- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 9,225
- Reaction score
- 3,794
As I said when I don't give imporatnce to quickly I said that I didn't meant as slow as monkey producing Shakespear is OK. It's more like difference between speed chess and games in world chess championship. Speed chess is mostly recall from memory while championship games are innovations. Every champion is not Alekhine or Bobby Fisher but once they get at that level there is more than intelligence is involved. Courage and luck play there part.
If Shakespear had produce Lear, Hamlet, McBeth and Othello it would be sufficient to rate him high. Reiman even if he had produced quarter of what he did he would be in top 100 instead of top five. He died pretty young without a permanent faculty position nevertheless.
You need courage. Stuckleburg invented a model for nuclear interaction. He discussed that with Pauli who said it's nonsense and he didn't publish it but Yukawa published it got the Nobel. Pauli was terrible in that respect.
Luckily Yukawa didn't confere with Pauli. There was another case of proposal for electron spin without any rotating electron. Pauli said it's nonsense. The autors wanted to withdraw. They went to Ernfest, who had recommended the publication (this was necessary to get published), to request withdrawal. Erfest said that he already sent it and can't withdraw.
The authors got a Nobel. Lucky once.
When we are talking about Hawking we are talking about 0.01%tile. Romantic stories such as for Einstein, Hawking, Ramanujan do get little overblown. However Hawking had a courage to go against conventional wisdom and porpose that black holes are not permanent and can evaporate by radiation. Well that is part os every consomology model now. This fundamental contribution is not going to dissappear for 1000 year. Coming with such ideas is not everyday affair. Some times you have once in life time chance.
Feynman actually missed a boat once. Bunch of physicst, including Feynamn, were travelling in train from Pocono to New York. Feynman actually proposed that some conventional wisdom may be wrong. But he didn't follow it up. Lee and Yang did and got a Nobel.
Mensa kind of problems are speed chess. What Hawking did is like Championship game; he exhibits supreme self confidence and courage in addition to intelligence though luck was not on his side. But once again every Chess Champion is not Alekhine, and you also need self confidence, luck and courage in addition to intelligence.
Well, let's not play around with the whole MENSA questions thing. Neither of us were EVER talking about MENSA problems, so I think we can pretty much ignore any argument based on those for now.
But still, the question of speed clearly affects perception of intelligence in some way, which is really all I was trying to get at. Sure, you might have been able to call Shakespeare intelligent if he had ONLY produced one play, say, Romeo and Juliet, that he had worked his entire life on.
And there's a reason that I took my example to the extreme and used the "one page" example. Because that one page wouldn't have gone very far. To be able to quickly translate your ideas into concrete medium reasonably quickly (take note: Not instantly. We're not talking about MENSA) is an important part of intelligence.