subconsious and then you read something else or play your violin/get hit on the head by an apple/come across something analagous in another discipline and suddenly understand what it means? I think what I am trying to say is that this isnt a result of genius this just occurs when you are passionate/engaged enough with something to think about it a lot.

Perhaps another point to make is that the term "genius" is extremely ambiguous. You seem to take it to mean something innate which some people are born with and which cannot be taught. Few would dispute Einstein and Mozart were a genii but we all know Einstein was not a particularly fast learner nor even that good at maths and Mozart, well he had over 20 000 hours of tuition!

So basically I'm pretty confused by this all - maybe one day I will be attacked by a pineapple and suddenly it will all make sense and I will go on to win prizes in cognitive psychology... "hey, sibling, throw that pineapple at me will you? aaaooow... Doh!"

Reply 84

poulanck

Oooh I just thought of something else (unaided by fruit) -

Mozart couldn't be decribed as a genius (under the definition of being born with an innate "superhuman" ability) unless we assumed that classical music and the western scale etc were transcendental and absolute.

It makes more sense to call someone a maths genius as maths is a universal and absolute thing and is to some extent, ability in maths is innate in us all anyway.

Reply 85

Font

i don't think anyone is born a genius sdo you...its an effect of environmental variation and how a person is brought up; and the most critical stages occur during the first 5-10 years of ones life, where they develop mentally, very significantly, an dif you teach them to think one way, then surely they will be better off in the long run...just a theory i came up with :biggrin:

start the debate...

pk

Reply 86

specialhelen

just to add to this - it is thought that it is highly likely that he was dsylexic therefore did not have the head start in life that other genii had!!!!

Reply 87

Universal*

How do you know if someone's a genious? Is there some sort of scale that you can measure it off? For me the answer to the latter question would be no. Therefore genius is relative, it's the comparison of one to another that leads to the conclusion of whether s/he is a genius. But it has often been quoted that humans use less than 10% (or something like that) of our brain, could it be that these people have simply learnt how to use their brains to their full potential? If so, then surely everyone has genius inside of them but doesent know how to exploit it as well as the genii out there. Then one could argue that on this basis alone they are a genius because they've learnt how to tap into their brain power effectively

Reply 88

shiny

12

Wayne Rooney is a Football Genius!

Reply 89

Font

shiny

Wayne Rooney is a Football Genius!

he's just a rude potato headed t wat!!!!!!!! (ha try censor this!-damn moderators)

Reply 90

Universal*

http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/B00062OHCE.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg[img/]

I know it's been done

Reply 91

shiny

12

Phil23

he's just a rude potato headed t wat!!!!!!!! (ha try censor this!-damn moderators)

maybe. but on the pitch he is a genius!

Reply 92

Alewhey

Universal*

But it has often been quoted that humans use less than 10% (or something like that) of our brain, could it be that these people have simply learnt how to use their brains to their full potential? If so, then surely everyone has genius inside of them but doesent know how to exploit it as well as the genii out there. Then one could argue that on this basis alone they are a genius because they've learnt how to tap into their brain power effectively

Once again, this would be very nice if it were true, but the 10% story is a myth. We use most all of our brains most all of the time.

Reply 93

Fluffy

15

Not exactly a reputable source of information!! :wink:

Reply 94

shiny

12

Fluffy

Not exactly a reputable source of information!! :wink:

Mama!

Reply 95

Alewhey

:/ I've seen that myth refuted so many times in so many different places that I didn't bother checking the source. I admit that one was a little dodgy, try:

http://www.sci-con.org/articles/20040901.html
http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/10percnt.htm
http://www.brainconnection.com/topics/?main=fa/brain-myth

Hopefully you will think at least one of these is trustworthy!

Reply 96

Fluffy

15

Alewhey

:/ I've seen that myth refuted so many times in so many different places that I didn't bother checking the source. I admit that one was a little dodgy, try:

http://www.sci-con.org/articles/20040901.html
http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/10percnt.htm
http://www.brainconnection.com/topics/?main=fa/brain-myth

Hopefully you will think at least one of these is trustworthy!

er... no! A peer reviewed offical artical/jounal piece would be more trust worthy! Anyone can set up a webiste and claim X, Y or Z. Doesn't mean it's right though :wink:

Reply 97

shiny

12

My mother was a bit of a child prodigy.

Reply 98

mandu13

What most people dub a "normal" childhood is oftentimes unsuited/restricting to gifted children. People have a tendency to worry that putting a bright child in a university setting will hinder "normal" social development, but that "normal" developmental path in many cases probably would not have been a very pleasant alternative to that child in the first place. I myself entered uni at 14 (in the US) and looking back on the past four years, I don't regret my decision to do so at all. I feel that my social skills are at least on par with those of my peers, and I feel lucky to have had the opportunity to have a much more satisfying academic, intellectual *and*
social experience over the past four years than I would have otherwise. Of course, my good experience with early college also has much to do with the fact that my parents were fairly open-minded and never overly pushy. My decision to enter early was pretty much my own, and once in college, I was given quite a bit of freedom and encouragement to pursue social activities. Since the drinking age in the US is 21, I also wasn't left alone when fellow students who were of-age went bar-hopping. Also, I had a support network of other early-entrance students when I first entered college (there was a program at my university that allowed around ten 14-16 year olds to enter college early per year) to help me adjust...so I was lucky in that respect as well...
Although no one can really hypothesize with great certainty about the road not taken, I feel that I would have been much unhappier due to both intellectual and social stiflement had I gone the traditional secondary schooling route. The late middle and early high school years (in the US) are notorious for producing the majority of one's life quota of angst and low self-esteem, and some part of me is extremely glad to have missed that experience...
but who knows?

Child Genii at Oxbridge

Related discussions

Trending

Latest