Are people with straight A's naturally smart?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
B

bigDee

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2006
Messages
478
Reaction score
3
My friend Jerry is so lazy, that he tries to justify his bad grades by saying he doesn't have the naturally intellect to do good like our other friend shawn. We've been arguing over this since the start of the semester and I still don't know how to prove to him that shawn isn't some kind of genius.

This shawn guy is in his second semester of school and did very good in gen chem and for this semester he hasn't missed a single point so far in calculus 1.
Jerry thinks shawn has this natural ability to retain information FAR greater than he can and that's why he does so well. I call BS and say its because he studies smart and doesn't play around. I say jerry only believes that so he can have a reason to not make himself study harder. With Jerry's logic, if he doesn't have the intellect to get straight A's, what's the point of studying so hard?

Btw calc is easy as hell here.

I understand that there are people out there who have a natural ability to retain information far greater than most people, but I think they are one in a million. Whatever the case, this sean guy is not some kind of genius just because he's acing calculus. What do you guys think?

I'm sure you guys know people with 4.0's. Do they come off to you as some kind of genius, or do you think its mostly just work ethic?
Members don't see this ad.
 
Well, I'm not sure if it helps; but I'm a genius and I'm seriously regretting the 3.5 I managed to get by slacking my way through undergrad.
 
Some people are naturally smart, but that doesn't mean they will always get straight As. I have Eidetic memory, but if I don't at least look at the material, that won't help me at all. I think that if you are naturally intelligent, all that means is you won't have to study as much; however, you can still do poorly. I'm pretty smart, but I did really crappy in high school because I just didn't give a rat's behind.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
"If you dont use it, you lose it." That would be your friend Jerry.
 
"If you dont use it, you lose it." That would be your friend Jerry.



Ask him to try soduku?
 
I LOVE Sudoku. My girlfriend's mom and I always do them in the paper. :laugh: Have you ever played Kakuro?
 
That's weird. A lazy person justifying poor performance by saying they aren't intelligent?

Well, yeah. I would agree with them.

You usually see stupid people justifying poor performance with lazyness.
 
I think it's just as common for intelligent people to blame poor performance on laziness. My high school GPA was 1.7, but my college GPA was 4.0 until this year (damn 23 credits). Obviously, I am capable of doing well, I was just lazy.
 
Moshe Rabbenu said:
I think it's just as common for intelligent people to blame poor performance on laziness. My high school GPA was 1.7, but my college GPA was 4.0 until this year (damn 23 credits). Obviously, I am capable of doing well, I was just lazy.
Click to expand...

Well, yeah. And who the hell cared about high school?
 
just goes to show how much people love to rationalize.

your buddy Jerry is lazy. end of story.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
zenlike said:
Well, I'm not sure if it helps; but I'm a genius and I'm seriously regretting the 3.5 I managed to get by slacking my way through undergrad.
Click to expand...

You really are a genius, you just choose not to use it?🙄

That could be called "stupid".
 
Cegar said:
Well, yeah. And who the hell cared about high school?
Click to expand...

I did. Valedictorian and all. But that's because I had a decidedly unbalanced life in high school. :laugh:

ghostfoot said:
You really are a genius, you just choose not to use it?🙄

That could be called "stupid".
Click to expand...

Pshhh, I'm a genius, too. Even with a high GPA in undergrad, I choose not to use it. One day, I'll recruit you, my Pinky, and we'll take over the world.
 
Moshe Rabbenu said:
I think it's just as common for intelligent people to blame poor performance on laziness. My high school GPA was 1.7, but my college GPA was 4.0 until this year (damn 23 credits). Obviously, I am capable of doing well, I was just lazy.
Click to expand...

sounds like you're my twin. HS is so incredibly pointless it's amazing, people who got GPAs 2 points higher than me are going to the same schools.
 
Cegar said:
Judging by that statement, you must not work at all.
Click to expand...
im guessing you just called me an idiot 😉 but no, i get good grades. my friends say it's because im smart...and i really, really dont believe thats true. anyone can do well, you just need to put in the effort.
 
jgberken said:
im guessing you just called me an idiot 😉 but no, i get good grades. my friends say it's because im smart...and i really, really dont believe thats true. anyone can do well, you just need to put in the effort.
Click to expand...

Sometimes it isn't even fun.
 
Wylde said:
sounds like you're my twin. HS is so incredibly pointless it's amazing, people who got GPAs 2 points higher than me are going to the same schools.
Click to expand...

I dunno, HS + Texas's valedictorian tuition exemption for year one of any state school = ~20% off my undergraduate degree. That was kinda nice.

HS performance + my university's scholarship to me = ~60% off my undergrad degree. Also nice.
 
People who are naturally smart can get straight A's with a bit less effort. Other people have to work harder sometimes, but I don't think the disparity is so large as people think.

Most of us on here are "naturally smart", trust me. I did close to the same amount of work (or more) than most of my classmates. Yes I got good grades, but I still had to do the work.
 
Due to the excessive number of times I was dropped on my head as an infant and adult, it isn't any wonder I ended up as I did. I am the epitome of why you don't need to be smart to enter medical school.
 
jgberken said:
im guessing you just called me an idiot 😉 but no, i get good grades. my friends say it's because im smart...and i really, really dont believe thats true. anyone can do well, you just need to put in the effort.
Click to expand...

That's not true.
 
Cegar said:
Well, yeah. And who the hell cared about high school?
Click to expand...

you're right you'll be fine not caring about HS once you get to college and change your habits, but high school matters for two reasons: 1) if you already had good study habits from HS, college is cake and you don't have to learn to study since you already know how to and 2) you can get college credit from HS classes you took so you don't have to take all the stupid general ed classes your first year or two in college.

i came into college wtih 36 credits...so i automatically started as a sophomore! i'm finishing in 3 years and next year just taking like 2 classes and chilling while i apply to med schools. it's a pretty tight setup. other ppl with similar credit use it to double major and still easily finish in 4 years. so there are definitely reasons to care in HS. for example, all my general bio knowledge, learned that in high school! didn't waste my time taking those stupid classes filled with all the ****ing ******ed premeds when i got to college. i automatically started with genetics where most of the idiots are already weeded out.

so anyways, my point is you should care in HS, but you don't have to be obsessed about having a 4.0 since having just a 3.0+ will still get you all the college credit you want. if you don't care in HS, then you just have to waste more of your time taking stupid classes in college. so either way, things will workout fine.

oh yea, don't forget that if you do well in HS you can get full rides to undergrad. so it definitely pays off to work in HS. except again, you don't need a 4.0 to get full scholarships. most of those full rides are given for doing really well on the ACT/SAT. hell, that's what my friend did. he didn't do **** in HS and only studied the PSAT. being national merit got him a full ride here! he also did well enough on IB tests to get 36 hours like me haha. all that's required for all those hours is an IB diploma, which you get for having a total of 24 IB points. if that # is trivial to you, then just know it's almost impossible not to get at least 24 pts hahaha. the only thing is he had bad study habits in HS, changed his major 5 times, and it's gonna take him 5 years to graduate with one degree. that's what happens when you don't have any discipline in HS and then are unable to change your ways in college b/c at that point it's so hard to change what you've been doing for years. it can be done tho i guess. anyways, i can't judge him, tho, because me, him, and all our friends are complete slackers haha. i just have some discipline at times leftover from when i did study a lot in HS.
 
There are people who aren't smart enough to make it through college or into medicine. Jerry is not one of those people if he is capable of comprehending and making the argument he is making to try to justify his lack of work.

Medicine is more about work ethic than pure intelligence. You're expected to know the material and be able to use it when needed, but you're even more expected to find out the answer to information you don't know, and be willing to put the time and effort into helping the patient, no matter how long it takes or how hard it is to do.

If, intelligence-wise, you can't make it into medical school, then you would never have made it past general chemistry. If you don't have the work ethic to make it into medical school, then you won't have good enough grades in the classes you did pass in order to make it into medical school.
 
bigDee said:
My friend Jerry is so lazy, that he tries to justify his bad grades by saying he doesn't have the naturally intellect to do good like our other friend shawn. We've been arguing over this since the start of the semester and I still don't know how to prove to him that shawn isn't some kind of genius.

This shawn guy is in his second semester of school and did very good in gen chem and for this semester he hasn't missed a single point so far in calculus 1.
Jerry thinks shawn has this natural ability to retain information FAR greater than he can and that's why he does so well. I call BS and say its because he studies smart and doesn't play around. I say jerry only believes that so he can have a reason to not make himself study harder. With Jerry's logic, if he doesn't have the intellect to get straight A's, what's the point of studying so hard?

Btw calc is easy as hell here.

I understand that there are people out there who have a natural ability to retain information far greater than most people, but I think they are one in a million. Whatever the case, this sean guy is not some kind of genius just because he's acing calculus. What do you guys think?

I'm sure you guys know people with 4.0's. Do they come off to you as some kind of genius, or do you think its mostly just work ethic?
Click to expand...

Is there some reason why shawn's name is chronically spelled without a capital S? Were his parents beatniks?
 
Gut Shot said:
Is there some reason why shawn's name is chronically spelled without a capital S? Were his parents beatniks?
Click to expand...

Aren't you adorable? Pointing our grammatical problems with no further progression towards the thread... aww... that's so cute.

You're going to grow up so fast, though, and soon you'll be talking about big, important things that matter! Awen't you? Awen't you? Aww... gootchy gootchy goo!

That's so sweet...
 
i'd say "hard working" rather than necessarily smart
 
Tin Man said:
Aren't you adorable? Pointing our grammatical problems with no further progression towards the thread... aww... that's so cute.

You're going to grow up so fast, though, and soon you'll be talking about big, important things that matter! Awen't you? Awen't you? Aww... gootchy gootchy goo!

That's so sweet...
Click to expand...

Just an observation. And yes, I am extremely sweet.
 
I grew up with three of the smartest girls I've ever known.

Here's what happened:

Girl #1 went to a small writing college, flunked out because she wouldn't go to class or do work, then flunked otu of another school, worked, eventually got a tech degree, and just decided to go back to school 6 years later because she doesn't want her little sister to get a degree before her.

Girl #2 got a full-ride to her state school, got a double degree in electrical engineering and mathematics, but slacked her entire way through school. She always went to class, but she wasn't a studier. She got about a C/B average in school, and now works for the government in a cushy job.

Girl #3 made the worst grades in highschool of the three, went to a small private college, earned pretty much straight A's (1 B in over 200 hours, I think), earned a couple of different degrees, and will be going to a great medical school in the fall. That girl studied, but not much. A lot of people who worked a lot harder than her couldn't get anywhere near her grades, and she was very involved outside of class.

So, the moral of the story? All three girls are ridiculously smart... I think girl #3 is the least brilliant of them.... Yet, she has been the most academically successful. Girl #2 tried, but mainly coasted, and she survived, but didn't excell. Girl #1 didn't try at all, and she failed herself.

Also, there are many bystanders who didn't have the same natural intelligence, and no matter how hard they tried, they could not keep up with girl #3. Natural intelligence plays a role, but it's not the end-all, be-all.
 
uzybear said:
the ego is strong with these ones 😉 i'm sure that's par for the course with med students though
Click to expand...

And, the inability to read an entire post seems to be strong with you, my friend. If you read the whole thing, you'd know that I said that even though I have that, it means diddly squat if I don't study--hence my 1.7 GPA in high school. I'll be the first to admit that I don't get straight As. My GPA isn't 4.0, so obviously I don't.
 
People with straight-A's who do all the recommended work in a class, start studying days/weeks before exams, and spend a lot of time outside of class trying to understand the material = above-average intelligence and hard-working.

People with near straight-A's who do no work at all for a class like o-chem until the night before the exam = naturally smart.
 
This is silly.
Of course it doesn't mean they are smart, it may help but you can be smart as hell and not get A's. It just means they work hard or are likable/kiss booty (if subjective grades).
In fact most of the smartest ppl do not do well in early coursework because it is not challenging - try showing interest when your bored out of your mind.
 
jgberken said:
there's no such thing as smart ppl, only those who work hard.
Click to expand...

That is only true but to a small extent you do have to be born with some sort of intellect. Granted, this is only a very little part of the equation since it is mostly worth ethic, but I have seen people who can study their asses off forever and will still never pull anything better than a B on a test no matter how many hours they study.
 
Don't worry about things you have no control over (ie your natural intelligence)

Do not get upset when you were not smart enough to figure something out, but do get upset when you know a mistake was made that could have been avoided by working harder. Make sure not to blend the line and blame it on just not having the smarts because 95% of the time it was the hard work. 90% of stats are made up on the spot

Make them beat you by being simply smarter, not because they outworked you.

"hardwork beats talent when talent doesn't work hard"

I wrote a lot because it is kind of a touchy subject with me.

Hope this made sense it was an interesting, too interesting to say the least night last night.
 
brianmartin said:
People who are naturally smart can get straight A's with a bit less effort. Other people have to work harder sometimes, but I don't think the disparity is so large as people think.
Click to expand...

Agree. Also bear in mind that "learning how to learn" is probably more important to your later life than any info you pick up at the college level. There are tons of people who coast to A's in college who get killed in med school because they aren't used to the buckling down required. There are a couple of active threads on the allo board relating to folks struggling in first year after having a relatively easy time in college. So if you get a good understanding of how your own brain works and how to buckle down and master a large amount of material, you are infinitely better off than an A that comes easy to you.
 
This is an interesting question that my psychology course on tests and measurements was debating. The only reason we talked about intelligence in the first place was that this was the first subject that the idea of testing got started. As we discussed the issue, we came to the idea that intelligence is something separate from academic achievement. The latter taps in book smart skills and things you have retained and mastered over time. The former, however, is kind of equivalent to street smarts in that you need to solve a novel problem. Honestly, the two constructs can be correlated to some degree. However, there are those who have high intelligence but decide not to use it in an academic setting. I hope my insight helps further the thread a little further and generate food for thought.
 
Wylde said:
sounds like you're my twin. HS is so incredibly pointless it's amazing, people who got GPAs 2 points higher than me are going to the same schools.
Click to expand...

That's nothing, I graduated high school with a 2.4 gpa and more than half of the top ten that I graduated with dropped out of college already.
 
I think theres a gradient of intelligence and also a gradient of work ethic which work together to achieve a gradient of results (failure to excellence).
Also, I think that intelligence is way too narrowly defined. Intelligence is much more than the ability to excel at school. There is a wide variety of types of intelligence and generally each individual their own gifts to bring to the table. For instance.... I'm not struggling in med school and some topics I would even consider "easy." However, if I were forced to enroll in a bunch of advanced math or physics courses, I'd have to work EXTREMELY hard and would probably only pass. Some individuals are literary geniuses but struggle with science. Some individuals have creative prowess but aren't particularly good with more concrete subjects. I think that an individual who is brilliant in all topics is rare - and maybe even nonexistant.

I think the above is only important in how it helps us understand and be graceful with others. Otherwise - we all have the gifts that we have and its our own responsibility to see that we do the most we can with it. Your friend may not be as intelligent with Shawn - but if he's not trying, then he's not reaching his potential. Thats what is important. Perhaps your friend CAN'T get every question right in every class, but he can certainly do better than he's doing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
Does anyone ever feel discouraged when they see people with crazily high stats applying?
Replies
5
Views
1K
MrBigglesworth
MrBigglesworth
P
Reapplicant with a previous A, Blacklisting?
Replies
4
Views
926
C+P
C+P
A
Are my chances over with a W in an SMP?
Replies
14
Views
1K
ahsoka
A
E
chronically ill people, did schools ask for verification from a medical provider?
Replies
4
Views
653
LizzyM
LizzyM
crknwk2000
PSA to those with recent A's
Replies
2
Views
1K
j_diggity
j_diggity
Top