GENIUS FORUMS

We'll disassociate the word "genius" from academia for now and assume it's geared toward enlightenment, or the inclination thereto. I think we all can agree that every individual, at least at one point, is (at the very least) capable of developing genius, and eventually, enlightenment. The reasons many individuals do not pursue these capabilities are pretty obvious, but even the most mundane layperson is known to feel bursts of fleeting inspiration or momentary truth (the dictionary calls it an epiphany) from time to time. Even the most learned scrabble-player will admit there are times he or she is at a complete loss of words in the intangible presence of what seems like the ghost of an inner truth. Is what we call "genius" simply an effort attempt at articulating the emotive conclusions all humans must be innately capable of experiencing?

But then again, I'm 10 IQ points shy of genius, so it's entirely possible I'm either not seeing the big picture, or I'm overstating the obvious.

I would describe a genius as someone who his firmly grounded in reality, meaning one has a very independent mind, not easily persuaded to do things based on what their culture deems appropriate or normal, honest with themselves and others, able to cut through the bullshit in society and see what the real deal is, and can spot the rampant contradictions in peoples lives that the person in question seems oblivious to.

I wouldn't consider IQ a big determining factor in judging whether one is a genius or not. I would think, at best an average or slightly below average IQ would be required. I can't be too specific about this though.

Moatilliatta wrote:I think we all can agree that every individual, at least at one point, is (at the very least) capable of developing genius, and eventually, enlightenment.

I disagree with your premise. Only a small percentage of people are capable of pursuing enlightenment, and just a miniscule few have the potential to attain it.

Moat,

Is what we call "genius" simply an effort attempt at articulating the emotive conclusions all humans must be innately capable of experiencing?

That's a very imprecise question. It's really several stuck together.

Genius, when used in a sentence by a genius, always successfully describes the exact same condition. It is perfectly articulated in every single quotation in the "Quotes" link at the top of this page, so it is not "simply an attempt", nor is it "emotive".

What an illogical person calls genius might be emotive (and is often wildly inaccurate), but what a genius calls genius is logical and specific.

If all humans could innately experience genius, you would have to redefine what constitutes a "human" to include only rational thinkers with the courage and capacity to change their lives based on their decisions.

Carl G wrote: Only a small percentage of people are capable of pursuing enlightenment, and just a miniscule few have the potential to attain it.

If enlightenment is another thing people attain, then its only a matter of time before they lose it.

What is your idea of enlightenment exactly?

hades wrote:CG: Only a small percentage of people are capable of pursuing enlightenment, and just a miniscule few have the potential to attain it.

H: If enlightenment is another thing people attain, then its only a matter of time before they lose it.

What is your point? Are you disputing the term "attain?" That is another thread. I am speaking of potential and non-potential. Argue that.

What is your idea of enlightenment exactly?

State of being based upon understanding.