tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post115874384488454623..comments2023-11-03T19:05:08.512+11:00Comments on Harry Clarke: How to be a geniusUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post-1158892158650106372006-09-22T12:29:00.000+10:002006-09-22T12:29:00.000+10:00There's a great article in the August Scientific A...There's a great article in the August <I>Scientific American</I> about <A HREF="http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID=00010347-101C-14C1-8F9E83414B7F4945" REL="nofollow">The Expert Mind</A> by Philip Ross that argues that experts in all fields have similar ways of organizing their minds. In other words, David Beckham, Wolfgang Mozart, and John Von Neumman differ only in the field in which they are prodigial.<BR/><BR/>Ross argues that the key is training. The expert is able to assess a situation and immediately know what to do. As an example, he states that a chess grandmaster can look at a chess board for only a few seconds and be able to perfectly reproduce the exact position of all the pieces much better than a novice player--provided that the chess board held a piece arrangement that came from an actual game. But if the pieces are arranged randomly, the grandmaster's advantage over the novice virtually disappears. This shows that it's not because of "photographic memory" but because he can distill the arrangement down to a combination of familiar positions.<BR/><BR/>My favorite quote from the article was when someone once asked Jose Capablanca how many moves ahead he saw during a chess match, he answered "I see only one move ahead, but it is always the correct one."The Science Pundithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14497373296651049624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post-1158829022921365642006-09-21T18:57:00.000+10:002006-09-21T18:57:00.000+10:00I'll just assume the pedantic was for me, not Patr...I'll just assume the pedantic was for me, not Patrick. It certainly isn't pedantic by my standards (even if it superficially sounds like it) -- just imagine the distributions visually and you can see why.<BR/><BR/>First of all, lets say we categorize academic distinction as 500+ citations and a H > 20. (the RQF people would love me..I'm not sure how that goes for economists). I'm sure 90% of people in this situation would have an IQ more than 1 standard deviation to the right. At least I'd bet on that, since 1 SD to the right isn't exactly thrillingly smart.<BR/><BR/>According to an average or greater criterion, 68.2% of people fall between 0-1 SDs to the right, yet only 10% of our academic distinction population does. This means your function incorrectly classifies more than 60% of people who have academic distinction.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post-1158795111937402772006-09-21T09:31:00.000+10:002006-09-21T09:31:00.000+10:00Patrick, You are being a bit pedantic. Having 'gre...Patrick, You are being a bit pedantic. Having 'great academic distinction' is a long way from 'genius'. Having strong intelligence means having an IQ about 14% above the average.hchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13799594181016858701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post-1158794512347029742006-09-21T09:21:00.000+10:002006-09-21T09:21:00.000+10:00I think you are confusing things here.Your claim l...I think you are confusing things here.<BR/><BR/>Your claim later on is that many people do good work but only have ordinary intelligence (all those longitudinal studies on health etc. come to mind ).<BR/><BR/>This doesn't agree with the initial paragarph, which says that you need to have strong intelligence as well.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post-1158771224264346142006-09-21T02:53:00.000+10:002006-09-21T02:53:00.000+10:00Arithmetic my stumbling blog Andrew. I'll fix the...Arithmetic my stumbling blog Andrew. I'll fix the slip.hchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13799594181016858701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post-1158755562847770682006-09-20T22:32:00.000+10:002006-09-20T22:32:00.000+10:00So you need 99% perspiration, 10% inspiration, and...So you need 99% perspiration, 10% inspiration, and good math skills. No wonder there's so few geniuses around.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post-1158747572072967242006-09-20T20:19:00.000+10:002006-09-20T20:19:00.000+10:00I've got the dirty jokes bit working - now I only ...I've got the dirty jokes bit working - now I only need to work on the hard work and intelligence bits.FXHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14927037961123914689noreply@blogger.com