Expert psychologist suggests the era of genius scientists is over

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
The era of the genius is not over. I work for a genius. He is a genius with a specific form of finance, and interpersonal skills.

The genius you refer to, the scientific genius....it still exists. It is identified at an early age, and ends up as de facto property of government.

The educational system is set up to funnel the brightest into places like ARL, LANL, LLNL, AFRL, etc, etc. That is where your genius is. And you never hear of their work.

you make a very good point,
when you can sift through the population and remove the young genius from the "pool" of intelligence,
and "syphon" them into government run structures, the output can be hidden and classified for military purposes.

or in corporate terms, used to make break throughs where the benefit of their work is patented in the name of the company they work for.

i think part of the genius of SIR tim burners lee, is that he gave the benifit of his genius to the world, FOR the world

we need to inspire more geniuses to give the ideas and designs to the world for every-ones benefit, instead of some corporate profits.

infact there should be a classification of genius for anyone who gives the product of their intellect to the people at no cost.

this would ensure more geniuses are recognised and praised by the population.

its quite hard to slip by the genius "filter" to enable good works for the benefit of the people, and i suspect would be very difficult to achive.



xploder

Originally posted by TheBandit795
He sounds like these guys...

"There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement" - Lord Kelvin to an assemblage of physicists at the British Association for the Advancement of Science in 1900

"When I began my physical studies [in Munich in 1874] and sought advice from my venerable teacher Philipp von Jolly... he portrayed to me physics as a highly developed, almost fully matured science... Possibly in one or another nook there would perhaps be a dust particle or a small bubble to be examined and classified, but the system as a whole stood there fairly secured, and theoretical physics approached visibly that degree of perfection which, for example, geometry has had already for centuries." - from a 1924 lecture by Max Planck (Sci. Am, Feb 1996 p.10)

"The more important fundamental laws and facts of physical science have all been discovered, and these are now so firmly established that the possibility of their ever being supplanted in consequence of new discoveries is exceedingly remote.... Our future discoveries must be looked for in the sixth place of decimals." - Albert. A. Michelson, speech at the dedication of Ryerson Physics Lab, U. of Chicago 1894

the arrogance involved is huge, as is the mistake of resting on past discoveries as "perfected models of understanding.

if we stop evolving our knowledge base we stagnate.
thank you for adding to the thread



i see you can understand the pit falls of telling people,
we need no more physicists as we have a pretty stable model now

lol
xploder

reply to post by XPLodER


altruism can be removed if you affect the proper behavior modifcation at an early enough age. Intelligence is a tool that can be formed, guided, and wielded.

It would be very hard for one of those folks to ever get the notion that they should work for the greater good. The reality that they must live within would be unusual to us.

Originally posted by XPLodER
so the idea here is that we know we know everything therfore there is nothing to discover, or re discover.
kinda like closing the patent office

I think you mis-read the article...that's not what it says.

It says that there's been nobody like Einstein since Einstein, which is true. It also says the author hopes he is wrong and that there will be "another Einstein" in the future, and I think he probably is wrong. Dark matter is one problem that still may need some lone genius insight to solve, or dark energy.

But you can't deny that science at CERN is done in teams, so new discoveries will be made, but at CERN, they'll be made by teams and not lone geniuses like Einstein.

And it's not just you, that doesn't seem to understand what the article says...many people commenting in this thread appear to have either not read or not understood what the article actually says.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by XPLodER

 

altruism can be removed if you affect the proper behavior modifcation at an early enough age. Intelligence is a tool that can be formed, guided, and wielded.

in that case my advice to future geniuses is to "hide their potential" and achieve "average" test scores until they are in a position to advance their field for the benefit of all men (not exactly the best scenario) but as you point out the manipulation of their potential can be very negative in effect,

it would be far better if their potential can be harnessed at a young age and their potential extended for the benefit of all

It would be very hard for one of those folks to ever get the notion that they should work for the greater good. The reality that they must live within would be unusual to us.

this reality saddens me alot.

all the lost youth, lost potential, and lost culture



xploder

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by XPLodER
so the idea here is that we know we know everything therfore there is nothing to discover, or re discover.
kinda like closing the patent office

I think you mis-read the article...that's not what it says.

It says that there's been nobody like Einstein since Einstein, which is true. It also says the author hopes he is wrong and that there will be "another Einstein" in the future, and I think he probably is wrong. Dark matter is one problem that still may need some lone genius insight to solve, or dark energy.

But you can't deny that science at CERN is done in teams, so new discoveries will be made, but at CERN, they'll be made by teams and not lone geniuses like Einstein.

And it's not just you, that doesn't seem to understand what the article says...many people commenting in this thread appear to have either not read or not understood what the article actually says.

maby just maby it is you that dosnt understand,

you see the idea that we have a firm grasp "on the fundamentals" is incompatable with the idea that a genius could come along with a paradime shift that allows for GREATER or BETTER understanding of the fundamentals,
thus "showing their genius"

ie we know the fundamentals are correct,
a genius would be some one who has the intelict to challenge the fundamental understanding,
thus showing their genius.

its circular logic,
we know we are right,
until a genius shows "where" we are wrong

so no more genius is predicated on the idea that we are right until proven wrong.

this is my point, geniuses have always come along and changed our fundamental understanding of the universe,
to say there will be no more lone geniuses is to try to imply that we are right in the first instance.

hence we are arrogant in two places,
we have the fundamental 100% right,
and that no individual can come along and change that view

both show a lack of understanding of history

xploder

I have a theory on this. As science and physics gets more advanced it becomes more difficult to understand resulting in fewer and fewer people who are smart enough to make new discoveries.
On the flip side as the human population increases more smart people are born so maybe it can be balanced out.

No doubt as our scientific knowledge increases there is more and more to learn before you are able to try to discover something new. I wonder how Newton would go in quantum physics today, he was smart back then but would he be able to keep up today, who knows?

people who i consider recent geniuses, most not considered lone geniuses,

but their advancements for humanity qualify them for praise

Sir Tim Buners Lee
advancement > inventor of the WWW. or world wide web
connected the hypretext idea with the use of the DNS (Domain Name Server) to connect the transmition control protocol to allow cross connection of independent networks into a negotiable network environment.

Steven Hawking
advancement > advance academic exploration of black holes and engage the public, and inspiring the future scientists of the world to explore the cosmos

Dina Katabi
advancement > detailed advancements in data streaming, video one of the fastest growing mediums on the www requires large resources to transmit streaming video, her team unveiled a new algorithm which will make it faster and cheeper. also allowing for remote robotic sergery, remote moon vechicles and secure transmittion of data over existing web technologies. spectrum crunch not so much of a problem any more

Kim Ung-yong
simply genius
210 IQ
worked for nasa at age 12

i could go on but some of these people "lead" teams and are genius,
and
some of them are simply genius in their own right

xploder

reply to post by XPLodER


There is little impetus for the caretakers (parents) to hide their childs capabilities. Matter of fact, ego drives the exact opposite. In a culture where vicarious living comes with child rearing, asking for such things is almost an impossible. We are all proud of our kids, and want to see them "soar".

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by XPLodER

 

There is little impetus for the caretakers (parents) to hide their childs capabilities. Matter of fact, ego drives the exact opposite. In a culture where vicarious living comes with child rearing, asking for such things is almost an impossible. We are all proud of our kids, and want to see them "soar".

you bring up the solution,
we raise awareness that if your child is gifed, their gift is to be encouraged,
but at the same time as advanced education, the understanding that there gift can do great good for society by focusing on the greater good, that can come from their gifts.

with great power comes great responcability (spiderman)

maby focus less on money and more on charity.

for the good of all

i agree that the want for the best personally conflicts with the want to do good socially,
but the great geniuses tend to focus on the greatest need

the needs of the many outway the needs of the few (startrek)

maby we just let them watch altruistic movies?

xploder

reply to post by XPLodER


Imagine you have a set of legs that would make you pass Usain Bolt in the 200m like he was standing still. Would you not yearn to use those legs to their fullest?

What is an angel if he can spread his wings and soar from time to time?

That opportunity is what "the system" gives you. The price is altruisms demise.

The solution to this? A change in human nature. Throughout the ages information has been stifled. Often to a point that those who knew the information would encode it so as to not risk punishment to knowing this information.

It is a source of power. Sources of power are always guarded jealously.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


I for one am hoping that the whole open source movement will change all that.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by XPLodER

 

Imagine you have a set of legs that would make you pass Usain Bolt in the 200m like he was standing still. Would you not yearn to use those legs to their fullest?

i see your point, but without a reason to run, would you not just do it for fun? some would want to compete, some would just love running but i do see what you are saying.

What is an angel if he can spread his wings and soar from time to time?

free

That opportunity is what "the system" gives you. The price is altruisms demise.

i have personally given away technology,
i have seen others give away technology.

the system is flawed, the only way to win is not to play.......or fly away
a candle can light many without losing an ounce of light

The solution to this? A change in human nature. Throughout the ages information has been stifled. Often to a point that those who knew the information would encode it so as to not risk punishment to knowing this information.

free will is a gift like genius, it would be sad to see it taken away.
encoded across the internet is a single word in a million sentences, freedom
open source, is the change in human nature you speek of, im positive about that

It is a source of power. Sources of power are always guarded jealously.

only by those with the most to loose or gain.

most care little for power, all they want is freedom.

we must resist encoding knowledge, and instead stand on our ideals and give it freely
the only way forward to together.



xploder

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

I for one am hoping that the whole open source movement will change all that.

star
i agree, the internet and the "interconnectedness" that comes with it is allowing for a more altruistic society,
information scarcity is losing, co-operation is winning,
and open source can out compete financially, and morally.

the free information age is upon us.



xploder

reply to post by XPLodER


I don't disagree with anything you say. I am only commenting on the current situation

I am one of those who gives away freely as well. Even my work. I make about 40% of what my peers make. Not because I am no good at what I do, but because I am willing to sell myself for less just to ensure I get to keep spreading my wings and being free.

Regardless, I do "side work" that is all gratis. Art, websites, helping people with things like spreadsheets and resumes....if i have a skill i believe it is to be given to my partners in this life.

Genius scientist suggests there are no expert psychologists. Touche!

Originally posted by zayonara
Genius scientist suggests there are no expert psychologists.

Touche!

edit on 1-2-2013 by zayonara because: (no reason given)

it would have been nice if the author of this used google,
a short search would have listed some of the current day icons of scientists,
upon whose shoulders, future generations will stand

xploder

The geniuses in the past lived in a world devoid of entertainment. Everyone spends time watching TV and playing video games. The last wave of geniuses ended about the time that movies and cars became common pastimes in the western world. John Taylor Gatto said somewhere that the average person, as a child, has about 9 hours per week to think about himself as an entity in the universe. The last bunch of geniuses, pre WW1, spent up to 100 hours per week thinking about reality and what was possible.

Psychologists think of geniuses as people who score high on intelligence tests. The actual definition of genius is the act of creation, as in genesis or generation. A genius creates something new, or genius is the act of creation itself credited to the person who did it first.

Invention is a form of activity, and most activities are done best when done for enjoyment. Genius is born of boredom and inspiration.

Geniuses will reappear when the averge, undirected person has a rule of thumb approximation of the totality of human knowledge and there is nothing else interesting to do.

reply to post by XPLodER


We are just finding out about things we need to discover that we did not till just recently know to exist or have a high probability of existing.

In all likelyhood...it is more likely that the field of Psychology has reached it's Voodoo peak and that Science or the possible birth of a Genius that can undersatnd and discover complex issues...is just at 100 feet in altitude of a learning mountain the size of Everest.

I often get a good chuckle when reading Psychobabble as it seems to be based on whatever opinion someone who is renoun may get.

I also find that a true Dr. of Science say perhaps in Medicine will attempt to determine what an ailment really is by using the Scientific Method...where as a Psychologist will TALK to the person who is ailing and ask...HOW DOES IT MAKE YOU FEEL? LOL!

Split Infinity

reply to post by solomons path



Well your point has a lot more to do with how science is funded and discoveries are reported/respected. All that "settled science" you hear about. Academia is every bit as corrupt as big business, medicine, big government, big labor and mega corporations are. It's truly sad, but if it isn't going to be profitable it's not going to be funded or reported in "respected" scientific journals.