Home  ›  Genius Is All Aorund

Genius Is All Aorund

Written By Saturday, 12 March 2022 Add Comment Edit

Person who has exceptional intellectual ability, creativity, or originality

This article is about the college level of intellectual power possessed past certain individuals. For the mythological spirit, see Genius (mythology). For other uses, meet Genius (disambiguation). For the taxonomic level, see genus.

A genius is a person who displays exceptional intellectual power, creative productivity, universality in genres, or originality, typically to a degree that is associated with the achievement of new discoveries or advances in a domain of knowledge. Geniuses may be polymaths who excel across many diverse subjects[1] or may show loftier achievements in only a single kind of action.[2]

At that place is no scientifically precise definition of a genius.[iii] The term is also defined as the exceptional power itself, every bit simply genius without the article. In that sense of the word, sometimes genius is associated with talent, but several authors such equally Cesare Lombroso and Arthur Schopenhauer systematically distinguish these terms.[four] Walter Isaacson, biographer of many well-known geniuses, explains that although high intelligence may be a prerequisite, the virtually common trait that actually defines a genius may be the extraordinary power to use inventiveness and imaginative thinking to almost any situation.[1]

Etymology [edit]

In ancient Rome, the genius (plural in Latin genii) was the guiding spirit or tutelary deity of a person, family (gens), or place (genius loci).[18] The noun is related to the Latin verbs "gignere" (to beget, to give nascency to) and "generare" (to beget, to generate, to procreate), and derives directly from the Indo-European stem thereof: "ǵenh" (to produce, to afford, to give birth). Considering the achievements of exceptional individuals seemed to signal the presence of a particularly powerful genius, by the time of Augustus, the word began to larn its secondary meaning of "inspiration, talent".[19] The term genius acquired its modern sense in the eighteenth century, and is a conflation of ii Latin terms: genius, every bit to a higher place, and Ingenium, a related substantive referring to our innate dispositions, talents, and inborn nature.[20] Beginning to alloy the concepts of the divine and the talented, the Encyclopédie article on genius (génie) describes such a person every bit "he whose soul is more expansive and struck by the feelings of all others; interested past all that is in nature never to receive an idea unless information technology evokes a feeling; everything excites him and on which null is lost."[21]

Historical development [edit]

Galton [edit]

The cess of intelligence was initiated by Francis Galton (1822–1911) and James McKeen Cattell. They had advocated the analysis of reaction fourth dimension and sensory acuity as measures of "neurophysiological efficiency" and the assay of sensory acuity equally a measure of intelligence.[22]

Galton is regarded as the founder of psychometry. He studied the work of his older half-cousin Charles Darwin about biological evolution. Hypothesizing that eminence is inherited from ancestors, Galton did a study of families of eminent people in Britain, publishing information technology in 1869 as Hereditary Genius.[23] Galton'due south ideas were elaborated from the work of two early 19th-century pioneers in statistics: Carl Friedrich Gauss and Adolphe Quetelet. Gauss discovered the normal distribution (bong-shaped curve): given a large number of measurements of the aforementioned variable nether the same conditions, they vary at random from a most frequent value, the "boilerplate", to ii least frequent values at maximum differences greater and lower than the nigh frequent value. Quetelet discovered that the bell-shaped curve applied to social statistics gathered by the French government in the class of its normal processes on big numbers of people passing through the courts and the military. His initial work in criminology led him to observe "the greater the number of individuals observed the more than do peculiarities become effaced...". This platonic from which the peculiarities were effaced became "the average man".[24]

Galton was inspired by Quetelet to define the average man every bit "an unabridged normal scheme"; that is, if one combines the normal curves of every measurable human characteristic, ane will, in theory, perceive a syndrome straddled by "the boilerplate man" and flanked by persons that are different. In contrast to Quetelet, Galton's average man was not statistical just was theoretical simply. In that location was no measure of general averageness, just a large number of very specific averages. Setting out to discover a general measure out of the average, Galton looked at educational statistics and found bong-curves in test results of all sorts; initially in mathematics grades for the last honors examination and in archway examination scores for Sandhurst.

Galton'due south method in Hereditary Genius was to count and assess the eminent relatives of eminent men. He plant that the number of eminent relatives was greater with a closer degree of kinship. This piece of work is considered the first instance of historiometry, an belittling study of historical human progress. The work is controversial and has been criticized for several reasons. Galton and so departed from Gauss in a way that became crucial to the history of the 20th century Advertising. The bong-shaped curve was not random, he concluded. The differences between the average and the upper end were due to a non-random factor, "natural ability", which he defined as "those qualities of intellect and disposition, which urge and qualify men to perform acts that atomic number 82 to reputation…a nature which, when left to itself, volition, urged by an inherent stimulus, climb the path that leads to eminence."[25] The apparent randomness of the scores was due to the randomness of this natural power in the population as a whole, in theory.

Criticisms include that Galton's study fails to account for the impact of social status and the associated availability of resources in the course of economic inheritance, pregnant that inherited "eminence" or "genius" can exist gained through the enriched surround provided by wealthy families. Galton went on to develop the field of eugenics.[26] Galton attempted to control for economic inheritance by comparing the adopted nephews of popes, who would have the reward of wealth without being as closely related to popes as sons are to their fathers, to the biological children of eminent individuals.[23]

Psychology [edit]

Genius is expressed in a variety of forms (e.g., mathematical, literary, musical performance). Persons with genius tend to have potent intuitions nearly their domains, and they build on these insights with tremendous energy.[ commendation needed ] Carl Rogers, a founder of the Humanistic Arroyo to Psychology, expands on the idea of a genius trusting his or her intuition in a given field, writing: "El Greco, for example, must have realized as he looked at some of his early on piece of work, that 'practiced artists do not paint similar that.' But somehow he trusted his own experiencing of life, the process of himself, sufficiently that he could continue expressing his own unique perceptions. It was as though he could say, 'Good artists don't paint like this, only I paint like this.' Or to move to another field, Ernest Hemingway was surely aware that 'good writers do not write like this.' Merely fortunately he moved toward existence Hemingway, beingness himself, rather than toward someone else's conception of a proficient writer."[27]

A number of people commonly regarded equally geniuses accept been or were diagnosed with mental disorders, for example Vincent van Gogh,[28] Virginia Woolf,[29] John Forbes Nash Jr.,[thirty] and Ernest Hemingway.[31]

It has been suggested that there exists a connection betwixt mental illness, in particular schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, and genius.[32] Individuals with bipolar disorder and schizotypal personality disorder, the latter of which existence more common amongst relatives of schizophrenics, tend to show elevated creativity.[33]

In a 2010 report[34] done in the Karolinska Institute it was observed that highly creative individuals and schizophrenics have a lower density of thalamic dopamine D2 receptors. One of the investigators explained that "Fewer D2 receptors in the thalamus probably ways a lower caste of signal filtering, and thus a college flow of data from the thalamus." This could be a possible mechanism backside the ability of salubrious highly creative people to see numerous uncommon connections in a trouble-solving situation and the bizarre associations found in the schizophrenics.[34]

IQ and genius [edit]

Galton was a pioneer in investigating both eminent homo accomplishment and mental testing. In his book Hereditary Genius, written before the development of IQ testing, he proposed that hereditary influences on eminent accomplishment are strong, and that eminence is rare in the general population. Lewis Terman chose "'near' genius or genius" as the classification label for the highest classification on his 1916 version of the Stanford–Binet examination.[35] Past 1926, Terman began publishing nigh a longitudinal study of California schoolchildren who were referred for IQ testing by their schoolteachers, called Genetic Studies of Genius, which he conducted for the residual of his life. Catherine G. Cox, a colleague of Terman's, wrote a whole book, The Early on Mental Traits of 300 Geniuses,[2] published equally book two of The Genetic Studies of Genius volume serial, in which she analyzed biographical data about historic geniuses. Although her estimates of childhood IQ scores of historical figures who never took IQ tests take been criticized on methodological grounds,[36] [37] [38] Cox'due south study was thorough in finding out what else matters besides IQ in becoming a genius.[39] By the 1937 second revision of the Stanford–Binet test, Terman no longer used the term "genius" every bit an IQ classification, nor has any subsequent IQ test.[40] [41] In 1939, David Wechsler specifically commented that "we are rather hesitant almost calling a person a genius on the footing of a single intelligence test score".[42]

The Terman longitudinal study in California somewhen provided historical prove regarding how genius is related to IQ scores.[43] Many California pupils were recommended for the study by schoolteachers. Two pupils who were tested merely rejected for inclusion in the written report (considering their IQ scores were also low) grew up to be Nobel Prize winners in physics, William Shockley,[44] [45] and Luis Walter Alvarez.[46] [47] Based on the historical findings of the Terman study and on biographical examples such every bit Richard Feynman, who had a cocky-reported IQ of 125 and went on to win the Nobel Prize in physics and become widely known as a genius,[48] [49] the current view of psychologists and other scholars of genius is that a minimum level of IQ (approximately 125) is necessary for genius but not sufficient, and must be combined with personality characteristics such equally drive and persistence, plus the necessary opportunities for talent development.[50] [51] [52] For instance, in a chapter in an edited volume on achievement, IQ researcher Arthur Jensen proposed a multiplicative model of genius consisting of loftier ability, loftier productivity, and high creativity.[53] Jensen's model was motivated by the finding that eminent achievement is highly positively skewed, a finding known as Toll's law, and related to Lotka's law.

Some high IQ individuals join a Loftier IQ society. The most famous and largest is Mensa International, but many other more selective organizations also exist, including Intertel, Triple Nine Order, Prometheus Order, and Mega Society.

Philosophy [edit]

Diverse philosophers have proposed definitions of what genius is and what that implies in the context of their philosophical theories.

In the philosophy of David Hume, the way society perceives genius is similar to the way gild perceives the ignorant. Hume states that a person with the characteristics of a genius is looked at every bit a person asunder from society, likewise as a person who works remotely, at a distance, abroad from the residuum of the earth.

On the other hand, the mere ignorant is still more than despised; nor is any thing deemed a surer sign of an illiberal genius in an historic period and nation where the sciences flourish, than to be entirely destitute of all relish for those noble entertainments. The about perfect character is supposed to lie between those extremes; retaining an equal power and taste for books, company, and business; preserving in conversation that discernment and effeminateness which arise from polite letters; and in concern, that probity and accuracy which are the natural result of a merely philosophy.[54]

In the philosophy of Immanuel Kant, genius is the ability to independently go far at and understand concepts that would normally have to be taught by some other person. For Kant, originality was the essential character of genius.[55] The artworks of the Kantian genius are as well characterized by their exemplarity which is imitated past other artists and serve as a rule for other aesthetical judgements.[56] This genius is a talent for producing ideas which can exist described as not-imitative. Kant's discussion of the characteristics of genius is largely contained within the Critique of Judgment and was well received by the Romantics of the early on 19th century. In add-on, much of Schopenhauer's theory of genius, particularly regarding talent and freedom from constraint, is directly derived from paragraphs of Part I of Kant'south Critique of Judgment.[57]

Genius is a talent for producing something for which no determinate rule can be given, non a predisposition consisting of a skill for something that can be learned by following some dominion or other.

In the philosophy of Arthur Schopenhauer, a genius is someone in whom intellect predominates over "volition" much more than within the boilerplate person. In Schopenhauer's aesthetics, this predominance of the intellect over the will allows the genius to create creative or bookish works that are objects of pure, disinterested contemplation, the primary criterion of the aesthetic experience for Schopenhauer. Their remoteness from mundane concerns means that Schopenhauer's geniuses ofttimes display maladaptive traits in more mundane concerns; in Schopenhauer's words, they fall into the mire while gazing at the stars, an allusion to Plato'south dialogue Theætetus, in which Socrates tells of Thales (the outset philosopher) being ridiculed for falling in such circumstances. As he says in Volume ii of The World equally Will and Representation:

Talent hits a target no 1 else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see.

In the philosophy of Bertrand Russell, genius entails that an individual possesses unique qualities and talents that make the genius especially valuable to the society in which he or she operates, once given the hazard to contribute to lodge. Russell's philosophy further maintains, nevertheless, that it is possible for such geniuses to be crushed in their youth and lost forever when the environment around them is unsympathetic to their potential maladaptive traits. Russell rejected the notion he believed was popular during his lifetime that, "genius will out".[58]

In his archetype work The Limitations of Science,[59] J. W. N. Sullivan discussed a utilitarian philosophy on the retrospective classification of genius. Namely, scholarship that is so original that, were information technology not for that detail contributor, would not have emerged until much later (if ever) is characteristic of genius. Conversely, scholarship that was ripe for development, no matter how profound or prominent, is not necessarily indicative of genius. In this context, Sullivan counted Albert Einstein, Carl Friedrich Gauss, and James Clerk Maxwell every bit geniuses, only not Isaac Newton or Charles Darwin.

Literature and popular civilization [edit]

Geniuses are variously portrayed in literature and film as both protagonists and antagonists, and may exist the hero or villain of the story. In popular civilization, the genius is frequently stereotypically depicted as either the wisecracking whiz or the tortured genius.[60]

Throughout both literature and movies, the tortured genius graphic symbol is often seen as an imperfect or tragic hero who wrestles with the burden of superior intelligence, arrogance, eccentricities, addiction, awkwardness, mental health bug, a lack of social skills, isolation, or other insecurities.[61] [62] They regularly experience existential crises, struggling to overcome personal challenges to employ their special abilities for good or succumbing to their own tragic flaws and vices. This common motif repeated throughout fiction is notably present in the characters of Dr. Bruce Banner in The Incredible Hulk and Dr. Henry Jekyll in The Strange Instance of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, amidst others.[63] [64] Although non equally extreme, other examples of literary and filmic characterizations of the tortured genius stereotype, to varying degrees, include: Sherlock Holmes, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart in Amadeus, Dr. John Nash in A Beautiful Heed, Leonardo da Vinci in Da Vinci's Demons, Dr. Gregory House in Firm, Will Hunting in Proficient Volition Hunting, and Dr. Sheldon Cooper in The Big Bang Theory.

1 of the most famous genius-level rivalries to occur in literary fiction is betwixt Sherlock Holmes and his nemesis Professor Moriarty, the latter grapheme also identified as the modern classic of an evil genius.[65]

Since Hollywood seems to accept trouble capturing the actual nuance and complexity of genius in movies,[66] screenwriters and filmmakers usually appear to settle for unsatisfactory stereotypes instead. This further spreads misrepresentations and misunderstandings about genius in society.[60] A recent comprehensive analysis of over 10,000 movie transcripts also suggests that in that location is a design of gender bias in the Western world that more oftentimes associates male person characters with higher cerebral abilities and terms like "genius" in films.[67]

Encounter also [edit]

  • Intelligence
  • Aptitude
  • Creativity
  • Genetic Studies of Genius
  • Intellectual giftedness
    • Child prodigy
      • List of child prodigies
        • Listing of child music prodigies
    • Gifted education
    • List of chess prodigies
    • Savant syndrome
  • MacArthur Fellows Program
    • List of MacArthur Fellows
  • Nobel Prize
    • Listing of Nobel laureates
  • Polymath

References [edit]

  1. ^ a b "What Makes a Genius? The World's Greatest Minds Take One Thing in Common". Time . Retrieved 2021-01-08 .
  2. ^ a b Cox 1926
  3. ^ Robinson, Andrew. "Can Nosotros Define Genius?". Psychology Today. Sussex Publishers, LLC. Retrieved 25 May 2017.
  4. ^ a b Schopenhauer, Arthur (1909) [First published 1818]. The World equally Will and Idea Book iii. Translated by Haldane, R. B. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co. p. 158.
  5. ^ "Mathematical proof reveals magic of Ramanujan's genius". New Scientist.
  6. ^ "Genius of the Ancient World". BBC.
  7. ^ Frank North. Magill (1998). The Ancient Globe: Dictionary of World Biography, Volume 1. Fitzroy Dearborn Readers. p. 299. That pedagogy regime remained the heart of learning in Prc until the early twentieh century. The flourishing of his pedagogical approach is a testimony to Confucius' genius.
  8. ^ The Ancient World'south Almost Influential Philosophers: The Lives and Works of Confucius, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero. Charles Rivers Editors. 2016.
  9. ^ "Confucius". Earth History Encyclopedia.
  10. ^ Roger T. Ames (1998). The Analects of Confucius: A Philosophical Translation. Ballantine Books. p. [i]. Confucius is probably the near influential thinker in human history, if influence is determined by the sheer number of people who have lived their lives, and died, in accordance with the thinker's vision of how people ought to live, and die. Like many other epochal figures of the ancient world (...)
  11. ^ Shona Grimbly (2000). Encyclopedia of the Ancient World. Fitzroy Dearborn Readers. p. 1. The teachings of Confucius proved to be remarkably indelible and had a huge influence on Chinese society for much of the following 2,500 years
  12. ^ "Confucius". Encyclopaedia Britannica.
  13. ^ "Genius of the Aboriginal Earth". BBC.
  14. ^ Charlente Tan (2016). "Creativity and Confucius". Journal of Genius and Eminence. 1 (one): 79. doi:10.18536/jge.2016.01.1.1.10. Confucius qualifies as a creative genius
  15. ^ Steve C. Wang (2000). "In Search of Einstein's Genius". Scientific discipline. 289 (5844). doi:10.18536/jge.2016.01.1.1.10. Ask people who they associate with the discussion 'genius' and they will invariably answer 'Einstein.' Ane could argue that Newton, Archimedes, Shakespeare, and Confucius displayed genius of the same order
  16. ^ Frank Northward. Magill (1998). The Ancient World: Dictionary of Earth Biography, Book ane. Fitzroy Dearborn Readers. p. 299. That education regime remained the heart of learning in China until the early twentieh century. The flourishing of his pedagogical approach is a testimony to Confucius's genius.
  17. ^ Raymond Bernard (1970). Prenatal Origin of Genius. Health Inquiry. p. 48.
  18. ^ genius. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged (five 1.1). Retrieved May 17, 2008, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/scan/genius
  19. ^ Oxford Latin Dictionary (Oxford: Clarendon Printing, 1982, 1985 reprinting), entries on genius, p. 759, and gigno, p. 764.
  20. ^ Shaw, Tamsin (2014). "Wonder Boys?". The New York Review of Books. 61 (15). Retrieved 5 October 2014.
  21. ^ Saint-Lambert, Jean-François de (ascribed). "Genius". The Encyclopedia of Diderot & d'Alembert Collaborative Translation Project. Translated by John South.D. Glaus Ann Arbor: Michigan Publishing, University of Michigan Library, 2007. Spider web. 1 Apr. 2015. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027/spo.did2222.0000.819>. Trans. of "Génie", Encyclopédie ou Dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers, vol. seven. Paris, 1757.
  22. ^ Fancher, Raymond E (1998). Kimble, Gregory A; Wertheimer, Michael (eds.). Alfred Binet, General Psychologist. Portraits of Pioneers in Psychology. Vol. III. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assembly. pp. 67–84. ISBN978-ane-55798-479-1.
  23. ^ a b Galton 1869
  24. ^ Bernstein, Peter L. (1998). Against the gods. Wiley. p. 160. ISBN0-471-12104-5.
  25. ^ Bernstein (1998), page 163.
  26. ^ Gillham, Nicholas West. (2001). "Sir Francis Galton and the birth of eugenics". Almanac Review of Genetics. 35 (1): 83–101. doi:10.1146/annurev.genet.35.102401.090055. PMID 11700278.
  27. ^ Rogers, Carl (1995). On Becoming a Person . Houghton Mifflin. p. 175. ISBN0-395-75531-10.
  28. ^ "Van Gogh'southward Mental and Physical Health". Archived from the original on 2013-12-06. Retrieved 2013-12-16 .
  29. ^ "Virginia Woolf".
  30. ^ John F. Nash Jr. - Biographical
  31. ^ Ernest Hemingway
  32. ^ Efroimson, V. P. The Genetics of Genius. 2002
  33. ^ Thys 2014, p. 146.
  34. ^ a b de Manzano, Örjan; Cervenka, Simon; Karabanov, Anke; Farde, Lars; Ullén, Fredrik (2010-05-17). "Thinking Exterior a Less Intact Box: Thalamic Dopamine D2 Receptor Densities Are Negatively Related to Psychometric Creativity in Healthy Individuals". PLOS ONE. five (five): e10670. Bibcode:2010PLoSO...510670D. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0010670. ISSN 1932-6203. PMC2871784. PMID 20498850.
  35. ^ Terman 1916, p. 79
  36. ^ Pintner 1931, pp. 356–357 "From a study of these adolescence records, estimates of the probable I.Q.s of these men in childhood accept been made…. It is of course obvious that much error may pitter-patter into an experiment of this sort, and the I.Q. assigned to any one individual is only a rough gauge, depending to some extent upon how much information about his boyhood years has come up down to us."
  37. ^ Shurkin 1992, pp. 70–71 "She, of class, was not measuring IQ, she was measuring the length of biographies in a book. Generally, the more than information, the higher the IQ. Subjects were dragged downward if there was niggling information about their early lives."
  38. ^ Eysenck 1998, p. 126 "Cox found that the more was known about a person'south youthful accomplishments, that is, what he had done before he was engaged in doing the things that fabricated him known equally a genius, the higher was his IQ…. And then she proceeded to make a statistical correction in each case for lack of knowledge; this bumped upwardly the figure considerably for the geniuses about whom little was in fact known…. I am rather doubtful about the justification for making the correction. To do so assumes that the geniuses about whom least is known were precocious but their previous activities were not recorded. This may be true, but information technology is likewise possible to contend that perhaps in that location was nothing much to record! I feel uneasy near making such assumptions; doing so may be very misleading."
  39. ^ Cox 1926, pp. 215–219, 218 (Chapter XIII: Conclusions) "three. That all as intelligent children practise non as adults reach equal eminence is in office deemed for by our last determination: youths who achieve eminence are characterized not only by loftier intellectual traits, only also past persistence of motive and try, confidence in their abilities, and great force or forcefulness of graphic symbol. " (accent in original).
  40. ^ Terman & Merrill 1960, p. 18
  41. ^ Kaufman 2009, p. 117 "Terman (1916), as I indicated, used near genius or genius for IQs above 140, but mostly very superior has been the label of choice" (emphasis in original)
  42. ^ Wechsler 1939, p. 45
  43. ^ Eysenck 1998, pp. 127–128
  44. ^ Simonton 1999, p. 4 "When Terman first used the IQ test to select a sample of kid geniuses, he unknowingly excluded a special kid whose IQ did not brand the form. Yet a few decades later that talent received the Nobel Prize in physics: William Shockley, the cocreator of the transistor. Ironically, not one of the more than than 1,500 children who qualified according to his IQ benchmark received and so high an honour as adults."
  45. ^ Shurkin 2006, p. 13; see also "The Truth Well-nigh the 'Termites'" (Kaufman, S. B. 2009)
  46. ^ Leslie 2000, "We also know that two children who were tested just didn't make the cut -- William Shockley and Luis Alvarez -- went on to win the Nobel Prize in Physics. According to Hastorf, none of the Terman kids e'er won a Nobel or Pulitzer."
  47. ^ Park, Lubinski & Benbow 2010, "There were two young boys, Luis Alvarez and William Shockley, who were amongst the many who took Terman's tests but missed the cutoff score. Despite their exclusion from a study of young 'geniuses,' both went on to study physics, earn PhDs, and win the Nobel prize."
  48. ^ Gleick 2011, p. 32 "Still, his score on the school IQ exam was a just respectable 125."
  49. ^ Robinson 2011, p. 47 "After all, the American physicist Richard Feynman is mostly considered an almost archetypal late 20th-century genius, non just in the United States but wherever physics is studied. Yet, Feynman's school-measured IQ, reported by him every bit 125, was non specially high"
  50. ^ Jensen 1998, p. 577 "Creativity and genius are unrelated to 1000 except that a person's level of m acts equally a threshold variable below which socially significant forms of inventiveness are highly improbable. This thousand threshold is probably at least i standard divergence above the mean level of chiliad in the general population. As well the traits that Galton thought necessary for "eminence" (viz., high ability, zeal, and persistence), genius implies outstanding creativity likewise. Though such exceptional creativity is conspicuously lacking in the vast majority of people who have a high IQ, it is probably impossible to find any artistic geniuses with low IQs. In other words, high ability is a necessary but not sufficient condition for the emergence of socially significant inventiveness. Genius itself should not be confused with simply high IQ, which is what we by and large mean past the term 'gifted'" (emphasis in original)
  51. ^ Eysenck 1998, p. 127 "What is obvious is that geniuses have a high degree of intelligence, only not outrageously high—there are many accounts of people in the population with IQs as high who accept non accomplished anything like the status of genius. Indeed, they may take achieved very little; there are big numbers of Mensa members who are elected on the basis of an IQ test, but whose creative achievements are cypher. Loftier achievement seems to be a necessary qualification for loftier creativity, but it does not seem to exist a sufficient 1." (accent in original)
  52. ^ Cf. Pickover 1998, p. 224 (quoting Syed Jan Abas) "High IQ is not genius. A person with a high IQ may or may not be a genius. A genius may or may not have a high IQ."
  53. ^ Jensen, A. R. (1996). "Giftedness and genius: Crucial differences". In C. P. Benbow and D. Lubinski (Eds.), Intellectual talent: Psychometric and social problems, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Printing. Pp. 393—411.
  54. ^ Hume, David (2001). "An Enquiry Apropos Human Understanding. — "Of the different Species of Philosophy"". New York: Bartleby.com. Archived from the original on xix Oct 2012. Retrieved 2 September 2012.
  55. ^ Howard Caygill, Kant Dictionary (ISBN 0-631-17535-0).
  56. ^ Emine Hande Thuna (April one, 2018). "Kant on Informed Pure Judgments of Taste". The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. Oxford University Press. 76 (two): 163–174. doi:x.1111/jaac.12455. ISSN 0021-8529. OCLC 7626030498. Retrieved May 20, 2021. (KU five:308, cited in the section Three-Products of Genius)
  57. ^ Kant, Immanuel (1790). Kritik der Urteilskraft [The Critique of Judgment]. §46–§49. Due east.g. §46: "Genius is a talent for producing something for which no determinate rule tin be given, not a predisposition consisting of a skill for something that can exist learned by post-obit some rule or other." (trans. W.S. Pluhar).
  58. ^ Page 91, The Conquest of Happiness, ISBN 0-415-37847-8
  59. ^ Sullivan, JWN (1933). The Limitations of Science. NY: Viking Printing. p. 167-168.
  60. ^ a b "Pop Culture Stereotypes and the Self-Concept of Gifted People". High Power. 2020-12-26. Retrieved 2021-01-08 .
  61. ^ "10 Best Movies Almost Tortured Geniuses, Ranked". ScreenRant. 2019-12-x. Retrieved 2021-01-08 .
  62. ^ Wolf, Elizabeth R. (2018). "The trope of the tortured genius : an exam of 19th century British and American poetry". wlu.primo.exlibrisgroup.com . Retrieved 2021-01-08 .
  63. ^ "Incredible Blob turns 30". Tampa Bay Times . Retrieved 2021-01-08 .
  64. ^ Mills, Ryan (2019-10-11). "Using the Incredible Hulk to Teach Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde". Pop Culture Classroom . Retrieved 2021-01-08 .
  65. ^ "The Case of the Evil Genius". Clan for Psychological Science - APS . Retrieved 2021-01-08 .
  66. ^ "The Problem With 'Geniuses' In Movies". Overthinking It. 2009-10-15. Retrieved 2021-01-08 .
  67. ^ Gálvez, Ramiro; Tiffenberg, Valeria; Altszyler, Edgar (2018-04-01). "Quantifying stereotyping associations between gender and intellectual ability in films". VoxEU.org . Retrieved 2021-01-08 .

Bibliography [edit]

  • Cox, Catherine M. (1926). The Early on Mental Traits of 300 Geniuses. Genetic Studies of Genius Book 2. Stanford (CA): Stanford University Press. ISBN0-8047-0010-ix. LCCN 25008797. OCLC 248811346.
  • Eysenck, Hans (1995). Genius: The Natural History of Inventiveness. Issues in the Behavioural Sciences No. 12. Cambridge: Cambridge Academy Press. ISBN978-0-5-2148508-1.
  • Eysenck, Hans (1998). Intelligence: A New Expect. New Brunswick (NJ): Transaction Publishers. ISBN978-0-7658-0707-6.
  • Galton, Francis (1869). Hereditary Genius. London: MacMillan. Retrieved 4 April 2014.
    • Robert H. Wozniak (1999). "Introduction to Hereditary Genius Francis Galton (1869)". Classics in the History of Psychology.
  • Gleick, James (2011). Genius: The Life and Science of Richard Feynman (ebook ed.). Open up Road Media. ISBN9781453210437.
  • Howe, Michael J. A. (1999). Genius Explained. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN978-052100849-5.
  • Jensen, Arthur R. (1998). The 1000 Cistron: The Science of Mental Ability. Human Evolution, Beliefs, and Intelligence. Westport (CT): Praeger. ISBN978-0-275-96103-9. ISSN 1063-2158.
    • Charles Locurto. "A Balance Sheet on Persistence: Volume Review of Jensen on Intelligence-g-Factor". Psycoloquy.
  • Kaufman, Alan S. (2009). IQ Testing 101 . New York: Springer Publishing. pp. 151–153. ISBN978-0-8261-0629-ii.
  • Leslie, Mitchell (July–Baronial 2000). "The Vexing Legacy of Lewis Terman". Stanford Magazine . Retrieved 5 June 2013.
  • Park, Gregory; Lubinski, David; Benbow, Camilla P. (ii Nov 2010). "Recognizing Spatial Intelligence". Scientific American . Retrieved five June 2013.
  • Pickover, Clifford A. (1998). Strange Brains and Genius: The Secret Lives of Eccentric Scientists and Madmen. Plenum Publishing Corporation. ISBN978-0688168940.
  • Pintner, Rudolph (1931). Intelligence Testing: Methods and Results. New York: Henry Holt. Retrieved 14 July 2013.
  • Robinson, Andrew (2011). Genius: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford Academy Press. ISBN978-0-nineteen-959440-5.
    • GrrlScientist (3 March 2011). "Genius: A Very Short Introduction [Book Review]". The Guardian.
  • Shurkin, Joel (1992). Terman's Kids: The Groundbreaking Study of How the Gifted Abound Up. Boston (MA): Petty, Chocolate-brown. ISBN978-0316788908.
    • Frederic Golden (May 31, 1992). "Tracking the IQ Elite : TERMAN'S KIDS: The Groundbreaking Study of How the Gifted Grow Upward, Past Joel North. Shurkin". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on 2012-11-08.
  • Shurkin, Joel (2006). Broken Genius: The Ascension and Fall of William Shockley, Creator of the Electronic Historic period. London: Macmillan. ISBN978-ane-4039-8815-7.
    • Brian Clegg. "Review - Broken Genius - Joel Shurkin". Popular Science. Archived from the original on 2006-10-06.
  • Simonton, Dean Keith (1999). Origins of genius: Darwinian perspectives on creativity. Oxford: Oxford University Printing. ISBN978-0-19-512879-half-dozen. JSTOR 3080746.
  • Terman, Lewis Thou. (1916). The Measurement of Intelligence: An Explanation of and a Complete Guide to the Utilize of the Stanford Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Intelligence Calibration. Riverside Textbooks in Education. Ellwood P. Cubberley (Editor's Introduction). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Retrieved 26 June 2010.
  • Terman, Lewis M.; Merrill, Maude (1937). Measuring Intelligence: A Guide to the Administration of the New Revised Stanford–Binet Tests of Intelligence . Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
  • Terman, Lewis Madison; Merrill, Maude A. (1960). Stanford–Binet Intelligence Scale: Manual for the 3rd Revision Form L–K with Revised IQ Tables by Samuel R. Pinneau . Boston (MA): Houghton Mifflin.
  • Thys, Erik (2014). "Creativity and Psychopathology: A Systematic Review". Psychopathology. 47 (3): 141–147. doi:10.1159/000357822. PMID 24480798. S2CID 12879552.
  • Wechsler, David (1939). The Measurement of Adult Intelligence (first ed.). Baltimore, MD: Williams & Witkins. ISBN978-1-59147-606-1.

Further reading [edit]

Sources listed in chronological gild of publication within each category.

Books [edit]

  • Burks, Barbara Southward.; Jensen, Dortha Westward.; Terman, Lewis M. (1930). The Promise of Youth: Follow-upwardly Studies of a 1000 Gifted Children. Genetic Studies of Genius Volume iii. Stanford (CA): Stanford University Press.
  • Terman, Lewis M.; Oden, Melita (1959). The Gifted Group at Mid-Life: Thirty-5 Years' Follow-Upward of the Superior Child. Genetic Studies of Genius Book V. Stanford (CA): Stanford University Press. Retrieved 2 June 2013.
  • Harold Bloom (November 2002). Genius: A Mosaic of I Hundred Exemplary Creative Minds. Warner Books. ISBN0-446-52717-3.
  • Simonton, Dean Keith (2004). Creativity in Science: Gamble, Logic, Genius, and Zeitgeist. Cambridge: Cambridge University Printing. ISBN0-521-54369-10.
  • David Galenson (27 December 2005). Erstwhile Masters and Young Geniuses: The Two Life Cycles of Creative Inventiveness . Princeton Academy Press. ISBN0-691-12109-5.
  • Simonton, Dean Keith (2009). Genius 101. New York: Springer. ISBN978-0-8261-0627-8.
  • Robinson, Andrew (2010). Sudden Genius?: The Gradual Path to Artistic Breakthroughs. Oxford: Oxford University Printing. ISBN978-0-19-956995-3.
  • McMahon, Darrin Chiliad. (2013). Divine Fury: A History of Genius. New York, NY: Basic Books. ISBN978-0-465-00325-9.
  • Weiner, Eric (2016). The Geography of Genius: Lessons from the Globe's Most Creative Places. Simon & Schuster. ISBN978-1451691672.

Review articles [edit]

  • Ellenberg, Jordan (30 May 2014). "The Wrong Way to Treat Child Geniuses". Wall Street Journal . Retrieved 1 June 2014.
  • Feldman, David (1984). "A Follow-up of Subjects Scoring above 180 IQ in Terman'south Genetic Studies of Genius". Infrequent Children. 50 (six): 518–523. doi:x.1177/001440298405000604. S2CID 146862140. Retrieved viii July 2010. Put into the context of the psychometric movement every bit a whole, it is clear that the positive farthermost of the IQ distribution is not as dissimilar from other IQ levels every bit might have been expected.

Web articles [edit]

  • Wilson, Tracy 5. (1998–2009). "How Geniuses Work". HowStuffWorks.com. Retrieved 2021-02-20 .
  • Gupta, Sanjay (2006). "Brainteaser: Scientists Dissect Mystery of Genius". CNN.com. Retrieved 2021-02-20 .
  • Callard, Agnes (2020-eleven-24). "Torturing Geniuses". The Betoken Magazine . Retrieved 2021-02-twenty . On societal expectations of geniuses.

Encyclopedia entries [edit]

  • Feldman, David Henry (2009). "Genius". In Kerr, Barbara (ed.). Encyclopedia of Giftedness, Creativity, and Talent. Vol. ii. Thousand Oaks (CA): SAGE. ISBN978-141294971-2.

External links [edit]

marshallimas1988.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genius

0 Response to "Genius Is All Aorund"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel