Comments on: How Geniuses Think (Guest Post)

By: hqfbtt

hqfbtt — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 15:48:40 +0000

By: dan potter

dan potter — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 06:45:03 +0000

the display of egotism in the longing to make one self seemily more intelligent by their choice of words far out reached the wish to express any true idea which true gensius long to be understood . this is what i find with some of the other’s comments about the artictle,they clearily are thr bottom feeders of the intelectual society. but only to this our majority is an artivle showing how a gensius could learn from follwimg rules will this be read by. i am no better. sad commentary on the intellect being sold like steak knifes.

By: Hello world! | Whatageniuswants's Blog

Hello world! | Whatageniuswants's Blog — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 15:25:53 +0000

[...] http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2008/06/09/how-geniuses-think/ Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)testcontents [...]

By: Ragu

Ragu — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 16:46:17 +0000

Interesting reading> Our world is not the same without innovation/out of the box thinking…

By: Venkat

Venkat — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 19:59:24 +0000

and here I was thinking you are a non-dualist

why do you believe an ability to ‘be’ in a raw ‘be the consciousness’ sense is necessarily at odds with wanting to also look at things from an intellectualized perspective?

By: gregory

gregory — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 19:42:40 +0000

thanks for you comments, and am looking at you prior posts

what is like is the range of you inquiries, enquiries, however it is spelled, india has ruined my american english,

and what i find i rebel against, probably projecting, is where academia and corporate mindsets seem to have trammeled the innocence of your other observations. and your art

anyway, opinions, yuck.. will read your other work now.

thanks for your time, gregory

By: Venkat

Venkat — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 13:54:51 +0000

gregory: you are conflating materialism with reductionism. given your advaita references, you are a monist I take it. my view , for what it is worth is 'unsolved problem.' It is just too soon to take positions yet. you may want to check out my piece Framing the Consciousnes Debates. I also have a 2nd piece in this series on consciousness, where is I?, and more on the way at a slow pace...would welcome taking these debates there.

By: gregory

gregory — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 06:39:18 +0000

AI may build systems that exhibit intelligent behavior, a simulacrum, but i understand the creativity being talked about here is the realm of ideas

where do you think thoughts come from if not out of consciousness?

or are you one of those reductionists that think consciousness comes from meat?

By: Venkat

Venkat — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 19:30:40 +0000

@ Gregory… interesting comment, that you think the two are related. I actually happen to think linking creativity and consciousness is a case of anthropocentric conceit… you can probably build AI systems that capture a lot of creativity with no consciousness. I don’t think the two are actually related.

@ Saurabh: candidate answer that you won’t like — ability to see connections (through mechanisms like metaphor that you may have awareness of, or through black-box aha! moments) seems to be genes/nature rather than nurture according to many. Can’t be learned (but if you have the talent, can be refined). Not sure if Michael would agree, but I kinda believe that. ISFJs can’t “learn” to be INTPs to use Myers-Briggs as the organizing scheme for a minute….

As for the rest of Michael’s list, the ‘how’ is actually not very obscure in many cases. My ‘the fine art of opportunism’ article (linked at the bottom) is basically a how-to for Michael’s point that ‘geniuses prepare for chance’…this one CAN be learned and applied, though perhaps not at genius levels, by everybody.

By: Saurabh

Saurabh — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 17:50:53 +0000

Not “How Geniuses Think” but more in “What is genius” post-hoc definitions vein… eg. yeah I know they connect the unconnected, but *how*?

By: gregory

gregory — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 09:05:22 +0000

“Growing cadres of scholars …” is always a frightening term

an entire article on genius/creativity and not a mention of consciousness or awareness … if it was understood that consciousness has subtler levels very little in this article would need stating, and the cadres could go investigate whatever else they could get funding for

genius has nothing to do with thinking strategies, and everything to do with listening at a deeper level within one’s own awareness.