A proper genius (also: is there a general factor?)

Genius is a bizarre word, which is apropos because geniuses are bizarre people.


Irrelevant but included because interesting. Credit: Google

I disambiguate “genius” thus:

1. Very high general intelligence (common definition)
2. Precociousness (colloquial definition)
3. Extraordinary but overly specific talent (like virtuoso musicianship a la Paganini or Liszt; colloquial definition)
4. Origination of one or more important ideas (proper, etymological definition)
5. Extraordinary creativity (Cooijmans’ definition)
6. Pathologically altruistic, group fitness-enhancing creativity (Charlton’s definition)
7. Obsessive-compulsive, anxiety-downregulating creativity (my definition)
8. People who work for Apple (definition by people who work for Apple)

Well, here’s a guy who fits every reasonable definition, Leonhard Euler:

He is also widely considered to be the most prolific mathematician in history. His collected works fill 60 to 80 quarto volumes,[5] more than anybody in the field.


Here’s a description of a typical day in the life of a man who writes 70 volumes of anything (math or otherwise):

>Wake up
>Go back to bed (optional)

(That’s not entirely true because he managed to have a social life and acquire wealth. Even more unbelievable.)

Not only did he write 70 volumes (picture how high that would be if you stacked them), but he wrote 70 volumes of nonstop brilliant mathematical ingenuity. It is downright excessive if you think about it.

Now, Euler was 43 years old in 1750. There were approximately one half billion people in the world in 1750. So now that we’ve had all this PROGRESS and DIVERSITY, being WINNARZ on the right side of history and all, then we should be able to find 14 Eulers in the world today. Certainly 10 of them, no sweat.

Show me five and I’ll vote Obama for a third term. Until then, I’ll stay on the wrong side of history looking back, thank you very much.

Anyway, the point of this post is to point out that Euler had ALL of the characteristics of a genius in great supply, and was also one of the greatest geniuses of all time. The same may be said of the other greats of his caliber: Newton, Gauss, Goethe. Surely we ought to take note of this confluence of factors.

All of that is to say, I believe the answer is yes, there is a general factor for creativity. In fact, I believe it has an extremely high correlation to the general factor g. Thus, being a high-order emergent phenomenon it is one of the first individual traits to disappear when breeding patterns tend to favor…well, breeders.

There are many, many ingredients required for the emergence of genius, not least of which is nationalism.


About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to A proper genius (also: is there a general factor?)

  1. Edenist whackjob says:

    Maybe there’s just not that much low-hanging fruit around anymore? And the things that are out there, waiting to be answered in plain view, are not things that are easily solved one’s own without a lot of lab equipment and access to human guinea pigs. Not to mention that they are proscribed by the Cathedral.

    If Euler were alive today and provided favorable conditions, what would he choose to work on?

    • Edenist whackjob says:

      There’s also a class of science projects which, while not thoughtcrimes, are still strangely underpowered. Ie immortality research. You won’t get fired from your job for wanting to extend lifespan dramatically, but you won’t get funded by a committee either. So maybe that one can be attributed to a general lack of discernment and creativity in those who hold the purse strings. To me, wanting to fix aging sticks out like a sore thumb among worthwhile concerns (discernment), and is deliciously crazy but within the realm of the feasible (AH).

      Aha! PC does impact those kinds of things. Not directly, but by crowding effects. Ie all the funding goes to fight globowarmery and such things.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      I imagine he’d do much the same as he did: any interesting problem that crossed his desk, as well as practical stuff and whatever fields he felt inspired to invent. I bet he’d get a real kick out of computer science.

      >Maybe there’s just not that much low-hanging fruit around anymore?

      I’ve heard that argument before and I don’t buy it. Do we really think a modern Euler wouldn’t be able to knock out a few of the Millenium Prize problems? Math requires no investment in the modern day except time and effort.

  2. Heaviside says:

    >There are many, many ingredients required for the emergence of genius, not least of which is nationalism.

    Uncle Wolf was very preoccupied with genius, but people don’t seem to remember that.

  3. Pingback: Working memory dysfunction in geniuses | Aeoli Pera

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s