What makes a person a Genius?

Post Reply New Topic

Is a genius person just a person that is more indepth when it comes to problem solving and overall mental enhancement compared to a regular person or is everyone a genius? Genius in my definition is a person that is able to solve complex things such as equations or anything difficult that a average person will have a lot of difficulties solving, also a vivid imagination should be necessarily because that is pretty much where they begin on great works.

My question is:

Isn't everybody a genius if they just stay with the subject they love and is making progress in it no matter what the actual intellectual abilites the person has (maybe unless if it's below 70 iq)? Practically everyone is a genius, but the real[i] geniuses do only have it simplified, everything should come down to creativity and bringing up at new topic that might actually work. If I came up with a great idea on something, what is preventing me from doing it compared to a genius?

(English is not my primary launguage so please do not critize me were I'm grammaticaly incorrect)
(And also sorry if I'm creating to many topics regarding the human intelligence)
Thank you for your time. //Quantum

No, not everyone is. There a lot of components that makes an individual a genius. Also, even if there were someone who is, and doesn't use his/her genius into something productive and into something useful, that would rather be a total waste, don't you think?

The technical definition is someone with an IQ of 140+. I am not a genius, therefore the answer is "no"

Yep

<--- Far from genius. You should hear him play the guitar, though.

An author said: "Genius is the strength to stretch the ability to exert oneself to the utmost".
We humans have many intelligences, and someone who has been working with asperger children said: Every one of them has a spot of genius. It is only a matter of finding it.
So, I voted: Don´t know.

No, "genius" is a word that includes the concept of being unusual. So, in order to correctly use the word "genius", you would have to be referring to someone whose talent in some area is something that most people don't have--natural ability, combined with things like effort and creativity, to take them further than most people could go. "An artistic genius" is someone who is noteworthy for his skill in art. "Genius" without modifiers often refers to intellectual ability, especially in academics; ex., "Stephen Hawking is a genius."

There are words that can refer to a human being's ability to do one thing very well, so much better than most other people that most people will never be able to do as well, without using the term "genius".

One such term is "specialist". This would be a person who has chosen a small field to focus on, and dedicated a large amount of his effort to it. For example, you might say, "He's always been musically talented, but his specialty is playing the violin." Specialist is a term often used in scientific, medical, and engineering context--for example, "a specialist in deep-sea ecosystems".

Another term you could use is "expert". This is a word that implies that someone has reached close to the maximum possible knowledge or skill in some field. Expert is a more general term than specialist and is applied to many areas, but it does assume that some level of skill has been gained. Examples: "He's an expert cake decorator." "She's an expert watchmaker," imply that these people could decorate a cake or repair a watch better than pretty much anyone else except another expert.

"Experienced" is used when you want to talk about somebody's long-term practical knowledge. It implies skill, but it also implies a lot of time spent learning. "She's an experienced pre-school teacher," implies that this person has been a preschool teacher for long enough to know a lot about the job, and has probably been through many situations that a preschool teacher might need to know how to handle.

On the other hand, "talented" doesn't say very much about how long someone has been practicing; it's all about innate skill. Perhaps because of their early upbringing, their genetics, or their environment, someone who is described as "talented" has the potential to learn something very well and probably unusually quickly. "My daughter is a talented actress," implies that she is naturally good at acting.

"Gifted" is a clinical term that refers either to an unusually high skill in a single academic subject, or to a globally advanced academic ability, usually accompanied by a high IQ test score. "A gifted child" probably has an IQ of 130 or higher. "A gifted mathematician" is someone who is unusually good at mathematics.

Very few people are geniuses.
Some people are gifted.
Many people are talented.
Most people can become experts.
Anyone can become experienced.
Anyone can become a specialist.

Ok. I'm going to specialize in astrophysics and I'm not gifted neither a genius in this subject (I'm 16 right now). What are the odds of me actually doing a scientific discovery in this subject, like a new kind of energy that can be used in equations (by equation I mean for example another kind of Gravity or something similar). Is it extremly low or completely random or the ammount of time I put into it, or do I have to be a Genius?

Who knows. If you are dedicated enough, and put the effort into your subject of interest you could do it, or not. It has reminded me of this proverb: " The one who follows, the one who accomplish" It's the translation of it. It says that you have to have plenty of perseverance and patience. In the case of such discovery, even if it's possible, it's not something that can be done overnight; it will take some time to make such discovery. That's why the dedication, perseverance, patience, etc, etc. It's about trying and not giving up; lot of things have some factor on it to make such accomplishment.

Just work in retail for a short while at a place with a good cross section of the population as customers and you will quickly learn that there are very few geniuses out there.

I just use Lisa Simpson as an idea of what a genius is. I'm nowhere near a genius. I'm probably clever in my own way but they say everyone is. But I'm not, like, outstandingly clever. Most NTs got higher grades than I did at school. Some even got A's in math and science, while I got an F in math and an E in science.

But my theory of a genius is probably wrong. If I'm not a genius myself, I doubt I'm going to know what is really a genius.

I think the difference between 'gifted' and 'genius' is that the gifted person has the natural ability, the genius actually does something with that natural ability and has a wider range of natural abilities.

I vote that the word Genius be eliminated from anything to do with so call intelligence.
I once 30 years ago or so created a program that a man that people considered to be a genius said could not be done – others took it on and said it could not be done six months later I produced it on my own – so I must be a genius if I did what the genius said could not be done.
I am just an everyday person accept I am an Aspie and people see me as really ignorant and as an Aspie I do a lot of weird things speak incorrect and behave not like normal’s “thank god” anyway
I saw in my head a picture of the program and it took me six months to get it out.
I had a thought and I was a thousand present dedicated to it.
What I want to say is
This person has a good imagination and is really dedicated
This person has an impressive memory
This person really knows how to get things done
This person really learns fast
This person is a great leader and can cause great things to happen
I hope you understand what I am trying to say - all of the above can appear to be a genius in whatever they are doing if it has excelled in an over abundant way.
My only thing I stand by is “knowledge without action as no value” or IQ without action the same

The term “genius” is generally used subjectively rather than objectively, to refer to someone of brilliant achievement, and usually an achievement that others appreciate. A person can be regarded as a genius by some and a useless twit by others. Many of those in history who are regarded as genius were not so until some time after their death.

Many of those who possess a natural talent will not use it in a manner that most would recognise as notable. Sociological, economic and personal motivation factors play a significant roll in whether a person will realise their talent. Often with the talent comes difference which is generally disadvantageous amongst a creature whose dominant function is sociological. A person who may be brilliant at physics but working as a shoe salesman will more likely just be viewed as odd and shunned.

To a great degree the difference between a gift and a disorder is whether someone else appreciates it or not, and the term genius is mainly rhetorical.

Humans tend to more rely on power to achieve rather than intellectual or creative talent. Power is gaining sociological advantage, which is more innately motivated. I don't think that most people could achieve grandeur in the manner the OP defines, as they don't posses a natural awareness and it's not necessary for success.

Certainly though, if one has a specific area of interest they can increase their ability by practice. The degree one achieves is always limited by relevant factors, but these factors are not absolutely constraining. One factor which is commonly under observed is pure dumb luck. For example, under Darwinism, generally taken as the survival of the fittest, there is no account for the slowest pray being on the far end of the herd from where the predictor attacked, and the fastest being on the closest. With a 200 metre advantage, coincidentally the pray with the greatest potential fails while the one with the least potential succeeds. Luck is probably the greatest and most consistent factor in just about everything.

By that definition I'm a genius, but I'm quite sure I'm not.

It makes more sense, to me, to reserve the word for people who accomplish something amazing.

An average person who wants to become an astrophysicist? Totally possible. You would have to work harder than people who are talented in the subject. Because astrophysics is a highly theoretical branch of science, your PhD would probably involve some new discovery, however minor--a new method for measuring something; a new way of solving a problem; a new pattern in the data that no one else has found yet. Most scientists--even geniuses--are not going to make major, Einstein-like contributions to their fields; rather, what they do is slowly build on what others have done, gathering evidence for or against various theories, adding to the sum of knowledge in the field. So, yes, if you wanted to be an astrophysicist despite not being either gifted or a genius, you could be one, and you would probably make new discoveries of some kind. The chances that you'd discover something along the lines of "another kind of gravity"--well, that's rare enough even among genius astrophysicists, but who knows? You might stumble onto something like that by pure chance and willingness to take the time to process the data. Jocelyn Bell and pulsars comes to mind... and she was only a graduate student at the time.