Everytime I hear someone described as a genius in the media, it makes me wonder. What exactly IS a genius? How do they differ from someone who is simply very good at something? Or is that enough? Do they have to come up with a new idea? Do they have to show insight into an existing problem?
I'd love to know what other people think defines a genius.
I think that is going to be very hard to define. Someone can be a genius in their own profession. We have musical geniuses - Mozart was a child genius. Where would you start?
I think it would be very frustrating for a real genius to look at this world, see everything that is wrong with it and know that they couldn’t do anything about it.
I'm not really convinced there is such a thing as genius. As the saying goes "Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration". Although I'm not even sure that's accurate, it's more like "Genius is 1% inspiration, 50% perspiration, 30% being in the right place at the right time, 10% having the right contacts and 9% luck".
There is no doubt that some people are cleverer than others, and there is no doubt that some people work harder than others, but that doesn't mean there's anything special enough about them to deserve the title of genius. As Newton (probably) said, "If I have seen further than others it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants", and that is true for pretty much everyone who is generally regarded as a genius.
Take Eistein. There's no doubt he was pretty clever, but when it comes down to it, relativity was just waiting to happen. All the ground work on Lorentz transformations, Maxwell's equations, time as a fourth dimension, and so on, was already done. Einstein just took it one step further. If he hadn't, someone else would have. Even most of the implications of relativity weren't worked out by Einstein, they were worked out by other people at the time and later. Or take Stephen Hawking. He's fairly smart, but is he actually any different from the rest of the people at the top of his field? Same for Feynman. They might be more famous, but they were working in a fairly large community of equally clever people, so why do some get called genius and some never even get heard of?
Genius is basically a useless word that just describes a fairly clever person with good PR.
Better sorry than safe.
Certainly along with the up and comng "legend", "genius" is one of the most overused words around it's meaning diluted by its application to more and more mundane.
For me I don't think it is enough to be exceptionally tallented in one field or to ahve scored well on an IQ test. To truly deserve the appelation one must be the renaissance man head and shoulder above his peers in multiple disciplines.
Leonardo da Vinci - Undoubted Genius, Archimedes, Newton, Goethe and Gallieo Gallilei. Geniuses (Genii?) Einstein - Really good at physics but what else? Mozart - musical prodigy but what about the other arts, science or philosophy?
What then about the venerable Bede, John Dee or Pascal.
Certainly not Bill Gates (IQ 160) Quentin Tarrantino (IQ 160) Andrew Wiles (IQ 170) Bobby Fisher (IQ 187) or Garry Kasparov (IQ 190)
It takes more than just good test scores and one exceptional talent to qualify in my book.
Mozart not a genius? Surely he was! Your definition including distinction in several fields - isn't that a polymath?
I think we can take the intelligent bit as a given but what part does creativity play in genius? Doesn't a genius have to do something new rather than just really well? I willingly accept that simply coming up with original ideas doesn't make you a genius (though it could make you mentally unstable!). Is genius, perhaps, the ability not only to innovate but also to be able to apply that innovation in a useful way?
More thoughts please!
Last edited by MRT; 15th October 2007 at 11:26 AM.
You are a genius when other people start saying about your ideas and work "that's genius!".
It's like 'cool' in that respect. You're only it when other people deign to describe you as it, not when you yourself think so.
Oh dear, in that case just call me idiot.
Mozart wrote a lot of competent, but hardly inspiring music. But he did it at the age of 12, or whatever. I don't know if that is genius. It seems that it came fairly easily to Mozart; Beethoven really had to work at it. Haydn too.Originally Posted by MRT
Mozart mostly wrote what his employers requested - it happened to be better than most of his contemporaries' output.
LVB mostly wrote what he wanted, and tried to get income from subscriptions/publication.
Personally, I'm a Beethoven fan. He wrote very little rubbish, but if you want to hear some, try "Wellington's Victory"!.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear
bright, until you hear them speak.
Well, if I am forced to choose between Wolfgang Amadeus and Ludwig van, I go for the jobbing musician. Can't be doing with all that tedious Romantic stuff about " seizing fate by the throat"...
I'm a JSB man meself. There has to be something all right about a man who was described by one of his sons as " the old fart"; and himself described continuo playing as " a harmonious unity to the greater glory of God and the permitted delectation of the mind". Don't you love that permitted?
Quick thought about the difference between scientific and artistic genius: priority matters to scientists in a way that it doesn't to artists. Relativity may have been waiting to be discovered when Einstein did the business. But no one was itching to write the Brandenburgs before JSB nipped in first.
As a good friend of mine would say, the music of JSB is "really average". Meaning rather good.
Me - I rather like a drop of LBV with my LVB.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear
bright, until you hear them speak.
LBV? Steady, man-that way lies Buckie! :-)As a good friend of mine would say, the music of JSB is "really average". Meaning rather good.
Me - I rather like a drop of LBV with my LVB.
And your friend is being rather mean-spirited IMO. JSB deserves the highest praise: he is humdrum.
Sir,
I don't know where you found the Romantic stuff about "seizing fate by the throat". Possibly from Tovey, or a 19th century historical romantic. Have you tried listening to one of the late Beethoven string quartets? Extremely demanding.
Anyway, for what my opinion is worth, I think you are right about scientific thought - just fundamentally different from music. As a novice, I think I am beginning to appreciate the beauty of science.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear
bright, until you hear them speak.
Hi, bindeweede.
The business about seizing fate by the throat is from the man himself ( scroll down about 9/10 of the way):
http://www.raptusassociation.org/pianohist_e1.htm
However, I should add that I can't remember where I first found the quotation- certainly not in his letters.
As for the late quartets being demanding, I agree. Not my thing, though.
The thought that priority matters in a special way in science is, alas, not mine. Peter Medawar came up with it in his review of Koestler's Act of Creation. My only excuse is that I steal from the very best.
Regards
Wagner. His flaws as a human put paid to the divine nature of genius as ascribed to Mozart by, among others, Georg Solti. The idea that genius is “God given” demeans the human spirit and reduces us to the status of mere instruments of another agency's will.
JSB, Mozart and LVB have been cited as “proof” of God's existence (the argument from beauty), but never, as far as I know, Wagner. The creativity and complexity of the Ring is truly astounding and, to me, it is one of the pinnacles of human artistic endeavour. For want of a better word, I would call it a work of genius.
I find genius or even intelligence hard to understand.
What exactly IS intelligence anyway?
An autistic savant who can tell you what day of the week for any date in history but can't understand other basic concepts, is this person intelligent?
Dogs are smart.
Whales are smart.
I.Q. tests seem a bit clumsy to me. I think it is a very hard thing to measure. Smart people can do some dumb things.
I don't know. What am I missing.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks