TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Nurturing Genius

112 点作者 datashovel超过 8 年前

10 条评论

dmit超过 8 年前
Only tangentially related, but this article reminded me of Edward Kmett&#x27;s presentation from YOW! 2014:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;yow.eventer.com&#x2F;yow-2014-1222&#x2F;stop-treading-water-learning-to-learn-by-edward-kmett-1750" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;yow.eventer.com&#x2F;yow-2014-1222&#x2F;stop-treading-water-le...</a> (~40min)<p>(slides: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;yowconference.com.au&#x2F;slides&#x2F;yow2014&#x2F;Kmett-StopTreadingWater.pdf" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;yowconference.com.au&#x2F;slides&#x2F;yow2014&#x2F;Kmett-StopTreadin...</a>)<p>One of the topics he touched upon is Richard Feynman&#x27;s approach to &quot;being a genius&quot;:<p><pre><code> You have to keep a dozen of your favorite problems constantly present in your mind, although by and large they will lay in a dormant state. Every time you hear or read a new trick or a new result, test it against each of your twelve problems to see whether it helps. Every once in a while there will be a hit, and people will say, “How did he do it? He must be a genius!”</code></pre>
评论 #13259149 未加载
newswriter99超过 8 年前
The article buried in the middle what to do about the ones who fall through the cracks.<p>Speaking from a Texas point of view, there&#x27;s three big problems: 1) Focusing on athletics. 2)Lack-luster public schools and of course the be-all end-all: 3) Crappy parents.<p>What are the people who were &quot;gifted&quot; but live a mediocre life supposed to do? Be bitter and drink for 40-60 years?
评论 #13260929 未加载
评论 #13259431 未加载
datashovel超过 8 年前
It is my (probably controversial) belief that humans can teach other humans how to become geniuses. We just haven&#x27;t figured out how to yet.<p>With one caveat: My guess is intervention probably has to start early.
评论 #13258329 未加载
评论 #13260070 未加载
评论 #13258282 未加载
评论 #13260099 未加载
评论 #13259554 未加载
评论 #13260269 未加载
WhitneyLand超过 8 年前
The results are really impressive. It&#x27;s also comforting to see them dealing with some of the subtleties that were intuitive but not always practiced. That labeling people high and low can both be damaging. That putting children in college could sometimes save them emotionally rather than cause problems. That IQ tests are bullshit when used improperly and even the best tests are still missing people who should be nurtured.<p>Other factors seem very important anecdotally, have these been dismissed or just not fully studied yet?<p>1. Socioeconomic background - they mention it&#x27;s not as predictive, but how sure are we Microsoft would exist if BG&#x27;s&#x2F;PA&#x27;s parents were illiterate and couldn&#x27;t afford to give them access to computers?<p>2. Mental health - Someone could be a 4th standard deviation genius yet be debilitated by anxiety, depression, or some other condition.<p>3. Occasionally mental &quot;disability&quot; can seemingly be related to success. So many great scientists have been on the Autistic spectrum, or suffered from severe OCD. Can the success of the person be separated from the disorder? Could &quot;cures&quot; for Autism and OCD actually negatively affect scientific progress? Or could their condition cause them to be incorrectly screened out?<p>4. How do curiosity, motivation, and ambition affect success? Do high scoring kids automatically have these traits or is it a separate variable?
评论 #13259543 未加载
评论 #13259786 未加载
gedy超过 8 年前
The idea that people are blank slates as children and of equal capabilities aside from their environment is so prominent in this country. Many people are very dogmatic about this, so I wonder where this belief comes from? Religious and&#x2F;or Leftist political theory?
评论 #13259097 未加载
评论 #13259013 未加载
评论 #13259420 未加载
jessriedel超过 8 年前
As an aside, think we should all be impressed that Scientific American includes an &quot;In Brief&quot; summary of the article (aka an abstract aka tl;dr). Reading on the internet will be substantially better once these are widely adopted.
评论 #13258593 未加载
imranq超过 8 年前
Personally I think the goal isnt to be called a &quot;genius&quot;. That seems like a trick for parties - like to show off ones intellect like a lion shows off his roar at a zoo. Sometimes I feel we worship at the altar of genius way too much.<p>I&#x27;d rather take smarts and apply them to have better relationships, discover new and wonderful things, and build things i and other people find useful.<p>Being labeled as a genius seems like a huge drag.
marmaduke超过 8 年前
I attended CTY three times but I definitely wasn&#x27;t one of those &quot;genius&quot;es. I was a goddamn stubborn nerd who wasnt smart enough not to give up. I remember the fundamentals of comp Sci course finished with a short section on C and I amused myself not implementing data structures as assigned but seeing what sorts of segfaults lead to what pop up messages...<p>There were real smart people there. I mean they just took one look at a red black tree and just got it. Not me I sweat all the way through that stuff.
coldtea超过 8 年前
Enough with the geniuses cargo cult.<p>How about nurturing normal people collaborating, respecting the scientific process, loving to discover new things, be curious, etc?
评论 #13258823 未加载
评论 #13258739 未加载
mcguire超过 8 年前
&quot;<i>“Whether we like it or not, these people really do control our society,” says Jonathan Wai, a psychologist at the Duke Talent Identification Program, which collaborates with the Hopkins center. Wai combined data from 11 prospective and retrospective longitudinal studies, including SMPY, to demonstrate the correlation between early cognitive ability and adult achievement. “The kids who test in the top 1 percent tend to become our eminent scientists and academics, our Fortune 500 CEOs, and federal judges, senators and billionaires,” he says.</i>&quot;<p>I&#x27;m telling you, the Chinese were onto something with the imperial examinations.<p>What we do is set up a test focusing on IQ and aptitude taken at, say 10 years. Based on that, we segregate everyone into castes; say, manual laborers, blue collar workers, white collar workers, and professionals. Then we focus subsequent instruction for the particular caste: professionals and white collars get pre-college material, blue collars get trade schools and the rest get baby-sat to keep them out of trouble. Further tests can provide finer gradations, particularly important for the higher castes, to identify that 1% that will become the leaders. Those are given all the advantages they need to reach their potential without having resources sapped by sheer wastage.<p>Careers and such are determined properly, by aptitude and intelligence, and not by stupid crap like which class the hot girl is taking.<p>The system has a number of other advantages: we can ditch the goofy democracy for everyone thing, since the majority aren&#x27;t going to have valid opinions anyway. The result is less stress and more happiness for everyone.<p>[Edit] It just occurred to me that Plato would probably think that this is his <i>Republic.</i> Except that we could make this actually work.
评论 #13259754 未加载