With respect to learning, knowledge, and “genius” according to Cooijmans (AH, IQ, conscientiousness), I finally have a decent working illustration of the model in my head to describe the various ideas.
Let’s imagine that a subject of study is well-described by a dictionary compiled over time. Say a person with zero knowledge of law is given up a law dictionary with 10,000 terms in it. We would describe a high-IQ person as a person who reads, understands, remembers, and is able to apply a large number of definitions to novel problems in a relatively short amount of time. Some definitions are more difficult to understand than others, some have more words (longer time of perception, where quicker perception alone is understood to cause slightly higher intelligence), etc.
Taking a class under the aegis of law is therefore alike a guided tour of some selected terms in the subject’s dictionary. In a more analytical subject, the emphasis will be on correct combination and application of fewer terms (or concepts, if you prefer).
Conscientiousness, previously described as the predisposition to the directed application of mental energy, is understood colloquially as the dutiful application thereof according to the will of recognized authority figures (the only real difference is whose will is paramount, and often two wills can be closely aligned). If a recognized authority tells a conscientious person to learn all terms beginning with the letter ‘A’, they are more likely to do so because they will assign higher importance to those terms. A person who is not dutiful will not assign this higher importance, as opposed to failures of will, intelligence, energy, etc.
A conscientious person who recognizes himself as the authority may consciously assign himself the task of learning all terms beginning with ‘B’, and therefore prioritize those terms. If he also has the externally assigned task of learning the ‘A’ terms, he may still study the ‘B’ terms to the detriment of the ‘A’ terms and still be called “conscientious”. In this case, he only lacks (relatively) a feeling of duty toward the external authority figure.