Posted on 11/20/2011 9:02:21 AM PST by Pharmboy
HOW do people acquire high levels of skill in science, business, music, the arts and sports? This has long been a topic of intense debate in psychology.
...what seems to separate the great from the merely good is hard work, not intellectual ability...Malcolm Gladwell observes that...snip Once someone has reached an I.Q. of somewhere around 120, he writes, having additional I.Q. points doesnt seem to translate into any measureable real-world advantage.snip..
But this isnt quite the story that science tells. Research has shown that intellectual ability matters for success in many fields and not just up to a point.
...David Lubinski and Camilla Benbow...tracked the educational and occupational accomplishments of more than 2,000 people who...scored in the top 1 percent on the SAT by the age of 13. (Scores on the SAT correlate highly with I.Q). ... The remarkable finding of their study is that, compared with the participants who were only in the 99.1 percentile for intellectual ability at age 12, those who were in the 99.9 percentile the profoundly gifted were between three and five times more likely to go on to earn a doctorate, [etc.] A high level of intellectual ability gives you an enormous real-world advantage.
...we have discovered that working memory capacity, a core component of intellectual ability, predicts success ... snip..
It would be nice if intellectual ability and the capacities that underlie it were important for success only up to a point.... But wishing doesnt make it so.
None of this is to deny the power of practice. Nor is it to say that its impossible for a person with an average I.Q. to, say, earn a Ph.D. in physics. Its just unlikely, relatively speaking. Sometimes the story that science tells us isnt the story we want to hear.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
|
|
GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach | |
Thanks Pharmboy. To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. |
|
|
The article mixes up two types of skills.
&&&
Yes, I found that confusing. The cognitive skills required for the performance of the pianist are not the same as the analytical skills that a physicist uses to solve a problem.
No kid ever wins popularity contests by being the smartest in their class—in fact, that often makes them a social pariah.
&&&
Along those lines, I read quite a few years ago about a study of brain scans done on a group of stereotypical nerds. It found that these kids were geniuses but that there were certain parts of the brain — sorry, I can’t remember the details — that did not “fire” the way others’ did in social situations. It appeared that they were not capable of reading the social signals and emotional responses of other people.
Your post reminded me of this quote:
“In times of change learners inherit the earth; while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists.” -Eric Hoffer
We live in a world in which there are two classes of people: those who want to coast on achievement and those who want to achieve.
Think about infrastructure or even our capitalistic society. Socialism exists as a parasite on the pre-existing wealth, i.e. living off the principle instead of the profits. Government workers like teachers are those that want to coast - i.e. their investment is less than their withdrawals. A person like Steve Jobs is the opposite extreme and there are plenty of counter examples from the marketplace - F. Ross Johnson comes to mind as a person who ate up and wasted the capital accumulated by his predecessors.
I think success mostly comes from persistence. We learn from failure. The failures that give up stay failures, but the ones that learn and apply that learning, oft times changing course to hit the goldmine, are the real successes. Bill Gates didn’t just win because of his brains or luck, but because he had a viciously desperate need to succeed and so he didn’t quit. There are any number of mildly successful businesses with a founder like that. They don’t make headlines, but they persisted where others quit.
Who needs a high IQ? With the right friends and a teleprompter any idiot could be president.
Heck, you wouldn’t even need to be a Natural Born Citizen...
Nahhh, they lock him up with all the other lunatics who are "seeing things"...
I like the quote, “Be at the right spot at the right time, and be prepared”. Being at the correct position when an opportunity occurs doesn’t help unless you have the skills to step in and take over.
Case in point, Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, IQ 167, who was living in a hut without electricity or running water.
Bull****! Notice that the only "advantages" they list are all verbal/intellectual. How about income? How about market-share? How about job satisfaction? How about actual production (as opposed to "visualization")?
The world needs less doctorates (especially in hypen-studies) and more do-ers!
...fewer doctorates...</grammar nazi>
But you really do have to be either obsessive about your subject matter, or as was my case, willing to grind it out regardless of inclinations to have some fun.
I have to say, I've done pretty well with my PhD. ;-)
Depending on the field, the calculus and differential equations may not be necessary. I haven't used calculus since undergraduate school, but I do use logarithmic functions quite extensively.
I'll agree about the obsessive part. At the beginning of grad school, one of the professors told our group that if we aren't absolutely passionate about the subject, we were just wasting everyone's time. He was so right about that...
Well,I haven’t used them much since I got out of school. But I had to learn them to get out.
I was never particularly passionate about my dissertation matter. It was a means to an end. But I do know how to grind :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.