Getting a PhD in mathematics, I work every day with literal geniuses and can tell you that one of the most defining qualities is adaptability. I’d argue it’s in fact the most important characteristic of genius for one to be able to abandon incorrect ideas and embrace new ways of thinking. Creative thinking is the life-blood of intellectualism and tbh we spend a lot of time in research specifically examining how our thinking is incorrect. I suppose we just have different experiences, but I don’t know any “geniuses” who got to be as smart as they are without making a mountain of mistakes along the way. That’s just how learning works. But maybe I missed the point.
I like the maybe at the end :) Learning can happen after a positive or a negative reinforcement, IMO. Determining the reward/punishment is the key here. It is more clear and easy to reach a conclusion that something was not ideal (i.e. mistake) rather than considering dozens/millions of possibilities where the supposed "mistake" is actually a positive thing, thus reinforcing the lesson with a positive reward rather than a punishment (e.g. shame, guilt, anxiety, fear etc.) Idk, I'm just late night thinking and going through these awesome comments. But damn, seeing a lot of opinions and hearing the point in the video just activated my big mouth (figuratively)
In maths is obvious that geniuses have a huge imagination coupled with a huge amount of skill and of course a lot of ideas that can work or not.They are extremely perseverant people so it's obvious that they ll try a lot of ideas till they ll find out the " key" to the solution.. But the Big Question is still a mystery: how is it possible that people like Newton,Euler, Gauss, Riemann , Hilbert,Poincare, John von Neumann,Wyles, Perelman... exist among the rest of mortals?????
There are two definitions of the word “genius”: 1. Someone with great mental capacities and/or creativity. 2. Someone who has a natural ease in a given area. Both are used and create confusion, as some people use the first definition, some use the second, and some use both. They are quite different, as someone with ease in, for example, neurology, may also be totally clueless in other areas, such as self-questioning. If you use the first definition, geniuses can’t be very stubborn people, as it is a proof of lack of intelligence and creativity. If you use the second definition, then SOME geniuses are indeed stubborn people. But I wouldn’t call them geniuses; I would prefer the term “immature” personally. Even so, not every genius has to be stubborn, as even if they’re often right, they aren’t always right. Thus, they can still learn from their mistakes, even if it’s harder than for most people. So, this video is a bit… arrogant? It always talks about geniuses as if every single one of them was concerned, without presenting the used definition of the term. Presenting this as being a universal truth when it’s based on personal experience isn’t very wise.
Each person has a set of fluid personal relevant neural connections which may or may not overlap with others, you can produce without 'x' or 'w' flexibility and/or move between.
Love this interpretation. How much creativity does one need in order to be a genius? Does it require a specific ratio, or does any amount of creativity help?
@@The-Well IMO, to separate the highest order of thinker from other smart people, a genius of the highest order is able to make paradigm shifting discoveries because they are willing to entertain a number of perspectives because they are focused on discovering the truth, then appearing to be right. They theorize based on the evidence and when new evidences arises, they create new theories. A genius is shown through their unique perspective on life and whatever they decide to focus on. True genius must be okay with imagination, because that's where possibilities of discovery lie. There's a reason why people like Tesla and Einstein had active imaginations and eclectic hobbies and beliefs. Their genius lied in their willingness to entertain their imagination. To ask the question, What if...? and to act upon that very question over and over.
The Human in thr West or better the Human Around the World ,makes today, to many Problems with to many Bias Visible. That Climate Problem that Problem with the Word Double Messages that the Human so Visible makes that makes very Quickly a Problem with a Psychosis Visible. The Human makes that with his Justice System on a Speciale way Visible . On this Place make the Affected People ,that more as good Visible ,that his own Problem ,with this Situation ,for the most People not so good or, no Visible is. The Sick Crowd makes the Super Sick People with his Justice System in the most Times to a sane Person or to a Normal Person. The Crowd was many Problems with the Double Messages and a Super Big Problem with the Criteria. In the Same Time where the Crowd ,with a Mass Psychosis, Around the World, a very bad Situation Visible makes ,makes that Crowd ,his Super sick People ,to a sane Person. So a Super sick Person, has in this Time, safe ever more as enough, bad Role Models . The Sick People makes many People with his own bad work, with the Double Messages, and with his bad work, as Observer, often more sick . The Human has a Super Big Problem with the Language and a Super Big Problem with the Moral. That makes a Link to a Problem with the Reality Visible and a Big Problem with many Bias. So a Child molester ,that os Safe a bad Person ,but the most People likes the Kill from so a Person . That the People on this way his Problem with the Double Messages Visible makes ,that is for the most People not Visible. A Child in a Factory full with Poisen or a Child labor that is for the most People Safe not so a Big Problem ,or his Link to this Problem. The Human likes the Child Abuse and that this Topic for the most People not a Big Problem is that makes the People ,with his own Clothing ,in the most Times ,more as good Visible. The Crowd likes the Child Abuse , long and longer ,and in the Same Time makes the People ,the Sexual Child molester ,to a Monster ,in his Fake Moral Expert Show.. That what the Human likes is a Big Fake Moral Expert Show, but his own bad Place ,in this Show ,can't the Affected People see . The Human is a Big Problem and that the Kapitalist or the Mony a Big Problem is that is more as Safe . With the Mony makes the Human Around the World ,very Quickly a Super Stupid Self Manipulation and a Super Stupid Indoctrinated Situation Visible. The Kapitalism makes us Humans to a Parasite and the Criteria never better. The Capitalism makes very Quickly , a Link to a bad work with the Logic Visible. That Topic Publicity ,that is a Topic, that very Quickly, the worse work, with the Logic Visible makes. The Capitalism is Bullshit and that is a Fact.
Funny thing is, I heard recently that this was studied, and they came to the conclusion, that the worst echo chamber is your friends and family. Furthermore it pushed the idea that social media is so distressing for many to use !because! you get exposed to so many outlandish opinions. So yes, the youtube algorithm tries to narrow it down, but the internet as a whole is some sort of anti echo chamber that pushes extreme views to you, so it might be bad in a somewhat different way....
Finding quality content with substance cannot be achieved passively. TH-cam is constantly throwing garbage my way, even though history, science and thought provoking videos such as this one are all I want.
No, the so called echo chamber phenomenon is a myth. People are exposed to diversity online in fact. He youtube algorithm doesn't stay on one thing permanently, especially if you have more than one interest, it's dynamic and changing.
TH-cam is only as good as the subjects topics research areas and questions you search for and feed into it. Otherwise the default is cheap dopamine trash
Agreed and the algorithm is also only 1 small piece in the puzzle. I believe that an initial necessary piece in avoiding echo chambers is getting it to click in the Childs mind that they have agency in this world and that their choices and decisions matter. They can change their echo chamber by moving, thinking and asking questions. No matter how uncomfortable it gets. I had this small example of an experience with my Grandpa. I asked him, “Why do you like Trump?” He got offended, thinking automatically that I was going to attack Trump or say something bad about him and he felt alarmed that someone even asked the question. As if it’s obvious. He knows me well enough to know that I don’t engage in trollish behavior but he sees that type of attitude on the news daily and he sees people attacking Trump constantly so he had a knee jerk reaction. Telltale sign of an echo chamber is sensitivity and hostility at the mere mentioning of the subject.
I've spent my life trying to maintain an open, flexible, adaptive, curious, and teachable state of mind, and at 58 I see that most of the people my age have not, and they are trapped in rigid ways of thinking and interpreting the world which just don't hold up as time passes and things change. And regardless of what they think, they are certain they are right, and they have a lifetime of unshakable, pre-packaged opinions, few of which are or ever were valid. And they're not even what I would consider bad people. Just stuck.
@@graphitic5578 I wish I had learned some practical crafting skills when I was younger, because now I don't really have the resources to take up the ones that interest me. I do have hobbies, mostly creative, musical, artistic, but nothing I can readily rely on now that I'm jobless and basically unemployable. I also wish I had been more athletic. You can only benefit so much from exercise at my age.
@@MemphiStig i see but i have wishes contrary to your age and wants. I wished all what i had done earlier were deferred later i.e exercising, martial arts, reading books to my older years, then I'd be able to concentrate on one single subject with all my focus unperturbed and active. Because you see, my life right now, is a mess that I'd have to sort out tremendously, one which i could rely on is my delusional willpower and drive, not to be backed down by procrastination. This isn't the consequence I'd want, nor ever being stuck again and again on this hellhole. I may ask you again about my experience above, what's the essence of focus?
@@graphitic5578 I tend to agree about the concentration. I always lacked the discipline to apply myself as fully as I would have liked to even the things I did well. I could have definitely used my time more productively regardless of what or how many things I pursued. As for focus, that took a long time, and I'm still working on it. If I'd been born later, no doubt I would have been diagnosed as ADHD, tho I'm glad I didn't learn to live dependent on meds for my daily frame of mind. I would say the essence of focus, however, is the ability to free your mind (and environment) of distractions and do only one thing at a time. It's something I think we all do without thinking about it, but not always on demand, or consciously at least. What helps me is relaxing, meditating, and embracing that desire to do that thing and only that thing at any given time. My mother taught me that you can do anything you want to do, and what you truly want is what you'll do. Even if that's nothing. It comes down to choice, I suppose. And you always control what you choose, even when you feel you have no choice.
Super intelligent people are also super skilled in rationalization. Intelligent doesn't mean smart. The latter is about making the right choices. Arguably one of the most intelligent people to have ever lived is von Neumann. Yet he was involved in more than one hundred car accidents because he was reading books when driving.(Too soon for podcasts, ironically we owe a lot to him for having podcasts). Another super genius is Pythagoras. He started one of the most insane cults ever! Isaac Newton has some crazy ideas about God and existence. Grandmaster Bobby Fischer was an anti-semite despite being Jewish himself. There are many examples. Be smart, stay humble, openminded and curious
So many ideas depending on "the right" and "the truth". If the process is more important than the result and we can only change perspective by being "wrong" sometimes, IMO there is no "right" or "the truth". There are either multiple of them or an illusion of it. The moment you know or find "the truth" or "the right", you fail. In this case, this thought also can't be "the truth". Perhaps "a truth" or an illusion. Anyways, stay humble and open :)
I was an avionics instrument and autopilot system technician, instructor and tech rep for the USNR, USAF. Many times I and others became locked into an idea for the cause of a malfunction that was wrong. It made finding the real cause much more difficult. One of the great thing about fixing broken aircraft is that it doesn't get fixed until the actual cause of the malfunction is determined and repaired. No vagueness about the actual cause.
@@nedanenadic5RhythmsKind of. The truth is always going to be the truth in the same way OP described aircraft only working after they had found the true source, but since truth isn’t necessarily a material item, it can make it harder to “find”.
One of the most common way for smart people to end up in a rut is to find out how to always "win" in disagreement. That makes them choose that direction of turning an exchange into a conflict they can win instead of getting the mindset of getting things right. (read that somewhere & I know it to be true for a bunch of people that see winning argument to be more important than getting things write including in scientific field 😢) *spelling mistakes correction
@@FireyDeath4exactly, you should always find yourself admitting you don't know a great number of things in an argument. Even experts admit this, so if you're talking about something you're not even an expert on, you're crazy if you can argue something with confidence
I think Dumbledore put the paradox very succinctly: “I make mistakes like the next man. In fact, being--forgive me--rather cleverer than most men, my mistakes tend to be correspondingly huger.” ― J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
There are two definitions of the word “genius”: 1. Someone with great mental capacities and/or creativity. 2. Someone who has a natural ease in a given area. Both are used and create confusion, as some people use the first definition, some use the second, and some use both. They are quite different, as someone with ease in, for example, neurology, may also be totally clueless in other areas, such as self-questioning. If you use the first definition, geniuses can’t be very stubborn people, as it is a proof of lack of intelligence and creativity. If you use the second definition, then SOME geniuses are indeed stubborn people. But I wouldn’t call them geniuses; I would prefer the term “immature” personally. Even so, not every genius has to be stubborn, as even if they’re often right, they aren’t always right. Thus, they can still learn from their mistakes, even if it’s harder than for most people. So, this video is a bit… arrogant? It always talks about geniuses as if every single one of them was concerned, without presenting the used definition of the term. Presenting this as being a universal truth when it’s based on personal experience isn’t very wise.
And even to that point, as you've already alluded too; if we were to break down what said 'natural ease' could potentially be (especially in the context of a field as complex as neurology for example) a good set of baskets to set our eggs in would be: a higher than average IQ, great mental capacity/ capability, aswell as an open mindset, creativeness, etc.. the proposal that genius is more likely to fall for conformation biases is not genuine, and fails to be rational in even light thought experiments.
Thank you Barbara, a very important message for our current global situation. Keep the discussion open to dialogue about deeper issues even if we come from different poles or ideas.
i'd say the problem is that we label people as "geniuses" or "intelligent" or "smart" or "wise" in the first place instead of learning what those things are and seeing how those identities make us less wise.
You are assuming that those folks are less wise...? Wisdom is not something acquired by studying. You need to pay attention and learn, be present *ALWAYS* . A genius can do that ... 🙂
I am astonished by the fact that you had been working for 7 years as a Russian translator. This language is really hard for understanding. You are an exceptionally fabulous and smart woman. Thanks a lot for this video. I've practiced my English
Flexibility, just like persistence with conviction both have their weaknesses and strengths. Flexibility is good when you're stuck on a problem and require a novel idea that basically unlocks your answer like a key. It's necessary when your approach is incorrect. Where as persistence shines when the approach is correct but it's proper execution has never been done before. This would be akin to finding your answer by digging it out and carefully extracting it. Persistence makes you realize there actually is nothing wrong with your approach, you just need more practice before you can learn to balance on a unicycle. When to apply flexibility/change or persistence is a matter of whether your approach is correct or not, and that's impossible to know until after you've found your answer. There are many instances of exceptional discoveries made through trudging, grinding, and countless hours of work. There are also many instances where discoveries were made through eureka moments or completely novel approach .
I love Barbara Oakley. She's amazing: smart, clearly thinking - rational and open-minded. She's a role model to me regarding these things. As I unfortunately spend quite some time on reddit (trying to quit it, too), I see the pitfalls and weaknesses she's talking about in almost every thread. It's generally how people there think: they live in echo chambers and repeat and think what they hear their peers repeat and think, a huge part of which can be traced to the biased media they're exposed to. It's a giant interconnected mess of irrational, emotional behavior/thinking. It's driving me crazy and I'm working on leaving most of the communities there.
So true. We learn by sharing and discussing ideas especially with those with a different perspective. Descartes understood this despite being a genius. IMO we can choose to be dogmatic or choose to remain open to better ideas. I choose to keep an open mind and try to learn something new every day.
On the contrary geniuses aren’t rigid thinkers but are actually the least rigid and most flexible, I would even go as far as defining genius as being flexible in thought. The more Socratic, the more critical thinking someone does, the more “flexible” they are, because they are constantly asking if they are wrong, and that is what the smartest people do.
Agreed. I believe they’re confusing an intelligent arrogant person with an actual true genius. A genius would never be arrogant and an arrogant person would never be a genius. They may be really smart but the genius piece is missing.
Not in theory but in reality: pondering over different things at the time you aim to focus on one thing is the result of exploring an otherwise difficult task that takes up effort and drains out the energy meant for the aim. This is the main reason behind the discomfort arising from trying different and complicated tasks
I find this really true. I suggest people to gain some knowledge of common biases. (Thinking Fast and Slow is a good book read). Personally I tend to believe to be smarter, and found was my ego that refused to be wrong. My solution was shifting my Identity from "I am smart, therefore I can't be wrong" to "Since I am smart, I can admit I am wrong". At the end is always superiority complex, but at least it's done in a good way XD
I would bet that those with genius IQs are actually substantially more flexible and adaptable in their thinking. This is just an anecdotal claim she seems to be making without any substantiation.
The science she is speaking to is well over 20 years old (slightly vexing and saddening to see this information presented now, as if it was new (when it's likely 20-30 years old, maybe older (better late than never?). I read in some science magazine (popular science?), way back, about using your left hand more often, if your right handed, taking different routes to and from work, washing your hair with your eyes closed, changing up habits, and novelty seeking; the reason being that, these were good ways to possibly prevent onset of alzheimer's and age related neuro-degeneration. So the first minute or two of the video seems on par. The rest, I dunno... We're all mostly about equally capable of biting our tongue by accident.
No, people just assume that a genius is always open minded and humble, which is plain wrong for the majority. Geniuses can be as*holes too, they can be stubborn and can also have a high ego. All these things are not correlated to intelligence. For example Issac Newton himself was described to be arrogant, he was angered by criticism and always argues so hard with his peers
With all due respect to Ramón y Cajal, I'm not sure his definition of "genius" holds in the modern day. With knowledge being a lot more widely available (and in much quicker motion) now than back in his day, to close one's mind off to contrary ideas is to give up the title of genius. It's why so many gifted kids don't grow into gifted adults; the modern genius is one who uses the tools now available to refine their knowledge, not one who self-identifies as knowledgeable and sticks hardily to that basis of knowledge. It may have been useful for a subject matter expert to follow their own ways back before we had widely available tools to investigate conflicting information, but that's not the world we live in anymore. The modern concept of genius is less about one who sticks to what they do know and more about one who can incorporate what they DON'T know.
I love one of her books "A mind for numbers" it teaches me approaches to attack math and science (the focused and diffused mode of thinking)...and absorb them intentionally....
3:24 I have cognitive empathy and can usually understand why a person feels something, but I often have either a blunted response or no response to the emotional part. I’m autistic, and I’ve learned that’s probably the reason why.
A really great genius who is talking about a similar matter (the conditioning of the mind) is Jiddu Krishnamurti. To fully understand him you need to be a genius yourself, but its worth giving him a try.
@@Liravin Oh there definitely is, my friend. While its hard, like i said, i think a lot of what he says is full of truth, waiting to be understood. I myself have learned a great deal from him, but he may not be for everyone, agreed. Still, i would advise you to look at his teachings again, try to comprehend them without prejudices, and maybe youll see a bit more. Maybe not, but then atleast youve really tried and can judge it a bit better ;)
@@aquario3563 To my mind, you seem to be very restrictive. The kind of loud person that has just started to realize things and that my 10-year-old self would look from afar with sadness. Still believing that there is something to understand is an undoing.❤
Wow, to see how her lesson flew right past her is astounding. Basically replicating that she - from The West - knew better than those Soviets who can't see or think outside their echo chamber but replicating exactly one of the core arguments: that the West needs to be present to teach and show them the error of their ways and how wrong they are. Far more instructive would have been to hear about what she learnt back then from these interactions outside her own echo chamber. Or did she just dismiss any Soviet information and insights as limited and something she already had "surpassed" and "knew better"? To come to the conclusion that fake news and echo chambers are also in the west without presenting some of her own fallacies and former blind spots in this very specific and unique life situation and opportunity she has experienced she is weakening her point so much that it basically still builds on the delusion that the problem is mainly outside of oneself. The Other has the issues, beware of those silly fools who believe their fake news are real. Great work!
IMO this provides a strong argument for why reading fiction is so cognitively beneficial - you are training yourself to imagine what circumstances would be like if reality was different or if you were someone else
Thanks a lot Mam, I've learned something new today about fascinating thing our brain and it happend because of you, your knowledge. Thanks for sharing your Knowledge with us. Thanks from the core of my heart.
Very intelligent people can blind themselves to reality, because they think they are so clever, they can get into intellectual ruts. I’ve met very clever people who cannot do fairly simple DIY, or think in depth on an issue. For example, one very clever person tells me I am talking nonsense when I say that some good in LIDL, a budget European supermarket, are as good as or better quality than in more expensive supermarkets. He hasn’t understood that LIDL have countless ways to reduce costs, and hence the product price. For example they have a much smaller range of products, they stack pallets in the shop, rather than stacking individual items and they buy opportunistically i.e. a supplier wants to quickly get rid of a large quantity of a branded product at a significantly reduced cost (perhaps they over ordered). His supposed superior intelligence prevents him from learning how LIDL works.
and so is yours, LIDL is not working that way you describe, I am in supply chain and know it, Lidl, Tesco, Aldi before opening any shop make sure their price range can be kept low by government subsidies, so whatever the price difference is betwen them and the competition is paid off from tax money to keep price low for the end users, that are supposed to be low earners mostly. In the end they buy at the same price from the same producers like everybody else, their goods are made in the same factories, just packaged with different labels, and the quality is the exact same as in very expensive shops.
I believe flexibility IS part of intelligence; part of what should constitute the idea of intelligence is the ability to quickly see things from multiple different perspectives.
I learned this lesson during the, shall we say, “Planned global stasis.” It’s hard to persuade someone who has spent $200,000 on their education that they might be wrong, or that they’ve been duped. It’s hard to fill a cup that’s already full.
The "global stasis" was unplanned, which is why it was a crazy mess. Vast numbers of people witnessed the actual process of science in progress, complete with uncertainties and revision and disagreements, and they became frightened, not realising that this is how science has always worked. Keeping up to date on that science in progress, required going deeper than what was presented in popular media. People who were unable to do that, generally turned to social media instead, which is a bad option if you want to be informed. Data literacy is sadly quite uncommon. Science literacy is uncommon too.
We need to clear the difference between 'Genius' and 'high functioning' 'Genius' is someone ingenuine, someone That brings you things you haven't seen or heard or imagined before, someone exceptional in such a way. High functioning, on the other hand, is someone with very high and fast calculative and comprehensive abilities, they understand things easier and better because they can calculate that much faster so the ideas in their memories get connected easily and fast, hence they are able to connect more ideas with each other and relate them with each other as recall and calculation both happen in a very fast way. I hope you learned something today, this is my own view, no studies, no statistics, no empirics.
Here’s a secret: watch your emotions. Whenever you have a position that’s associated with strong emotions, it’s probably a close-minded one - especially if you seek validating it with others. In my experience, there’s always a higher version of that understanding with less emotion attached.
I am like this approach with a “new source energy”. I have even asked AI Chat GPT, about it and got an affirmative response. The problem is it happens at the quantum scale.
Group think and fear dosent mean they didn’t have accurate points to make. And have you tried to get a highly open person to talk with low openess person with high disgust sensitivity. It’s like two totally different worlds.
What blows my mind is mathematician views on Arrow's Theorem. You can try to explain that voting for US president doesn't make sense to most people and most people don't get it. Mathematicians may be aware of condorcet voting and even know how it works, yet still somehow don't put enough thought in it to see why it makes sense. Instead they fall for this concept that all the "criteria" that Arrow's Theorem are somehow "equal" when, instead, only the condorcet criterion matters and the others are simply polishing criteria. They don't get that a condorcet vote will give you a completely reversed result as a plurality vote where you just give first choice.
I think it's interesting how she takes the Soviet Union as the example for fake news and echo chambers, without being able to acknowledge (at least she didn't say it) that the place where she comes from also has suffered from the same issues. Hence, displaying her own echo chamber.
This, this is why I find it dubious the meme about why aliens don't visit us then shows "basic disagreement" short vid. It's like damn, it's not the disagreement that's the issue like you don't want disagreements? it's about not considering the other party and working things out to find the middle ground, which is what being flexible is about
It said listen to views different from yours and embrace new experiences and perspectives to avoid common and detrimental crystallization of thinking. What are you confused about?
I think it is the other way around: some geniuses are very open-minded too much, they are open to new information, points of views and opinions. And they are continuously reflecting and putting their beliefs into question and reagusting them accordingly This is why they are full of doubts and unsure about everything
Definitely agree that this trap is almost, & can be detrimental to the intelligent; but is one truly a genius if they aren't in some fashion more open minded/ creative then the average, not the other way around? I would concure with the implied proposition that, its effects are likely to be more potant for an individual with a higher IQ but wouldn't say that it's a logical fallacy that quote on qoute 'genius' is more or less privi too. Its inverse could hypotheticaly be just as problematic.
I personally hate ruts and don't find it comfortable. I've seen how my thoughts have progressed over my lifetime and realize that I'm probably always wrong to some extent and therefore don't want to get too comfortable. Also, I actually get a sort of high when I get out of ruts.; That being said, obviously there are deeply ingrained thinking habits that probably will never be changed significantly, you can only work from them. You play the hand you are dealt basically. E: Damn she's a capitalist stan.
"They were convinced that all capitalists were evil" - *BASED* What an accurate conception, sounds like Dr. Oakley needs to internalize some of her own teachings.
One of the biggest scientific question of all times is : how is it possible that the same hardware ( the Brain) and almost the same " intellectual nurture" produces so different results: the Genius vs the common humans.Probably,if you consider an adequate measurement of creative intelligence, you ll get average people , intelligent people, very intelligent people , extremely intelligent people and there will be a huge jump at the level of genius!!! Not a continuous spectrum!!!!( I should use " skillful" instead of " intelligent" or " creative" instead of " intelligent"!!!!!).
What makes you yhink that geniuses are rigid in their thinking and what makes you correlate lives in Soviet era with that of geniuses? Millions of options and trials are done, mostly from within the brain to finally get one conclusion, the ultimate solution! There's a long process within the brain for one idea to get worked out, geniuses don't get it in the quickness of your own assumption! How smartness appears to be is not always what it is because sometimes what you experience in other society may have valid reasons to be that way which you haven't figured out yet!
I don't understand those arguments that incorporate basic assumptions like that: we, as beings, possess limited minds. for a structural cause... but at the same time they come to explain to me how to solve the problem. Because we arrive at the "flying donkey" paradox, for me. if intelligence is a natural expression and cannot be implemented, it is like saying to a donkey "fly by flapping your wings". because at a certain point there is cognitive decline, if you are not intelligent enough to make a leap that you have not already made in the past (and why hasn't it happened? another mystery...) now it will be easy to do it with 4 generic bar chatter, rules that more or less everyone knows?
I often look at newspaper articles written by people who have different opinions than I do. Sometimes I feel uncomfortable with that, but I feel it is necessary. I have met a few people who are very intelligent, but who focus all their intelligence on defending theses that I can refute. These people have rehearsed all kinds of rhetorical tricks to distort logical thinking and confuse their interlocutors. I don't want to be like them. I myself have some opinions that most people cannot or do not want to follow. I am not trying to convince or persuade anyone.
Yeah, many people have ridgid beliefs, and it feels impossible to change their minds. I have family members like this; and I think I have almost completely failed to move them, despite very much effort, in some cases. It kind of feels like a biological function that naturally emerges in groups of humans. Like any given group is eventually going to configure some of its brains this way; and once they get into this configuration, there's no way to undo it through normal discussion of reasoning and evidence.
when she say synoptic, does she mean synaptic? I thought duuh, but it’s also labeled this way in the timestamps.. Is this some esotheric thing I‘m unfamiliar with lol
As usual, I find 2 bubbles in the comment section. Those in agreement show up on top, those who are very critical are the "bottom dwellers". Interesting....!? At least it is obvious. PS. I strongly disagree about the assumption that "With great genius comes great rigidity." Quoted from description.
a child that has not been fed religious ideologies, can see and appreciate nature in very many ways, irregardless of whether that pesron is a genius or not
"A fear that if you say the wrong thing amongst your group" it can be avoided if you are the leader of your group. So changes come through developing your way into leadership or if logical communication is possible with the leading figure.
That's not going to work over longer periods of time. Leaders are overturned regularly. Also you don't wont followers, you want people who relate and can contribute.
ودر حال بیان بزرگترین سخنان و زیباترین جملات در تاریخ بشریت میباشم و چه خوش سعادت هستند مخاطبان سخنانم❤❤👍👍 چرا که همینک و در همین لحظه هر کس و هر انسانی در جایگاه بالحقه ی خود قرار گرفته و یا در حال قرارگیری است✋️✋️✋️🙏🙏🙏
clever people are often labelled intelligent, but that is not intelligence . highly intelligent people are very often not clever . they don’t need to be . they know the significance of listening to their genius - ie their intuition - and so they express wisdom, which does not stoop to cleverness . as far as winning, highly intelligent people are often not competitive, and so they would not classify their experience in terms of wins or losses; to a competitive person their lives can be looked at as riddled with failure, to themselves, they see merely that they live rich and fulfilling lives
Getting a PhD in mathematics, I work every day with literal geniuses and can tell you that one of the most defining qualities is adaptability. I’d argue it’s in fact the most important characteristic of genius for one to be able to abandon incorrect ideas and embrace new ways of thinking. Creative thinking is the life-blood of intellectualism and tbh we spend a lot of time in research specifically examining how our thinking is incorrect. I suppose we just have different experiences, but I don’t know any “geniuses” who got to be as smart as they are without making a mountain of mistakes along the way. That’s just how learning works. But maybe I missed the point.
I like the maybe at the end :)
Learning can happen after a positive or a negative reinforcement, IMO.
Determining the reward/punishment is the key here. It is more clear and easy to reach a conclusion that something was not ideal (i.e. mistake) rather than considering dozens/millions of possibilities where the supposed "mistake" is actually a positive thing, thus reinforcing the lesson with a positive reward rather than a punishment (e.g. shame, guilt, anxiety, fear etc.)
Idk, I'm just late night thinking and going through these awesome comments. But damn, seeing a lot of opinions and hearing the point in the video just activated my big mouth (figuratively)
Limited adaptability you mean. Just limited to academics and that too in maths. Very old definition of genius
In maths is obvious that geniuses have a huge imagination coupled with a huge amount of skill and of course a lot of ideas that can work or not.They are extremely perseverant people so it's obvious that they ll try a lot of ideas till they ll find out the " key" to the solution.. But the Big Question is still a mystery: how is it possible that people like Newton,Euler, Gauss, Riemann , Hilbert,Poincare, John von Neumann,Wyles, Perelman... exist among the rest of mortals?????
There are two definitions of the word “genius”:
1. Someone with great mental capacities and/or creativity.
2. Someone who has a natural ease in a given area.
Both are used and create confusion, as some people use the first definition, some use the second, and some use both. They are quite different, as someone with ease in, for example, neurology, may also be totally clueless in other areas, such as self-questioning.
If you use the first definition, geniuses can’t be very stubborn people, as it is a proof of lack of intelligence and creativity. If you use the second definition, then SOME geniuses are indeed stubborn people. But I wouldn’t call them geniuses; I would prefer the term “immature” personally.
Even so, not every genius has to be stubborn, as even if they’re often right, they aren’t always right. Thus, they can still learn from their mistakes, even if it’s harder than for most people.
So, this video is a bit… arrogant? It always talks about geniuses as if every single one of them was concerned, without presenting the used definition of the term. Presenting this as being a universal truth when it’s based on personal experience isn’t very wise.
Each person has a set of fluid personal relevant neural connections which may or may not overlap with others, you can produce without 'x' or 'w' flexibility and/or move between.
Big difference between intelligence and wisdom. True genius, imo, requires creativity
Love this interpretation. How much creativity does one need in order to be a genius? Does it require a specific ratio, or does any amount of creativity help?
@@The-Well IMO, to separate the highest order of thinker from other smart people, a genius of the highest order is able to make paradigm shifting discoveries because they are willing to entertain a number of perspectives because they are focused on discovering the truth, then appearing to be right. They theorize based on the evidence and when new evidences arises, they create new theories.
A genius is shown through their unique perspective on life and whatever they decide to focus on. True genius must be okay with imagination, because that's where possibilities of discovery lie. There's a reason why people like Tesla and Einstein had active imaginations and eclectic hobbies and beliefs. Their genius lied in their willingness to entertain their imagination. To ask the question, What if...? and to act upon that very question over and over.
IMO, blue is the coolest color.
@@Dulceria-La-Princesita IMO, one is the loneliest number
The Human in thr West or better the Human Around the World ,makes today, to many Problems with to many Bias Visible.
That Climate Problem that Problem with the Word Double Messages that the Human so Visible makes that makes very Quickly a Problem with a Psychosis Visible.
The Human makes that with his Justice System on a Speciale way Visible .
On this Place make the Affected People ,that more as good Visible ,that his own Problem ,with this Situation ,for the most People not so good or, no Visible is.
The Sick Crowd makes the Super Sick People with his Justice System in the most Times to a sane Person or to a Normal Person.
The Crowd was many Problems with the Double Messages and a Super Big Problem with the Criteria.
In the Same Time where the Crowd ,with a Mass Psychosis, Around the World, a very bad Situation Visible makes ,makes that Crowd ,his Super sick People ,to a sane Person.
So a Super sick Person, has in this Time, safe ever more as enough, bad Role Models .
The Sick People makes many People with his own bad work, with the Double Messages, and with his bad work, as Observer, often more sick .
The Human has a Super Big Problem with the Language and a Super Big Problem with the Moral.
That makes a Link to a Problem with the Reality Visible and a Big Problem with many Bias.
So a Child molester ,that os Safe a bad Person ,but the most People likes the Kill from so a Person .
That the People on this way his Problem with the Double Messages Visible makes ,that is for the most People not Visible.
A Child in a Factory full with Poisen or a Child labor that is for the most People Safe not so a Big Problem ,or his Link to this Problem.
The Human likes the Child Abuse and that this Topic for the most People not a Big Problem is that makes the People ,with his own Clothing ,in the most Times ,more as good Visible.
The Crowd likes the Child Abuse , long and longer ,and in the Same Time makes the People ,the Sexual Child molester ,to a Monster ,in his Fake Moral Expert Show..
That what the Human likes is a Big Fake Moral Expert Show, but his own bad Place ,in this Show ,can't the Affected People see .
The Human is a Big Problem and that the Kapitalist or the Mony a Big Problem is that is more as Safe .
With the Mony makes the Human Around the World ,very Quickly a Super Stupid Self Manipulation and a Super Stupid Indoctrinated Situation Visible.
The Kapitalism makes us Humans to a Parasite and the Criteria never better.
The Capitalism makes very Quickly , a Link to a bad work with the Logic Visible.
That Topic Publicity ,that is a Topic, that very Quickly, the worse work, with the Logic Visible makes.
The Capitalism is Bullshit and that is a Fact.
ironicaly - one of the biggest causes of echo chambers is the youtube algorithim - showing you an ever narrower view of only what you 'like'
Funny thing is, I heard recently that this was studied, and they came to the conclusion, that the worst echo chamber is your friends and family. Furthermore it pushed the idea that social media is so distressing for many to use !because! you get exposed to so many outlandish opinions. So yes, the youtube algorithm tries to narrow it down, but the internet as a whole is some sort of anti echo chamber that pushes extreme views to you, so it might be bad in a somewhat different way....
Finding quality content with substance cannot be achieved passively. TH-cam is constantly throwing garbage my way, even though history, science and thought provoking videos such as this one are all I want.
No, the so called echo chamber phenomenon is a myth. People are exposed to diversity online in fact. He youtube algorithm doesn't stay on one thing permanently, especially if you have more than one interest, it's dynamic and changing.
TH-cam is only as good as the subjects topics research areas and questions you search for and feed into it. Otherwise the default is cheap dopamine trash
Agreed and the algorithm is also only 1 small piece in the puzzle.
I believe that an initial necessary piece in avoiding echo chambers is getting it to click in the Childs mind that they have agency in this world and that their choices and decisions matter. They can change their echo chamber by moving, thinking and asking questions. No matter how uncomfortable it gets.
I had this small example of an experience with my Grandpa.
I asked him, “Why do you like Trump?”
He got offended, thinking automatically that I was going to attack Trump or say something bad about him and he felt alarmed that someone even asked the question. As if it’s obvious.
He knows me well enough to know that I don’t engage in trollish behavior but he sees that type of attitude on the news daily and he sees people attacking Trump constantly so he had a knee jerk reaction.
Telltale sign of an echo chamber is sensitivity and hostility at the mere mentioning of the subject.
I've spent my life trying to maintain an open, flexible, adaptive, curious, and teachable state of mind, and at 58 I see that most of the people my age have not, and they are trapped in rigid ways of thinking and interpreting the world which just don't hold up as time passes and things change. And regardless of what they think, they are certain they are right, and they have a lifetime of unshakable, pre-packaged opinions, few of which are or ever were valid. And they're not even what I would consider bad people. Just stuck.
interesting. I question, what hobbies would you like to have?
@@graphitic5578 I wish I had learned some practical crafting skills when I was younger, because now I don't really have the resources to take up the ones that interest me. I do have hobbies, mostly creative, musical, artistic, but nothing I can readily rely on now that I'm jobless and basically unemployable. I also wish I had been more athletic. You can only benefit so much from exercise at my age.
@@MemphiStig i see but i have wishes contrary to your age and wants. I wished all what i had done earlier were deferred later i.e exercising, martial arts, reading books to my older years, then I'd be able to concentrate on one single subject with all my focus unperturbed and active. Because you see, my life right now, is a mess that I'd have to sort out tremendously, one which i could rely on is my delusional willpower and drive, not to be backed down by procrastination. This isn't the consequence I'd want, nor ever being stuck again and again on this hellhole.
I may ask you again about my experience above, what's the essence of focus?
@@graphitic5578 I tend to agree about the concentration. I always lacked the discipline to apply myself as fully as I would have liked to even the things I did well. I could have definitely used my time more productively regardless of what or how many things I pursued. As for focus, that took a long time, and I'm still working on it. If I'd been born later, no doubt I would have been diagnosed as ADHD, tho I'm glad I didn't learn to live dependent on meds for my daily frame of mind. I would say the essence of focus, however, is the ability to free your mind (and environment) of distractions and do only one thing at a time. It's something I think we all do without thinking about it, but not always on demand, or consciously at least. What helps me is relaxing, meditating, and embracing that desire to do that thing and only that thing at any given time. My mother taught me that you can do anything you want to do, and what you truly want is what you'll do. Even if that's nothing. It comes down to choice, I suppose. And you always control what you choose, even when you feel you have no choice.
Super intelligent people are also super skilled in rationalization. Intelligent doesn't mean smart. The latter is about making the right choices.
Arguably one of the most intelligent people to have ever lived is von Neumann. Yet he was involved in more than one hundred car accidents because he was reading books when driving.(Too soon for podcasts, ironically we owe a lot to him for having podcasts).
Another super genius is Pythagoras. He started one of the most insane cults ever! Isaac Newton has some crazy ideas about God and existence. Grandmaster Bobby Fischer was an anti-semite despite being Jewish himself. There are many examples.
Be smart, stay humble, openminded and curious
Yes, it is quite possible to be very smart in some areas and not so bright in others. I have lived the difference.
Who better to speak the truth about a group of people than a member of that group?
Right choices... What does it mean?
So many ideas depending on "the right" and "the truth". If the process is more important than the result and we can only change perspective by being "wrong" sometimes, IMO there is no "right" or "the truth". There are either multiple of them or an illusion of it.
The moment you know or find "the truth" or "the right", you fail.
In this case, this thought also can't be "the truth". Perhaps "a truth" or an illusion.
Anyways, stay humble and open :)
I’m gonna be honest if Bobby Fischer was indeed a Jew and is antisemite that means antisemitism has at least a few kilograms of truth.
Clicked the "like" button with my left hand
😂 every little bit helps, right?
i typed this with crossed hands. and that was really stupid and took a while
@@gantnebagood job!
I liked your comment with the left hand.
hahahahahaha
I was an avionics instrument and autopilot system technician, instructor and tech rep for the USNR, USAF. Many times I and others became locked into an idea for the cause of a malfunction that was wrong. It made finding the real cause much more difficult. One of the great thing about fixing broken aircraft is that it doesn't get fixed until the actual cause of the malfunction is determined and repaired. No vagueness about the actual cause.
a la Boeing
I wish we had some sort of equal measure for the truth. Mechanically things are solid the truth can be so elusive.
@@nedanenadic5RhythmsKind of. The truth is always going to be the truth in the same way OP described aircraft only working after they had found the true source, but since truth isn’t necessarily a material item, it can make it harder to “find”.
@@Zach.3246but it's the most beautiful thing ♾🫶💃🏽🎸
Into the nuts n bolts & altitudes of truth :) Nice
One of the most common way for smart people to end up in a rut is to find out how to always "win" in disagreement. That makes them choose that direction of turning an exchange into a conflict they can win instead of getting the mindset of getting things right. (read that somewhere & I know it to be true for a bunch of people that see winning argument to be more important than getting things write including in scientific field 😢) *spelling mistakes correction
If the wrong person "wins", everybody loses
Debates are not like competitions where both opponents know full well what they're doing
You mean right not write
Imo if you never find yourself learning something from an argument you aren't winning anything. You're just wasting your time feeding your ego.
@@FireyDeath4exactly, you should always find yourself admitting you don't know a great number of things in an argument. Even experts admit this, so if you're talking about something you're not even an expert on, you're crazy if you can argue something with confidence
@@sploofmcsterra4786 Forgot where this quote come from : "The important things in an exchange is not have been right but to get it right"
I think Dumbledore put the paradox very succinctly: “I make mistakes like the next man. In fact, being--forgive me--rather cleverer than most men, my mistakes tend to be correspondingly huger.”
― J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
There are two definitions of the word “genius”:
1. Someone with great mental capacities and/or creativity.
2. Someone who has a natural ease in a given area.
Both are used and create confusion, as some people use the first definition, some use the second, and some use both. They are quite different, as someone with ease in, for example, neurology, may also be totally clueless in other areas, such as self-questioning.
If you use the first definition, geniuses can’t be very stubborn people, as it is a proof of lack of intelligence and creativity. If you use the second definition, then SOME geniuses are indeed stubborn people. But I wouldn’t call them geniuses; I would prefer the term “immature” personally.
Even so, not every genius has to be stubborn, as even if they’re often right, they aren’t always right. Thus, they can still learn from their mistakes, even if it’s harder than for most people.
So, this video is a bit… arrogant? It always talks about geniuses as if every single one of them was concerned, without presenting the used definition of the term. Presenting this as being a universal truth when it’s based on personal experience isn’t very wise.
And even to that point, as you've already alluded too; if we were to break down what said 'natural ease' could potentially be (especially in the context of a field as complex as neurology for example) a good set of baskets to set our eggs in would be: a higher than average IQ, great mental capacity/ capability, aswell as an open mindset, creativeness, etc.. the proposal that genius is more likely to fall for conformation biases is not genuine, and fails to be rational in even light thought experiments.
Thank you Barbara, a very important message for our current global situation. Keep the discussion open to dialogue about deeper issues even if we come from different poles or ideas.
i'd say the problem is that we label people as "geniuses" or "intelligent" or "smart" or "wise" in the first place instead of learning what those things are and seeing how those identities make us less wise.
You are assuming that those folks are less wise...? Wisdom is not something acquired by studying. You need to pay attention and learn, be present *ALWAYS* . A genius can do that ... 🙂
I am astonished by the fact that you had been working for 7 years as a Russian translator. This language is really hard for understanding. You are an exceptionally fabulous and smart woman. Thanks a lot for this video. I've practiced my English
Flexibility, just like persistence with conviction both have their weaknesses and strengths. Flexibility is good when you're stuck on a problem and require a novel idea that basically unlocks your answer like a key. It's necessary when your approach is incorrect. Where as persistence shines when the approach is correct but it's proper execution has never been done before. This would be akin to finding your answer by digging it out and carefully extracting it. Persistence makes you realize there actually is nothing wrong with your approach, you just need more practice before you can learn to balance on a unicycle.
When to apply flexibility/change or persistence is a matter of whether your approach is correct or not, and that's impossible to know until after you've found your answer. There are many instances of exceptional discoveries made through trudging, grinding, and countless hours of work. There are also many instances where discoveries were made through eureka moments or completely novel approach .
I love Barbara Oakley. She's amazing: smart, clearly thinking - rational and open-minded. She's a role model to me regarding these things.
As I unfortunately spend quite some time on reddit (trying to quit it, too), I see the pitfalls and weaknesses she's talking about in almost every thread. It's generally how people there think: they live in echo chambers and repeat and think what they hear their peers repeat and think, a huge part of which can be traced to the biased media they're exposed to. It's a giant interconnected mess of irrational, emotional behavior/thinking.
It's driving me crazy and I'm working on leaving most of the communities there.
So true. We learn by sharing and discussing ideas especially with those with a different perspective. Descartes understood this despite being a genius.
IMO we can choose to be dogmatic or choose to remain open to better ideas.
I choose to keep an open mind and try to learn something new every day.
I learn something new everyday without trying.
I learn how my day went.
Hi Alexandero. Hope you had a good day :)@@AlexanderofMiletus
@@jonathanspear850 Hope you had a nice one too
Well, Descartes was a philosopher so no surprise there.
Very well said. I will listen to it again since it was so packed with valuable insights.
So glad you enjoyed. Thanks for being here with us!
On the contrary geniuses aren’t rigid thinkers but are actually the least rigid and most flexible, I would even go as far as defining genius as being flexible in thought. The more Socratic, the more critical thinking someone does, the more “flexible” they are, because they are constantly asking if they are wrong, and that is what the smartest people do.
Agreed. I believe they’re confusing an intelligent arrogant person with an actual true genius.
A genius would never be arrogant and an arrogant person would never be a genius.
They may be really smart but the genius piece is missing.
Not in theory but in reality: pondering over different things at the time you aim to focus on one thing is the result of exploring an otherwise difficult task that takes up effort and drains out the energy meant for the aim. This is the main reason behind the discomfort arising from trying different and complicated tasks
lmao I was hella surprised as she mentioned the German word "Einstellung", it means how you posit yourself to certain things
i'd translate it as "attitude" or "view"
Me as well. It’s one of those things that you can’t really translate so well. You’d have to explain in a paragraph 😂
I love this! A healthy free speech culture is essential for a functioning democracy, which is what we've lost in the west.
The sun rises in the east.
I love the original channel, was incredibly happy when notified of the creation of The Well but this video... man. Amazing content, thank you.
Yes, absolutely. Groupthink is a big problem these days.
I find this really true. I suggest people to gain some knowledge of common biases. (Thinking Fast and Slow is a good book read).
Personally I tend to believe to be smarter, and found was my ego that refused to be wrong. My solution was shifting my Identity from "I am smart, therefore I can't be wrong" to "Since I am smart, I can admit I am wrong".
At the end is always superiority complex, but at least it's done in a good way XD
I would bet that those with genius IQs are actually substantially more flexible and adaptable in their thinking. This is just an anecdotal claim she seems to be making without any substantiation.
The science she is speaking to is well over 20 years old (slightly vexing and saddening to see this information presented now, as if it was new (when it's likely 20-30 years old, maybe older (better late than never?). I read in some science magazine (popular science?), way back, about using your left hand more often, if your right handed, taking different routes to and from work, washing your hair with your eyes closed, changing up habits, and novelty seeking; the reason being that, these were good ways to possibly prevent onset of alzheimer's and age related neuro-degeneration.
So the first minute or two of the video seems on par. The rest, I dunno... We're all mostly about equally capable of biting our tongue by accident.
No, people just assume that a genius is always open minded and humble, which is plain wrong for the majority. Geniuses can be as*holes too, they can be stubborn and can also have a high ego. All these things are not correlated to intelligence. For example Issac Newton himself was described to be arrogant, he was angered by criticism and always argues so hard with his peers
Going into this huge dark depth of thought away from normal hits u really hard❤❤🎉🎉flexibility is a gift
With all due respect to Ramón y Cajal, I'm not sure his definition of "genius" holds in the modern day.
With knowledge being a lot more widely available (and in much quicker motion) now than back in his day, to close one's mind off to contrary ideas is to give up the title of genius. It's why so many gifted kids don't grow into gifted adults; the modern genius is one who uses the tools now available to refine their knowledge, not one who self-identifies as knowledgeable and sticks hardily to that basis of knowledge. It may have been useful for a subject matter expert to follow their own ways back before we had widely available tools to investigate conflicting information, but that's not the world we live in anymore.
The modern concept of genius is less about one who sticks to what they do know and more about one who can incorporate what they DON'T know.
I love one of her books "A mind for numbers" it teaches me approaches to attack math and science (the focused and diffused mode of thinking)...and absorb them intentionally....
I admire female professors a lot. Truly resilient people
Just females? Seems sexist.
I have female professors who are not resilient.
I admire you for admiring female professors a lot.
Sexist.
I admire you for admiring him for admiring female professors.
3:24 I have cognitive empathy and can usually understand why a person feels something, but I often have either a blunted response or no response to the emotional part. I’m autistic, and I’ve learned that’s probably the reason why.
Try living a while believing that this is not true, just a thought
A really great genius who is talking about a similar matter (the conditioning of the mind) is Jiddu Krishnamurti.
To fully understand him you need to be a genius yourself, but its worth giving him a try.
there is nothing to be understood in J. Krishnamurti's work
you'd be wasting your time if you tried
@@Liravin
Oh there definitely is, my friend.
While its hard, like i said, i think a lot of what he says is full of truth, waiting to be understood. I myself have learned a great deal from him, but he may not be for everyone, agreed.
Still, i would advise you to look at his teachings again, try to comprehend them without prejudices, and maybe youll see a bit more. Maybe not, but then atleast youve really tried and can judge it a bit better ;)
@@aquario3563 oh wow, i just checked the general content. thank you for mentioning this. this stuff is on point. nice
@@aquario3563 To my mind, you seem to be very restrictive. The kind of loud person that has just started to realize things and that my 10-year-old self would look from afar with sadness. Still believing that there is something to understand is an undoing.❤
0:57 Synaptic* not synoptic (that’s for theologians), not sure if the AI subtitling got it wrong or she did pronounce Synoptic only.
Aha! It wasn't just me that noticed!
Wow, to see how her lesson flew right past her is astounding. Basically replicating that she - from The West - knew better than those Soviets who can't see or think outside their echo chamber but replicating exactly one of the core arguments: that the West needs to be present to teach and show them the error of their ways and how wrong they are. Far more instructive would have been to hear about what she learnt back then from these interactions outside her own echo chamber. Or did she just dismiss any Soviet information and insights as limited and something she already had "surpassed" and "knew better"? To come to the conclusion that fake news and echo chambers are also in the west without presenting some of her own fallacies and former blind spots in this very specific and unique life situation and opportunity she has experienced she is weakening her point so much that it basically still builds on the delusion that the problem is mainly outside of oneself. The Other has the issues, beware of those silly fools who believe their fake news are real. Great work!
for a practical approach and experience see the feldenkrais method
it's very obvious now. feelings easily triumph over facts.
IMO this provides a strong argument for why reading fiction is so cognitively beneficial - you are training yourself to imagine what circumstances would be like if reality was different or if you were someone else
The whole point of surrealism, I love it!
Thanks a lot Mam, I've learned something new today about fascinating thing our brain and it happend because of you, your knowledge. Thanks for sharing your Knowledge with us.
Thanks from the core of my heart.
Thank you for watching, and for sharing such positive sentiment with us! We appreciate you!
thank you for making this video
if everyone thought this way, society would be a better place
Thanks for being here ❤️
Very intelligent people can blind themselves to reality, because they think they are so clever, they can get into intellectual ruts. I’ve met very clever people who cannot do fairly simple DIY, or think in depth on an issue. For example, one very clever person tells me I am talking nonsense when I say that some good in LIDL, a budget European supermarket, are as good as or better quality than in more expensive supermarkets. He hasn’t understood that LIDL have countless ways to reduce costs, and hence the product price. For example they have a much smaller range of products, they stack pallets in the shop, rather than stacking individual items and they buy opportunistically i.e. a supplier wants to quickly get rid of a large quantity of a branded product at a significantly reduced cost (perhaps they over ordered). His supposed superior intelligence prevents him from learning how LIDL works.
and so is yours, LIDL is not working that way you describe, I am in supply chain and know it, Lidl, Tesco, Aldi before opening any shop make sure their price range can be kept low by government subsidies, so whatever the price difference is betwen them and the competition is paid off from tax money to keep price low for the end users, that are supposed to be low earners mostly.
In the end they buy at the same price from the same producers like everybody else, their goods are made in the same factories, just packaged with different labels, and the quality is the exact same as in very expensive shops.
I believe flexibility IS part of intelligence; part of what should constitute the idea of intelligence is the ability to quickly see things from multiple different perspectives.
One of the video chapters says "Synoptic connections". Is that supposed to be synaptic?
I learned this lesson during the, shall we say, “Planned global stasis.” It’s hard to persuade someone who has spent $200,000 on their education that they might be wrong, or that they’ve been duped. It’s hard to fill a cup that’s already full.
The "global stasis" was unplanned, which is why it was a crazy mess.
Vast numbers of people witnessed the actual process of science in progress, complete with uncertainties and revision and disagreements, and they became frightened, not realising that this is how science has always worked.
Keeping up to date on that science in progress, required going deeper than what was presented in popular media. People who were unable to do that, generally turned to social media instead, which is a bad option if you want to be informed.
Data literacy is sadly quite uncommon.
Science literacy is uncommon too.
She's taking about the opinionated quirky genius types. There are a spectrum of intelligent personalities in the realm of technical development.
We get it your smart 🙄
Technical development isn’t but the tip of the iceberg when it comes to intelligence.
@@jimmyjam-vc6rf???
@@jimmyjam-vc6rf I've always felt "slow" but I work around smart technical people too.
Most geniuses are quirky opinionated
Professor makes good point
Long story short : be flexible
We need to clear the difference between 'Genius' and 'high functioning'
'Genius' is someone ingenuine, someone That brings you things you haven't seen or heard or imagined before, someone exceptional in such a way.
High functioning, on the other hand, is someone with very high and fast calculative and comprehensive abilities, they understand things easier and better because they can calculate that much faster so the ideas in their memories get connected easily and fast, hence they are able to connect more ideas with each other and relate them with each other as recall and calculation both happen in a very fast way.
I hope you learned something today, this is my own view, no studies, no statistics, no empirics.
It was wonderful listening to her. 🙂
Here’s a secret: watch your emotions. Whenever you have a position that’s associated with strong emotions, it’s probably a close-minded one - especially if you seek validating it with others. In my experience, there’s always a higher version of that understanding with less emotion attached.
Guys did you know that pressing and holding on the TH-cam video increase the playrate by 2?
Amazing!
I am like this approach with a “new source energy”. I have even asked AI Chat GPT, about it and got an affirmative response. The problem is it happens at the quantum scale.
Thank you, very smart and very helpful.
Glad it was helpful! Thanks for watching!
Group think and fear dosent mean they didn’t have accurate points to make. And have you tried to get a highly open person to talk with low openess person with high disgust sensitivity. It’s like two totally different worlds.
What blows my mind is mathematician views on Arrow's Theorem. You can try to explain that voting for US president doesn't make sense to most people and most people don't get it. Mathematicians may be aware of condorcet voting and even know how it works, yet still somehow don't put enough thought in it to see why it makes sense. Instead they fall for this concept that all the "criteria" that Arrow's Theorem are somehow "equal" when, instead, only the condorcet criterion matters and the others are simply polishing criteria. They don't get that a condorcet vote will give you a completely reversed result as a plurality vote where you just give first choice.
I think it's interesting how she takes the Soviet Union as the example for fake news and echo chambers, without being able to acknowledge (at least she didn't say it) that the place where she comes from also has suffered from the same issues. Hence, displaying her own echo chamber.
"It´s important to draw inspiration from many different sources." -Uncle Iroh
Where was this video in 2016 and years before and after?
This, this is why I find it dubious the meme about why aliens don't visit us then shows "basic disagreement" short vid. It's like damn, it's not the disagreement that's the issue like you don't want disagreements? it's about not considering the other party and working things out to find the middle ground, which is what being flexible is about
Everyone in my family, including me, frequently falls into this rut. It gets in the way a lot.
This seemed a bit scattered and vague
It said listen to views different from yours and embrace new experiences and perspectives to avoid common and detrimental crystallization of thinking. What are you confused about?
"It was truly a totalitarian society" - it still is.
I think it is the other way around: some geniuses are very open-minded too much, they are open to new information, points of views and opinions. And they are continuously reflecting and putting their beliefs into question and reagusting them accordingly This is why they are full of doubts and unsure about everything
Oh boy… Obviously, it’s not everybody, but I invite you to visit your nearest Mensa chapter. You’re in for a surprise 😬
Definitely agree that this trap is almost, & can be detrimental to the intelligent; but is one truly a genius if they aren't in some fashion more open minded/ creative then the average, not the other way around? I would concure with the implied proposition that, its effects are likely to be more potant for an individual with a higher IQ but wouldn't say that it's a logical fallacy that quote on qoute 'genius' is more or less privi too. Its inverse could hypotheticaly be just as problematic.
I've been always under the impression that ppl like Einstein Leonardo and Edison are anything but rigid.
If she's so smart, maybe she is wrong?
Email her
If everyone thinks the same, it's because one person is thinking for all the others.
She has a ted talk that can change your life
Thanks for the recommendation!
Smart is facile, streetwise. Nothing to do with wisdom. Genius is extraordinary creativity, also not necessarily connected to wisdom.
I personally hate ruts and don't find it comfortable. I've seen how my thoughts have progressed over my lifetime and realize that I'm probably always wrong to some extent and therefore don't want to get too comfortable. Also, I actually get a sort of high when I get out of ruts.;
That being said, obviously there are deeply ingrained thinking habits that probably will never be changed significantly, you can only work from them. You play the hand you are dealt basically.
E: Damn she's a capitalist stan.
And now remember with what curiosity you clicked. Satisfied? Or led astray? Why, would you think? -I have no clue what this was or waa for.
I just realized I had already watched this video so I guess I must be an inflexible genius who knows that this video is gospel
Great Video.
We're so happy to hear this. Thanks for spending time with us!
"They were convinced that all capitalists were evil" - *BASED*
What an accurate conception, sounds like Dr. Oakley needs to internalize some of her own teachings.
Einstellung (German word) for Adjustment or Setting
Good video 👍
Thank you, CleroPata! We appreciate you!
One of the biggest scientific question of all times is : how is it possible that the same hardware ( the Brain) and almost the same " intellectual nurture" produces so different results: the Genius vs the common humans.Probably,if you consider an adequate measurement of creative intelligence, you ll get average people , intelligent people, very intelligent people , extremely intelligent people and there will be a huge jump at the level of genius!!! Not a continuous spectrum!!!!( I should use " skillful" instead of " intelligent" or " creative" instead of " intelligent"!!!!!).
Still waiting for all of those Mensa young geniuses from 10 years ago to solve the world problems.
Nuclear power AND nuclear weapons exist for the same reason.
So with every great solution comes great problems.
@@PhoenixDown99999 Ok.
What makes you yhink that geniuses are rigid in their thinking and what makes you correlate lives in Soviet era with that of geniuses?
Millions of options and trials are done, mostly from within the brain to finally get one conclusion, the ultimate solution! There's a long process within the brain for one idea to get worked out, geniuses don't get it in the quickness of your own assumption!
How smartness appears to be is not always what it is because sometimes what you experience in other society may have valid reasons to be that way which you haven't figured out yet!
I don't understand those arguments that incorporate basic assumptions like that: we, as beings, possess limited minds. for a structural cause... but at the same time they come to explain to me how to solve the problem. Because we arrive at the "flying donkey" paradox, for me. if intelligence is a natural expression and cannot be implemented, it is like saying to a donkey "fly by flapping your wings". because at a certain point there is cognitive decline, if you are not intelligent enough to make a leap that you have not already made in the past (and why hasn't it happened? another mystery...) now it will be easy to do it with 4 generic bar chatter, rules that more or less everyone knows?
I often look at newspaper articles written by people who have different opinions than I do. Sometimes I feel uncomfortable with that, but I feel it is necessary. I have met a few people who are very intelligent, but who focus all their intelligence on defending theses that I can refute. These people have rehearsed all kinds of rhetorical tricks to distort logical thinking and confuse their interlocutors. I don't want to be like them. I myself have some opinions that most people cannot or do not want to follow. I am not trying to convince or persuade anyone.
Yeah, many people have ridgid beliefs, and it feels impossible to change their minds. I have family members like this; and I think I have almost completely failed to move them, despite very much effort, in some cases.
It kind of feels like a biological function that naturally emerges in groups of humans. Like any given group is eventually going to configure some of its brains this way; and once they get into this configuration, there's no way to undo it through normal discussion of reasoning and evidence.
when she say synoptic, does she mean synaptic? I thought duuh, but it’s also labeled this way in the timestamps.. Is this some esotheric thing I‘m unfamiliar with lol
Uh yea an inflexible mind doesn't sound like a genius at all. It's literally the opposite. Calling people geniuses is part of the problem
As usual, I find 2 bubbles in the comment section. Those in agreement show up on top, those who are very critical are the "bottom dwellers". Interesting....!? At least it is obvious.
PS. I strongly disagree about the assumption that "With great genius comes great rigidity." Quoted from description.
..ON ..THE .OTHER.. HAND... A.. TRUE.. FLEXIBLE.. PERSON.. AS.. YOU SAY... KNOWS..HIS.. LIMITS..
a child that has not been fed religious ideologies, can see and appreciate nature in very many ways, irregardless of whether that pesron is a genius or not
ITS.. OK..TO ..LISTEN... OPINIONS...THAT MEANS. YOU RE... FLEXIBLE...
"A fear that if you say the wrong thing amongst your group" it can be avoided if you are the leader of your group. So changes come through developing your way into leadership or if logical communication is possible with the leading figure.
Sounds like a better option than either subsuming oneself into a group or trying to be completely independent, thanks.
That's not going to work over longer periods of time. Leaders are overturned regularly. Also you don't wont followers, you want people who relate and can contribute.
ودر حال بیان بزرگترین سخنان و زیباترین جملات در تاریخ بشریت میباشم
و چه خوش سعادت هستند مخاطبان سخنانم❤❤👍👍
چرا که همینک و در همین لحظه هر کس و هر انسانی در جایگاه بالحقه ی خود قرار گرفته و یا در حال قرارگیری است✋️✋️✋️🙏🙏🙏
thats whow we get sensibilites still in our society
The world is a gradient field. Don’t be stuck in a local minima.
reminds me of the blue dot effect
i do this already in my daily life and still get called dumb
👍
This totally happens to me with math
So many commenters post their opinions as if they are facts.
Almost every point she makes reminds me of the family court
She's great.
We absolutely agree!
clever people are often labelled intelligent, but that is not intelligence . highly intelligent people are very often not clever . they don’t need to be . they know the significance of listening to their genius - ie their intuition - and so they express wisdom, which does not stoop to cleverness . as far as winning, highly intelligent people are often not competitive, and so they would not classify their experience in terms of wins or losses; to a competitive person their lives can be looked at as riddled with failure, to themselves, they see merely that they live rich and fulfilling lives
..THE..HARD.. PART.. IS.. THAT... EVERYONE .IS.. LIMITED..
Why didn’t you spell out the German word instead of literally writing [German word]?
Thanks for calling this out, it's fixed now!