I've never really met one in engineering.

I generally feel anyone needs to spend some amount of time on the material in order to completely understand it.

Maybe there is one out there but I sure haven't met one yet.

Simple analogy:

A genius asks for directions to the store. Someone tells him to go straight, take the first right, walk to the next intersection, then make a left. He says ok, then does it.

A non-genius is told the same thing, he asks the guy to repeat it a few times, asks to look at the map, then walks down the street and takes a left because it just doesn't make sense to him. If he looks at the map enough times though, he'll probably get there.

Basically, a genius is someone who completely understands things as they should be understood, instead of struggling with an incomplete understanding. To a genius, the things that other people consider complex are clear and straight-forward.

But hey, we're not here to talk about that, we're here so OP can spout false modesty and talk about how people think he's a genius.

Someone good at subject he's actually interested in. So yea, a combo of good memory and/or creative thinking + an interest of the field you're good at is pretty much what makes it.

pic related: a genius

>>4423132
Why would he go left?

>I have a really good memory
What are your techniques OP?

Well, to me a genius is a fast learner. A guy who "gets" things faster than others. You sir, might be a genious. Or just a guy who are really interested in the subject you are studying. I too could learn fast if I only had the interest and dedication for the subject.

Although it is not considered intelligence to know stuff, you can be intelligent in a way that you progress the matters of interest faster than others.

"I know that I know nothing" therefore I know more than the one believing to know everything.

I think it was the saying of Socrates.

>>4423165

>I NEED HIS NAME GOD DAMN IT

>>4423172
The same reason ungifted people start down the wrong path to prove a theorem or obtain an experimental result... they just don't understand.

The point is that it's obviously wrong to go left, yet some people still do, because they're not intelligent enough for it to be obvious to them.

>>4423192
uh check the file name

I don't really understand: what is actually hard to get in sciences? You are just shown some theories and you are asked to accept them, when someone explains shit to you, there is generally no need for them to repeat, you should grasp the idea the first time it is said. I really don't see how one can "understand" faster than others, and more specifically what is called "scientific concepts"

>>4423195
i can into quantum mechanics and topology in university, but i have no sense of street directions. does this mean i am notgenius-genius o wise one?

>>4423192
You sir, are the definition of a genius. Discussion is hereby closed due to this conclusion!

>>4423192

>not knowing who Ramanujan is

By the sounds of it you probably are a genius OP. If it's not just kids saying it but the teachers as well then chances are that you're a genius. I think you should tripfag as The Genius from now on and really help /sci/ to become a better place with your genius ways. I wish people would think that I am a genius, but I guess I'm just not that much of a genius.

P.S. genius

>>4423195
>The same reason ungifted people start down the wrong path to prove a theorem or obtain an experimental result
>they just don't understand

>tfw i'm ungifted

A friend of mine had some really dodgy friends that wanted him to take up a loan on a car for a road trip. He saw nothing but butterflies in this (I laughed my ass litterally off when he told me the story)

>The loan was on 21498,82 USD
>His "friend" had just been let out of jail.
>He bought the car in his name
>He had not the certificate
>They said they were going to pay him back

Roadtrip went fine, although they stumbled upon an incident that costed them 3583,13 USD more.
>His pocket

Afterwards, the car was still in his name and the dodgy friends was picking up his sister with the car. (Yeah I know)

>He went to university
>Had to travel back and forth to get the monthly payments for the loan, he did not have the balls nor the brains to do anything about it.

After two years of this shit (he didn't do shit, accepted his faith)
They reported it stolen and he went through a living hell.

Long story short, and my point is. This is not an intelligent man's course of actions.

Genius should be thought of as a subjective term, something we can apply to people who embody a broad range of mostly semi-tangible assets.

Quick understanding can be part of it, sure, but so can the rigorous and nuanced understanding that comes from years of study. There are plenty of geniuses in all sorts of fields who came to be seen as geniuses because they put in not only long hours, but also intense, rigorous thinking about the subject.

There was a description of Douglas Adams, though, from someone I can't quite remember. Let me paraphrase: he was a genius because he saw and thought about the universe in an utterly unique fashion, and could communicate that perspective to others very clearly. I think that's as good a metric as any other on the subject, not only being able to think about things in a way that seems to escape most others, but having the wherewithal to explain it to others.

That, at least, seems to be a common thread among those we typically understand to be geniuses.

Hey, fellow Genius here. Being a genius is not just understanding, that's only half of it. The true "genius" part comes from creating new questions and thinking of answers to those questions.

Einstein? Sure he understood maths, as did many of his peers, however only he--the genius--created the theory of relativity, which ushered in a new age of understanding and learning for the non-genius.

It's kinda like trying to talk maths with an elementary school student who doesn't understand beyond long division.

Hope I simplified my explanation enough for you non-geniuses.

>>4423233
He also got several speed tickets, he got lucky they did not kill anyone with the car. As it was registered in his name.

I know, you are thinking. This is your type of friends? (pic related)

Answer; Their stupidity amuses me.

>>4423233
What the fuck, it sounds like he just isnt street smart.

>>4423266

I tend to agree. When I was younger, I might have very well fallen for something like this, despite having always been booksmart my whole life. Fortunately, "street smarts" is something that can be gained entirely through experience.

>>4423233
Why aren't those guys dead?

>>4423266
Nice dubs bro

Ohhh, I did not! Really?

Well, no. But that isn't exactly a very hard task to figure out that a loan on this scale is not a very good idea. Wether or not you are particularly "street smart" as you put it.

Or am I just too street smart thinking that everyone could figure out that this is not the smartest a jobless guy could do with his savings?

>>4423284
Your post makes my head hurt, are you a non-native english speaker?

>>4423276
They might be, my friend is entirely my creation. The power of the mind...

>>4423251
>>4423255
Pretty much.

It's that different thinking that separates the genius from the regular or even highly intelligent people. A lot of people understand very complex maths, and physics, but only a person like Hawking can think up of something like the Event Horizon.

>>4423295
Why did you waste your time creating a fake story? Looks like you trolled yourself more than us.

>>4423294
I am sorry, yes I am. Could you tell me if my other posts was as brain twitchy as this one? I try to improve my English massively!
>>4423295
>>4423264
>>4423233
>>4423189
>>4423210
I would be much obliged if you could dedicate a brief moment to this task?

>>4423294
Also, it is 03:00 am over here in Norway. Should not be an excuse nevertheless.

>>4423295
This post was a troll
>>4423304
Not the story.

>>4423317
It's ok man, I can't speak another language so I respect what ability you have.

Christ! Sorry guys, I better just fuck off to bed really soon. My posts makes anons brains twitch, I misread posts like this
>>4423276
Thinking he said; Arent those guys dead?
Counter trolling with, yes they might be.

From now on, I am only monitoring.

>>4423335
I wonder, what use does sleep have with regards to the mind? Is it a requirement to keep up the illusion of the sense of agency? Stuff starts getting weird when you lack sleep.

>>4423358
Your brain is a muscle like everything else. Could you lift weights constantly? No, your muscles need rest.

>>4423369

>your brain is a muscle

lol

>>4423369
I have used that analogy before but it still lacks in rigor.. Are we really just electrical impulses? Doesn't this mean we die every time we lose consciousness? Does death even exist?

>>4423376
our brain does the opposite of "death" when we lose consciousness (sometimes). Many times, people experience vivid visions, a higher amount of brain activity.

>>4423376
>Electrical impulses
>Die every time we loose consciousness
What is the definition of consciousness? Do we really know that we live? We exist, yes. But the present, time, our surroundings might as well be illusions that we need in order not to exceed existing. Because our mind would probably explode if we knew what was really going on. The aspect of religions (I believe) is something humans have invented in order not to go crazy over the questions of our existence.

Could not stand being spectator, question me if this is nonsense to you.

A genius is someone with a lot of talent and works their ass off.

>in order not to exceed existing
in order not to seise to exist

>>4423369
>>4423369
>>4423369
>>4423369

>>4423404
cease
My bad, going back to being spectator. Really interesting discussion. Feeling I am ruining it all!

Technically, a genius is something you *have*, not something you *are*.

A genius is a pathological individual whose pathology is an excess of algorithimical complexity in their drive, someone who can be utterly seduced by the sacrifice of energy to their obsessions and survive the sacrifice.

A genius can be a form of the inverse cripple, someone whose obsession prevents them from embracing wider propositional models that could be better utilized by the excess of mental energy that they embody.

>>4423358

And here we find a fiend in disguise, maybe in disguise to himself. He's already falsified the entire model of "mind" by pretending it as a propositional skeleton rather than an entire system of mechanics that as a condition might require or depend on submechanisms that require "sleep".

>>4423805

I don't think "fiend" is the right word. But do whatever you have to do to keep those sentences nice and colorful!

No that just means you are smart. A genius has smarts as well as creative talents and very likely a passion for what he does.

One can't be called a genius unless they produce works of genius consistently.

>>4423805

I think he's referring to those very same sub-mechanisms and is wondering what they are.

I measure genius by contribution. No point in being labelled a genius to produce no output, original insights or anything useful at all. Geniuses have contributed in some significant way. Goethe, Newton, Da Vinci, Einstein and Euler all contributed to science in some useful way or another.

>>normal above average people
Have to work hard to get anywhere

>>genius tier people
Understands everything almost perfectly the first time they learn something

I have not met a person who can actively neglect studies and still do well in relatively hard courses.

>>4423883
Really? That's your test of genius?
Then you might as well call me Gauss.

>>4423902

are you in highschool?

I'm saying you get an A+ in statistical mechanics, quantum mechanics 1+2, thermodynamics etc without studying in the least.

you heard the concepts once in the lecture, then you never looked at it again and scored the highest percentile every single time.

>>4423883
>4.0 4th semester math major, have smoked weed every single day this semester and most of the last two
personally id say that makes me not a genius but if you think the opposite im flattered

>>4423902

I'll call you a genius (a geuss)

>>4423172
I lol'd

>>4423909

>4th semester

stop right there.

just stop.

now come back after topology, real analysis and combinatorics.

there's a lot of urban legend "i know a guy who knows a guy who does nothing and gets only A's". This is bullshit. I've met 2-3 very smart people, and they were so because they had potential and worked hard to do so. Guys like Matt Damon in this movie, they exist if they do math in their spare time but never could one solve from the blue a millenium problem.

Genius is either:

Child prodigies like Terrence Tao - this type may become less of a genius with time

Von Neumann tier - Autist level mental calculation abilities

Euler/Gauss tier - significant and widespread contributions to one's field

>>4423958
What makes you so sure he didn't take them already? I took topology and analysis my second year, and hadn't even decided to do a math major until then.

I'm seeing alot of comments separating intelligence and memory. I find that a bit wrong.

I'm not saying a good memory makes a genious, certainly not. However, I've never met an intelligent person who is bad at trivia/quiz games.

A genius like Kanye West... makes the best music, makes the best album, not afraid to speak his mind

>>4423842
Well, defining it as "contributing is most important" is troublesome, because of... well.. most people may not at all realize the value of the contribution at the time and those people may rather be a drag down for the genius.

There are quite some geniuses utterly misunderstood by their peers. That's one reason why gatekeeping in academia must be crushed for instance. We can't afford to lose the contribution of geniuses just because the reviewers often are either biased or incompetent.

I have never met anyone in my life who is universally smarter than me. I don't think universal genius exists. I think it depends on the limitations imposed on the definition.

Certain individuals have structural qualities which give them category specific genius, like that autistic kid who is already in college. However, from the videos I have seen of him, he is completely socially retarded, and probably will be for his entire life.

Someone like Michael Jordan is possibly terrible at math, but he is an athletic genius. It takes a great amount of cognitive ability to control your body with such precision.

I have been called a genius before by peers and students, but I know that I am not a genius. I have my deficiencies. For example, I am average at math, and I do not reason as well as a mathematical genius. Linear functions are not intuitive to me.

However, I rarely if ever meet anyone who can understand the fundamental "essence" or axiomatic principles behind the concepts we use to distinguish reality. I am also excellent at non-linear thinking.

Most people fall into the average category, excelling averagely in all facets of intelligence ie. social, existential, analytical, motor control etc., yet amongst the geniuses, it is a much greater population than you'd think if you stop limiting your definition of genius.

I am, and it isn't just a matter of IQ (which is helpful), it's a matter of well organized thinking.

It's not that you know it a priori. It's that you generalize from your experiences REALLY REALLY well and accurately.

Thus, when you learn something "new" it isn't actually new at all because you already learned the same general principal from that time you were observing people behave in an airport, or from an economic principal or something that for everyone else would have absolutely nothing to do with the subject you are now studying.

High IQ allows you to create such generalizations in many cases where they are obvious, but you need special conditioning and thinking to continue this trend. With only above average IQ you can create an absurdly complex network of knowledge that pretty much starts to work on it's own without your conscious mind even being involved.

>>4424434
>math
>linear thinking

fuck off you ignorant swine

>>4424807
why so butthurt, when he's right?

>>4424434
This.
I have a very high IQ, but my mind is so disorganized that I can't do anything with it.

>>4424434
>I have never met anyone in my life who is universally smarter than me.

I went most of my life the same way, but then amazingly I met someone who was a polymath. The guy excelled in physics, math, economics, educational psychology, was a great writer, held arguments in improvised verse, a great cook, and pulled girls like a magnet. Made me feel inferior as shit.

>>4424813

He's mad because that guys is not right.

There's plenty of things in math that are counterintuitive and non-linear, probably more concepts in math are non-linear in spite of linear.

I hate both academically gifted and blown genius.
Come on, what they really did? It's like saying: OMG, JESUS DIED FOR YOU. Are you fucking stupid? I don't see anything amazing in it. Your fucking father is God. 30 years before you were looking at some girl's boobs with your father from somewhere in Heaven. Must be so "hard" to believe in God when you are his son. Do the same when you are nobody. Yeah, that would really be something interesting.

The same applies to so called geniuses, what's the effort you do? These things come out of yourself without any real effort. But if you are nobody, if you don't have talents at all and you come out with something brilliant. THEN you deserve respect, because from your natural mediocrity you have built something immortal.

>>4424869

Oh my God, the butt-hurt radiating from this post could keep a nuclear power plant running for years.

>>4424883
Indeed LOL. But the analogy makes sense actually.
Clearly if you don't consider the way it has been expressed xD

>>4424829
You aren't really intelligent then, are you?

>geniuses
>on /sci/
lol

It's not about understand OP. It's about understanding and going further than that. Look at people like Holger Bech Nielsen who basically contributed to string theory long before it was even "invented".

There's a difference between being good at learning, and being good at using your knowledge for understanding and contributing.

>read a mathematical or scientific theory once
>and then fully understand it and correctly complete nearly any question related to it?
I'm pretty sure anyone can do that.

A genius can work something up from first principles.
The academically gifted can understand the end result, but not necessarily arrive at the end result on their own.

My suspicion is that IQ is highly trainable, and that very high IQs tend to be developed as compensation for other cognitive shortcomings.

My IQ has been professionally tested at 145, but I've always had peculiar difficulties with attention and memory. If I couldn't make very sharp guesses about what's going on and what I should do when I'm dropped into a situation (since I haven't been paying attention, or can't recall important details), I just couldn't function. Every day for me, from early childhood on, was trial and training in critical thinking, where other people could easily just keep track of what's going on and have relevant memories ready to hand.

Maybe other people just like to think hard, without needing to, and they grow up to be geniuses. But for at least some of us, a high IQ seems to be compensation for serious defects.

>>4424869
But the only way to build something immortal from mediocrity is by chance. Hence again not your work and hence doesn't deserve respect. You seem to have misunderstood the fact that "respect" in an intellectual context is used in a sense more similar to "trust".

>>4423165
This. When someone asks me what a genius is I say "Ramanujan". When they ask me to explain what it is in general I repeat "Ramanujan".

>>4424983

You have misunderstood me. It's not by chance. What I meant is obtain those results by working hard, by going against your own natural mediocrity. There's an important difference between obtaining remarkable results when you are "academically gifted" and when you are not. The effort the non-talented has to put in order to achieve X compared to the one the gifted has to to achieve the same X is really different. So that's why I consider more "valuable" as a mind the non-talented instead of the gifted. Because from nothing he built something.

>>4425014
Actually, think of it as a 100 m race.
I don't see anything amazing if the person X wins the race when he starts it at 70m. Actually, I would be amazed if he doesn't.
At the same time, if the person Y runs the same race against X, and Y wins even if he starts from 0m. Then this is remarkable.

>>4425021
I see what you're getting at, but unfortunately it's extremely rare (I never heard of it) that someone mediocre accomplished something as grand as say Einstein's theory of relativity. Of course the value of such work is a relative thing as you say, but the gifted ones usually do the most amazing stuff.

>>4424965
The principle you described (high IQ/intelligence as a result of a compensation) I think is right, although I would expect the "defects" to be found more in the affective areas, rather than cognitive ones. But it is possible that there are different pathways for different people, and so, different "defects" could lead to different types of compensation and thus intelligence.

>>4425030
What about Steve Jobs?

>>4425049
that's called opportunism.

>>4425058
And it can be considered as a talent I guess.

>>4425063
>>4425058
This. I'd consider Steve Jobs an extremely talented business man.

>>4425058
The point is someone of average intellect accomplished a lot. That's what the poster asked for and that's what he got.

>full blown genius?

I've never met one, and I'm not even sure they exists. Everyone I met who was exeptional in one thing practiced that for years.

>>4424296
>>putting Von Neumann in any tier below anything
major contributions to a vast number of fields, including set theory, functional analysis, quantum mechanics, ergodic theory, geometry, fluid dynamics, economics, linear programming, game theory, computer science, numerical analysis, hydrodynamics, statistics, game theory, political science...

>>4425172
>exeptional in one thing

That doesn't make sense.