What is the difference between stupidity and genius? Einstein said that genius has its limits.
Einstein was a smart man or as Neil deGrasse Tyson said, so smart that he was “bad ass” smart. The ultimate geek that he was, I don’t think Einstein was particularly interested in studying human frailties but I think he nailed this one frailty with that remark of his.
When I have a conversation with someone about his or her own work which by any measure, is topnotch, I feel pleasantly “dislodged” after I throw them a certain kind of question and they respond with “I don’t know.” Because of who they are and what they have done, it does not seem to be the expected response from smart people.
But it may be a surprise that really smart people who have demonstrated their intelligence in their understanding or accomplishment in a certain subject matter would generally only claim knowledge for that particular thing. They will not readily extend what they know about something on to other things that are clearly unrelated. On the contrary, those who know very little are more likely claim to know so much more than they really do. Many of them in fact claim to know the answer to everything. This is such widespread behavior that it has been studied and called the Dunning Kruger effect. We can observe this in many situations, especially in the social lab demo showing at an election campaign near you.
The Dunning Kruger effect is related to the findings of a currently published paper where the latter extends our understanding of why we possibly behave this way. The research pinned this to what you think “intelligence” is.
Essentially, the research found that if you think that intelligence is something that was “fixed”, like a trophy with engraved markings, then you are one of those more likely to be overconfident in tests. Also, this “fixed” thinking makes you more likely to concentrate much more on easy tasks. This then makes you think you performed better than you really did. On the other hand, those who view “intelligence” as something that could grow, are more likely to concentrate on the hard parts of a task, chiseling their confidence level to match their demonstrated abilities.
Given this, I think it would be safe to say that if you viewed “intelligence” as movable, then you also know that it could head south, so you work harder to keep it at a level that you can sleep with.
But there is a twist to this story of hubris. The same research also found that by forcing “fixed” thinkers to work equally on the hard and easy tasks, it shaved their confidence to earthly levels. My phone’s wallpaper sports an image of a brain doing weights to remind (and amuse) myself that if I try harder to understand a difficult thing, maybe I will eventually get it, even if only partially.
I think this study that links how one views intelligence to overconfidence also ties in with another study done years ago that found that when kids are praised for how intelligent they are instead of for their effort, they are more likely to be more afraid to fail and thus, be less motivated to work harder. These kids confuse “intelligence” with “accomplishment.”
But like in any study, this particular research on viewing intelligence always contributes to the bigger picture. A singular view of “intelligence” would be an oxymoron. That is why people with only one answer to everything as if there was only one question in life, confounds people who are comfortable with the innate uncertainties of life.
So it is probably best to see this as you would examine a prism – it is just one captured slant of light on the subject. The researchers involved in the study led by Joyce Ehrlinger think that these findings are important as it helps us think about how we introduce children to the concept of “intelligence,” knowing that their own perception will affect their own performance.
I sometimes chance upon “Limitless”, the TV series which explores the excitement of drug-induced genius. Writing this, I imagine Einstein watching it too and sticking his tongue out in response. – Rappler.com