User:Graeme E. Smith/Collections/Model Series/Datamining/What is Genius

What is Genius?

Genius is the ability to go from a mistaken assumption to a foregone conclusion in one fell swoop
‌One has to ask, if Genius is what a person is, or what they do? Scientists spent millions of taxpayers dollars trying to find out what made a person a genius, and the question is still there, we don't really know if Genius is a characteristic of a certain type of person, or just a stage they go through at some point in their life, that makes them unusually productive. Certainly, much of the research into I.Q. levels, failed to predict geniuses. A Genius Level I.Q. of around 160 or higher depending on the I.Q. scale used, does not correspond always to particular levels of productivity.

SAVANTS

‌Many real geniuses have done poorly in school, never gaining more than about a B average. Suggesting that the I.Q. level which IS a good predictor of ability to do school work, is not a good predictor of Genius. In fact one specific type of genius, a type called a SAVANT, usually does poorly in I.Q. tests because they have an unusual profile in their aptitudes (The tests done to determine I.Q. when taken separately). Unlike most people who have a fairly even level of aptitudes across the board, Savants tend to have a wide variation in their abilities with aptitudes that are much lower in some tests than in others.((indent|8}}Those Savants with the most differences are often called Idiot Savants because they are idiots in some aptitudes and Geniuses in others. A person with a 98th percentile mechanical aptitude could have a 20th percentile clerical aptitude. They might test out as normal or only slightly superior, because the Total Score of their I.Q. test would be degraded by their lack of aptitude for clerical tasks. Savants may be showing symptoms of a type of Autism Spectrum Disorder such as Asperger's or may be showing signs of some sort of brain injury. The fact is that many Autistic people have Savant capabilities of one type or another. The famous "Rainman" example, where Dustin Hoffman played an Autistic Idiot Savant with a penchant for numbers, is a case in point.

Know him by his Actions

‌The only real way to recognize a Genius, is by being there when they make an important step, or by judging their work afterwords. In the case of SAVANTS, it is often the case that their work is denigrated during their life, and only recognized later when they are found to be forerunners in a new paradigm of thought. It has been said that by definition anyone who is doing seminal work, is a "Crack-pot" until their work is recognized. The problem seems to be how to get promoted from crack-pot to genius within your own life-time.
‌Often a worker at a seminal level is ignored because their work is KNOWN to be wrong, because it doesn't fit the standard of the current scientific establishment. Often advances in science must be done by generations, as if it took 2 generations for an idea to percolate through the system. The problem is that people become less adaptive as they get older, and it takes almost a lifetime to get to a respected position in science, so the current people running science have a vested interest in keeping the science they know, as the science that is accepted. Later, students who search through the libraries for odd stuff, may come across the work, and be amazed at its valuable insights. Gallileo for instance couldn't get published because the church which ran the presses wouldn't publish anything that didn't place the earth in the center of the solar system. Today, we know he was more right than Copernicus, who had loops in the orbits of the planets.

Not Invented Here!

‌These are the difficulties of being an unrecognized genius. Yet, perhaps geniuses are not so much unrecognized as actively ignored. Many people seem to think that the whole reason that a genius tries to get recognized is that they are needy for attention. Therefore anyone who is working in an unknown or seminal area, is automatically labeled a crack-pot. This may in fact be part of their motivation for doing the work, but it is a socially discouraged motivation. Further, in many cases, there is a significant investment in prestige in coming from the best Universities, and a sort of "Not Invented Here" mindset to ideas that come from outside that rarefied atmosphere. If all the geniuses go to Oxford, Substitute Your Own Alma Mater Here then why would anyone listen to a Savant from Edmonton?

The Politics of Science and Medicine

‌I once listened with dismay when my brother told me, that Medical Doctors in Canada, ignore medical scientists in other countries, and only listen to their own medical community about what is medicine and what isn't. From a science point of view it is silly, but from a political point of view it is reasonable, and science and medicine are first of all political. After all the Physicians and Surgeons have come a long way since they used to be called Quacks, and Barbers.
‌So it is with scientists that manage to work their way up in the University hierarchy, managing somehow to balance their research, teaching or supervision of students doing projects, and publishing some minimal number of articles every year. The ones that don't publish perish, and publishing is a major part of their careers. So why would an unlettered SAVANT from Edmonton be listened to. Everyone they know by that time is either a student or a PHD, so if you are not a PHD you must be a student. Who listens to students? This is reminiscent of An unfortunate series of Events where no one listened to the children. The Moral is obvious, not everyone who isn't a PHD is a student, and even if they were, you should listen to students, if only to make sure they are ok. It might also be a good idea to keep your eyes on what other countries are doing in medicine, instead of hiding your head in the sand.
‌Enough moralizing, it won't make any difference anyway. In passing however, I have to say that there are a few SAVANTS that don't make it to Oxford or MIT or Your Alma Mater Here that may still be doing valid seminal work. Luckily we have the Internet, WikiUniversity and Wikibooks. Are they Geniuses? Only in their particular seminal topic, perhaps, and maybe if they reach high enough not even there.