Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 477 posts

Re: Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children

#61

Post by fu9ar »

Retric wrote: post #22
Isamu wrote: post #14

> Such results contradict long-established ideas suggesting that expert performance is built mainly through practice—that anyone can get to the top with enough focused effort of the right kind. Actually the claim is the other way around - that the people at the top got there through focused effort of the right kind. Finding "gifted" children does not contradict this. Nobody pops out of the womb a math genius. Gifted…

Plenty of people spend hours drawing and still suck at it. My sister spent hours with a coloring book as a kid, and now has a growing IMDB page.* Sure, she went to a great art school, but not because of some single minded focus as she had ~10 AP classes and ended up High school Valedictorian. Even this did not take her full attention as she had a wide circle of friends, was very popular, and spent a lot of time on ma…

makeup is drawing

Re: Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children

#62

Post by Jimmy »

exelius wrote: post #48
Jimmy wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that's simply unacceptable to me. A stable six-figure job is failure. If I'm fated to try and fail for the rest of my life to break into the 1 in 10,000, then so be it.

I think the idea is that the 1-in-10,000 in this context is that it's not something you can "break into"; you're either born gifted or you're not. It's really hard for our generation to accept that some people really are born "better" -- which is exactly why the article mentions the education system now focuses on bringing up lower performers rather than identifying and accelerating gifted students.

I'm a strong believer in the idea that some people are born better, you don't have to convince me.

The extent of my abilities is still unknown to me. I know what I want to achieve and I will continue trying to achieve it until I succeed or I am dead. To accept anything less is equivalent to death.

Re: Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children

#63

Post by BatFastard »

iopq wrote: post #46
Isamu wrote: post #14

> Such results contradict long-established ideas suggesting that expert performance is built mainly through practice—that anyone can get to the top with enough focused effort of the right kind. Actually the claim is the other way around - that the people at the top got there through focused effort of the right kind. Finding "gifted" children does not contradict this. Nobody pops out of the womb a math genius. Gifted…

I don't feel like that's true. I didn't expend any effort on my studies and it just came easily to me. Now, I'm not a genius, but there's a huge difference between my aptitude towards anything and the average person. I scored in the 99th percentile in math on the California high school exit exam. I went to community college at 15 (while still taking some high school courses at first, but upon taking the proficiency e…

The Genius bar is not really that high, so I suspect you qualify. I bet there is a bit of ADHD thrown in there, which often accounts for not liking structured learning as much.

Re: Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children

#64

Post by kikishortler »

Isamu wrote: post #14

> Such results contradict long-established ideas suggesting that expert performance is built mainly through practice—that anyone can get to the top with enough focused effort of the right kind. Actually the claim is the other way around - that the people at the top got there through focused effort of the right kind. Finding "gifted" children does not contradict this. Nobody pops out of the womb a math genius. Gifted…

Genius = creativity + intelligence

You can preserve your creativity (doing things your own way) if you are prepared to pay the social cost but intelligence is largely inherited.

And intelligent women are having fewer children nowadays...

Re: Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children

#65

Post by JacobJans »

iopq wrote: post #46
Isamu wrote: post #14

> Such results contradict long-established ideas suggesting that expert performance is built mainly through practice—that anyone can get to the top with enough focused effort of the right kind. Actually the claim is the other way around - that the people at the top got there through focused effort of the right kind. Finding "gifted" children does not contradict this. Nobody pops out of the womb a math genius. Gifted…

I don't feel like that's true. I didn't expend any effort on my studies and it just came easily to me. Now, I'm not a genius, but there's a huge difference between my aptitude towards anything and the average person. I scored in the 99th percentile in math on the California high school exit exam. I went to community college at 15 (while still taking some high school courses at first, but upon taking the proficiency e…

>I didn't expend any effort on my studies

>I was reading calculus textbooks when I was 10 years old.

I suggest that you, indeed, spent effort on your studies.

Re: Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children

#66

Post by iopq »

JacobJans wrote: post #65
iopq wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't feel like that's true. I didn't expend any effort on my studies and it just came easily to me. Now, I'm not a genius, but there's a huge difference between my aptitude towards anything and the average person. I scored in the 99th percentile in math on the California high school exit exam. I went to community college at 15 (while still taking some high school courses at first, but upon taking the proficiency e…

>I didn't expend any effort on my studies >I was reading calculus textbooks when I was 10 years old. I suggest that you, indeed, spent effort on your studies.

Those weren't my studies. Those were my hobbies. Give me homework and I'll run away screaming.

I used to HATE the language subjects. Now that I'm not being forced to do it, I enjoy linguistics.

Re: Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children

#67

Post by saint_fiasco »

iopq wrote: post #57
saint_fiasco wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's impossible. Just like you can't force a gay man to be more interested in women and you can't force an asocial nerd to enjoy loud parties, you just can't force most people to enjoy math. EDIT: changed an example to be more specific and precise.

I'm an introverted nerd and I enjoy socialization. This is a bad example.

What's the correct word for someone who doesn't enjoy socialization?

What does introverted mean? Does it just mean "person who enjoys being alone" or "person who is not good at socializing, even though they may enjoy it"?

Re: Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children

#68

Post by Jimmy »

iopq wrote: post #59
Jimmy wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many ungifted people who make their livings as mathematicians. Have you already abandoned math? If you haven't given up yet, there are likely things you can do to improve your chances of success.

> There are many ungifted people who make their livings as mathematicians They're still well above average IQ.

Sure. It depends on what definition we're using for "gifted". Practice may not make you into von Neumann, but it may very well make you into a professional mathematician with stable employment.

My intuition is that if someone is interested enough in a career in mathematics that they begin putting regular practice into it, then they're already likely (but not certainly) past the minimum IQ threshold.

Re: Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children

#69

Post by bluetwo »

I agree with the article that spacial ability is an untapped resource, key to understanding and problem solving.

I think there is a pretty easy way of testing this, simply by finding out what they find funny.

Different kinds of humor tap this skill, and those drawn to certain types of humor, IMHO, likely have better spacial skills.

Post reply on HN