Everyone I look UP to is a genius; everyone I look DOWN on is a moron! and everyone in between is neutral! and I'm not naming names!!

HexHammer wrote:Philosophy without a bit of science these days, becomes nonsens and babble.

...I couldn't agree more. A philosopher who is only a philosopher without knowledge of overlapping disciplines has a kind of flat earth Weltanschauung. The "world" is much larger than it used to be and require philosophy to be in sync.

-- Updated March 3rd, 2012, 12:52 pm to add the following --

dparrott wrote:Here is a quote I found from a great individual.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”

...sorry! have to ask, who's the "great individual" who came up with this gem. This is thoroughly out of context and an insult to fish!

Good on Albert. He had a point to make which was definitely not yours ... that we're all made of vibrating atoms! How nice! what isn't?? There is no relationship and no context, it is simply borrowed with no reference to what you said either that or you failed to express yourself the way you meant to. This can make a quote, any quote sound stupid and in the context of what you wrote this is exactly how it sounds to me. BTW, this quote by Einstein was meant to be humorous, sarcastic not some semi-divine revelation by the forever quoted Albert as a gold lamination on some incoherent thought.

dparrott wrote:My point on vibrating atoms is a so called genius is no different in form from you and I. My interpritation of the quote is everybody is a genius. The people who judge whether or not you are, should not make you feel like you aren't.

...when one reads Einstein's quotes it's clear that most of them, in fact almost all of them, were meant to be witty, humorous, sarcastic as mentioned. There are only few that were meant to convey a deeper meaning. The rest are more colloquial, down to earth and not to be categorized as a Mount Sinai sequence of revelation from Albert (Yahweh) Einstein and I have no doubt he would have agreed. Case in point, one of the most famous of his witticisms:

Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."

...so which is it? are we mostly stupid or mostly geniuses? The question itself is stupid since it all depends on the intent at that moment, context in short, but in spite of that too bad we can't ask Albert for clarification. He'd probably say both. After all, it's the same coin really, a clown on one side and a god on the other.

I didn't mean to come down that hard on you but the one thing I really hate is when people unthinkingly quote Einstein to give their own ideas a veneer of credibility even if the flavor of it is completely different. He himself vehemently objected to this during his own lifetime when he was already famous enough for his name to be taken in vain!

Here's another quote by Albert and ABSOLUTELY true:
"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods."

dparrott wrote:So what part about his quote is incorrect?

...forget it! Nothing further to say! I give up!

wanabe wrote:Is there any such thing as a Genius?
No, just people who respect the accomplishments of others.

What does this amount to logically? I love, adore Mozart, among others. Now there's no such thing as genius but as someone who sincerely respects their works I must be equal to the talent which created it. Oh crap! I could only wish especially in this day and age where I could have made a few million just on Eine Kleine Nachtmusik which he probably spent one and half days in writing.

wanabe wrote:My point is that genius is ultimately a subjective term that can be applied to anyone, for any reason.

...and the ultimate which most mediocrities can subscribe to and endorse as their own belief. Just brilliant that a genius is only an opinion based on my own understanding and nothing more! Truly the path of least resistance to leverage what may be very little into allot and create another monument by mediocrity to mediocrity. If an idea can get any more pathetic, I'm certain the GENIUS of mediocrity will find a way. I'm all for democracy but in the case of brain power, there aint non! Rights are not evenly distributed.

dparrott wrote:

Jklint wrote:

wanabe wrote:My point is that genius is ultimately a subjective term that can be applied to anyone, for any reason.

...and the ultimate which most mediocrities can subscribe to and endorse as their own belief. Just brilliant that a genius is only an opinion based on my own understanding and nothing more! Truly the path of least resistance to leverage what may be very little into allot and create another monument by mediocrity to mediocrity. If an idea can get any more pathetic, I'm certain the GENIUS of mediocrity will find a way. I'm all for democracy but in the case of brain power, there aint non! Rights are not evenly distributed.

Jklint, are you just going to just write sarcastic retorts? Or are you going to back you belief up with some actual insight?

...first let me ask you, where is yours since none was offered? "Subjectivity" is the ONLY measure given which has been negated by history a thousand times over. Not that subjectivity doesn't have its place as a valuable asset but it must always be controlled and corrected and that's where cold blooded method enters into the picture. If you think any crackpot can be a genius because that's how you regard him...subjectively with no objectivity in view then you have a mind which must feel perfectly comfortable living inside the shell of an empty walnut. It seems many find it cozy "inside" since the cold air of objectivity usually demands a reevaluation. If I were you, I wouldn't move out!

...it's kind of like Amadeus. Even if the Mozart depicted in the movie had Mozart's talent he could never have written Mozart's music. It requires NOT JUST genius but an incredible level of intelligence to create works on that level. Put another way had Mozart no musical talent whatsoever he would still have been a master of an intelligence far beyond that of most people. The greater the genius (the creative agent), the greater the intelligence required (the controlling agent) to "make it sing". Intelligence in collusion with supreme talent is what creates genius.

dparrott wrote:

Jklint wrote:...it's kind of like Amadeus. Even if the Mozart depicted in the movie had Mozart's talent he could never have written Mozart's music. It requires NOT JUST genius but an incredible level of intelligence to create works on that level. Put another way had Mozart no musical talent whatsoever he would still have been a master of an intelligence far beyond that of most people. The greater the genius (the creative agent), the greater the intelligence required (the controlling agent) to "make it sing". Intelligence in collusion with supreme talent is what creates genius.

Jklint, I think what your missing here is imagination. Mozart had a great musical intelligence but the reason he created something great was not because he understood and new allot about music but because he imagined something that no one else had yet. We are all capable of imagining therefore he was not a genius just a person with musical talent and a great imagination. Einstein had a great intelligence of math and physics but with no imagination he would have not created any of his laws. What sets the genius apart is not there intelligence it's their imaginations and the ability to imagine is something we all have.

...you haven't understood a single thing I said - NOT AN IOTA. I'm off this thread. With some people one can talk about bread crumbs for an eternity...and I haven't got time!!

Gentlemen, I am forced to retreat before such brilliance. I don't know what happened. It must be all the cheddar cheese I've been eating lately the likes of which I can't resist as it smoothly melts upon a thin crust of bread. I know I've been overdosing lately which seems to impede the data flow between neurons each of which seem to have forgotten its own MAC address. What do you think. Should I take a sabbatical?? Sign in to a sanatorium? Call an electrician?? Since I ain't no genius I can't even get a job as an idiot savant. Woe is me!!!

Nah! I looked and looked and found nothing. Searched every nook and cranny and and found only dust. Such is fate. I must defer to my superiors as represented by your inimitable selves. Keep up the good work fellas! I must retreat...before the Alexanders of philosophy!

HexHammer wrote:Stop making bad guesses, many these days get ADHD because of underdeveloped Cerebellum. Seriously, read up on neurology, you don't really know anything about it.

I have to ask, where do you get the idea, or where is the reference that ADHD is caused by an "underdeveloped Cerebellum"? There is a big difference between what is underdeveloped and a malfunction - usually chemical. The CEREBELLUM, as you can see, is "the hind brain" which coordinates motor movement, balance, etc. If you meant the Cerebrum, that's an awfully large part of the brain to be "underdeveloped". So, aside from saying to people as you so often have "to read up on neurology" can you show us by references to sources just how ADHD is caused by an underdeveloped cerebellum?



-- Updated March 9th, 2012, 3:21 am to add the following --

wanabe wrote:Would you please define genius?

...this question is really a dog's bone. Bury it! Even Mozart, or any other "genius" could not define genius...except to say "I think about whatever and it comes. They don't know from "where" except that THEY are the recipients. If the human brain can be so much less than what it was meant to be it follows that it can also be more...much more! Anything that complex has a wide compass and nature is not perfect! It creates inequality. To really realize that you have to be on a philosophy forum.