
Both geniuses and madmen pay attention to what others ignore - lingben
http://nautil.us/issue/46/balance/if-you-think-youre-a-genius-youre-crazy-rp
======
sverige
Every time I read one of these articles about genius and madness, I become
smug for a little while, then I get depressed because I realize that I haven't
accomplished anything noteworthy, then I'm mildly reassured because
occasionally my wife will spontaneously aver (contrary to all expectation)
that I am a genius, then I get distracted and start chasing some ideas, then I
get depressed again because, well, shit, I still haven't accomplished anything
that anyone but my wife knows about, and anyway these ideas I chase are very
interesting but once I've figured it out, I am satisfied and don't share it
with anyone, because I don't really give a shit about becoming known as a
genius, if I even am (which I doubt seriously).

Then, as a general rule, I start drinking if I have no obligations for the
evening. Thankfully this evening I started drinking before I read this, so I
can skip all the other stuff and just enjoy this awful feeling as I
contemplate several of my friends who have accomplished things, and one of
whom is actually a genius, unlike me.

Edit: Thank goodness for whisky. (Did I mention that I predicted Trump's
victory back in August 2015? I'm pretty good at political predictions.) (No, I
don't vote, and my predictions don't imply endorsement. All politicians suck,
even those who aren't (or weren't) politicians.)

Also, if I ever accomplish anything noteworthy, I will let you poor HN comment
readers know immediately.

~~~
noir_lord
When my GF tells me I'm really clever I just say "not really, I have a good
memory and read a lot."

I'm not proud of my intelligence, why would I be? (much of it) is determined
by genetics and the environment you grew up in and I had little control over
either of those.

I also point out she is the one who speaks 3 languages fluently, has a degree
in finance and qualified as a shipbroker, I just explain things really slowly
and simply to a very fast idiot for a living.

~~~
alanh
> _I just explain things really slowly and simply to a very fast idiot for a
> living._

Given that I have the same job as you do, this took me an embarrassing number
of seconds to understand.

Well said.

~~~
faraggi
I don't know what he means. why 'fast idiot'?

All I come up with is you guys are lawyers?

~~~
rpedroso
They're programmers, the fast idiot is a computer.

~~~
epalmer
I must be slow today. I had to read this comment to know what a fast idiot is.
I too work with fast idiots. But now I'm slightly embarrassed. Time for more
coffee I think.

~~~
notreal55
I call them idiot savants.

------
Psychthowaway
As a public figure, it wasn't worth burning my reputation to type this out,
but I think that speaks to the state of discourse around mental health today.

The article is uses the word "psychopathology" which is a general term for the
study of mental disorders. However I want to talk specifically about
Psychopathy as a disorder, because I recently came to understand that I am a
psychopath. My guess is that there are probably a bunch of psychopaths reading
this too that don't even realize what they are.

I also scored in the "Genius" level on IQ tests in middle school (whatever the
hell those are worth), and have made a non-trivial creative dent in the world.

The challenge is that, for the average person, if you hear "psychopath" or
"sociopath" all you think is murderers and rapists. While most
institutionalized (ie. caught) murderers and rapists do fit that profile, 90%
of sociopaths are out there in the world and struggling to fit in. In fact
almost half of CEOs would fit the diagnosis: Lack of empathy, remorse or
guilt. Because that's all it is, it's not based on behavior (even though that
is usually part of a formal diagnosis).

I have gone through my whole life with what in retrospect feels like a
handicap that I have to make up for in every way. Not being able to feel
empathy, remorse, guilt etc... means that every movie that the whole crowd is
in tears at, every funeral of a family member, you are basically saying to
yourself "What is with all these emotional people?" When relationships
deteriorate because the best way you know how to deal with people is to act
like you care, to manipulate them to thinking you care and then when the "mask
of sanity" slips temporarily it blows your whole life apart.

Therein lies the rub, cause there is no sympathy there, and you know if you
reveal who you are you won't get any breaks, because you are seen as a
predator. So you spend your whole life studying people to see how they respond
in certain situations so that, like a robot, you can try and emulate them -
and because you're so smart you can actually pull it off. Genius level
sociopaths/psychopaths look like the best of us because it takes that level of
intellect to play a character 24 hours a day without taking a break.

And you don't reveal yourself - because what would the benefit be? You don't
get a chance to be yourself because who you are is broken and ugly. So you
continue to play the game and get into higher and higher stakes. You start to
run a company, maybe even a big one with thousands of employees, you get
married, have children etc...and your ability to manipulate and control just
get wider and wider. And you see that your contemporaries are also
psychopaths, so you think, well I guess that's what it takes to make a big
impact. So your goals and ambitions, those "delusions" get bigger as you
accomplish the "delusions" you previously had and see that you can accomplish
a lot that others can't.

This is something that needs to be discussed because from where I stand, it's
pretty clear that psychopaths like me "rule the world." It's not from a place
of malice or hate though, but adaptation and if we can have that conversation
and we can start to recognize and cope with psychopathy then I think everyone
would be better off. It's tiring as hell to live this life.

~~~
rumcajz
Glad you wrote this.

I was often wondering whether it is possible to communicate with a psychopath.
Communication requires trust, i.e. that the person you are speaking with isn't
lying. With non-psychopaths this is achieved by the complex play of empathy,
guilt etc. However, given that psychopaths lack these feeling the mechanism
just doesn't work. It's an epistemic and, actually, quite terrifying problem:
You have this human being and no chance to ever know what they think of feel.

And if there's no chance to communicate, there's no way to truly solve
problems.

And now I hear the problem is experienced even from the other side. And note
that I believe you because the comment was posted from a throwaway account and
thus you have very little to gain from it.

So maybe, in the end, there's a chance to communicate over the chasm, possibly
using some techniques from game theory?

~~~
Psychthowaway
Yea that's a great point. I think you can communicate with high functioning
sociopaths as long as your goals align. Note that your goals are by default
subordinate to mine but that sometimes near term ones can be the same. It's
generally the case that it's better to build a coalition of people who have
shared goals than just manipulate people into doing what you want.

If your goals are misaligned, you'll likely come away thinking that you
communicated but you might be being manipulated - which depending on how good
they are at it, you might not realize.

It is a challenge though when the situations are forced. If I'm forced to be
in a situation that doesn't align with my goals (and also stroke my ego in a
certain way that might not be obvious) I will subtly sabotage whatever is
going on or horse trade with someone else so that I can get out of the work.

I wouldn't try and play the game theory approach (I assume you mean the
prisoners dilemma style cooperate/non-cooperate primarily) with most
sociopaths because while a lot of high functioning ones are really logical -
we'll change the rules to make the advantage ours.

~~~
dennis_jeeves
Psychthowaway>> It's generally the case that it's better to build a coalition
of people who have shared goals than just manipulate people into doing what
you want.

Wouldn't the goal of most "high functioning" sociopaths be near identical i.e:
health, happiness and survival? (ofcourse one can debate on how that is to be
achieved, but that's another debate)

Anyway, I can identify with a lot of what you put in your parent post. There
appears to be a key difference in the way I'm a sociopath. I seem to have
became one. For example for me death is an anticipated event that will happen
to everyone. I have probably "greaved" over the death of most people who are
close to me and are now alive so that when it actually happens it does not
catch me off guard. So now I have to feign some grief when it actually
happens, so that I do not come across as a sociopath.

And on the topic of death - I have done my own little bit, since I do not
think it is entirely inevitable. Being a "sociopath" and having a high degree
of objectivity go hand in hand.

------
vxxzy
I'm surprised Hemmingway was used as an example in this piece. He did believe
he was being monitored or 'stalked' by the FBI. His wife/family did have him
subjected to electro-shock therapy. Wasn't it later proven that Hemmingway was
followed and 'harrassed' by the FBI?

~~~
sitkack
He also had chronic backpain from multiple airplane crashes. Many people that
suicide have chronic pain.

~~~
55555
Probably almost all of them, if we're including emotional pain.

------
CuriouslyC
Truthfully, I've found that the real difference in intelligence between people
isn't so large as many people think it is. People don't generally come along
and solve "intractable" problems because they're so much smarter than all the
people who've tacked the problem prior to them. Instead, they approach the
problem in a way that is fundamentally different. This is why outsiders are so
frequently the people who make major breakthroughs in a field, and "genius" is
correlated with eccentricity.

~~~
jacquesm
> This is why outsiders are so frequently the people who make major
> breakthroughs in a field, and "genius" is correlated with eccentricity.

That would be nice, if it were true. But it isn't.

Those are the stories that everybody likes though, a bit like the kid with a
25c fishing rod out-fishing adults with 100's of $ worth of gear.

But in practice, most progress in most fields is made by insiders, one tedious
bit at a time.

~~~
CuriouslyC
I didn't say most progress, I said breakthroughs. Let's look back at some of
the biggest breakthroughs in history. Newton was by all accounts a profoundly
odd human being who was highly secretive and kept to himself. Faraday came
from poverty and made his discoveries with no grounding in the math of the
day. Einstein made his big breakthroughs as a patent clerk working on his own.
Darwin was also an outsider who worked on his own to develop his theory of
evolution.

I'm not discounting the work of insiders, but their role is typically to tame
the wilds first explored by the outsiders.

~~~
throwaway90840
I don't know if that is possible these days though. Ideas even from
(relatively unknown) insiders are often termed "lacking in scope" and outright
rejected. I can only think of one outsider having accomplished anything of
value in math in the past 20 years (and even that guy wasn't really an
outsider).

Academia has turned into a social game that is painful, and where the rewards
are terrible (unless you're in CS I suppose). I think post-WW II has
solidified the cult-like feeling of place, and also the increased the number
of kooks. This contrasts starkly with the PR that is put out: hermits seeking
truth.

It's generally hard to put this point across, since most people don't see the
ground details, and the whistle-blower costs are rather high. I've previously
found posts by Mark Tarver (creator of Shen) on c.l.l and on his blog to be
informative, though.

Life, I fear, is no different than lord of the flies, except that the
characters are rather a bit more polite.

~~~
leggomylibro
I dunno; we have access to all kinds of fascinating and exciting technologies
today. You could get going with CRISPR for 5 large, if you do your research
and buy secondhand equipment. We have 50F capacitors today in a package that
would only fit a few mF in the past. You can order a few square inches of
custom-designed PCB for about $1.00 these days, including shipping.

I guess that CRISPR requires extensive research and planning to target genes,
pick out restriction enzymes, make gRNA, etc etc, but that's all freely
available through public resources like the NCBI. When it comes to taking
advantage of a global supply chain and centuries of incredible innovation, we
are really standing on the shoulders of giants. And how long will it be before
someone takes advantage of that low barrier of entry? History says: "not
long."

------
Pica_soO
The pattern-matching gone haywire visible in schizophrenia, applied in mild
dosages on principles not related is in my opinion the secrect ingredient that
allowed in the early days of science for the "genius" myth to occur.

So madmen might be usefull- but not all the time, and not in all situations.
The true art in project managment is to keep the madmen around against all
resistence ("That guy is constantly reinventing the wheel"), prevent the usual
specialization silos from walling off against this and get a stuck project to
"shift gears" as in, temporarily withdraw the usual project-management ("We
need fast, easy solutions- not something custom made") - and get the
recombined stuff at least discussed.

------
taneq
Well, they do say that the only way to distinguish genius from madness is by
observing the results.

------
dkarapetyan
Evolution is probably the worst way to design anything and yet all of biology
is driven by it. It is basically a random walk that just flips bits and every
so often it is inevitable that some of those flipped bits will have something
to do with the brain's default networks and modes of operation. But I think
genius is an unstable optimum and things inevitably slide downhill. There is
no such thing as heritable genius, crazy or otherwise.

~~~
dredmorbius
There are numerous examples of families in which talents seem to persist
across two or more generations. The Bachs and Mozarts come immediately to
mind. Myrna Gopnik and her children Adam, Sarah, and Blake. The Huxleys. The
Darwins. Multiple acting and performing dynasties: the Barrymores, Ravi
Shankar and daughter Norah Jones, Woody and Arlo Guthrie. The Assads: brothers
Sergio and Odair, sister Badi.

That's just off the top of my head, though searching for intergenerational or
family genius turns up surprisingly few useful results.

Of course, disambiguating nurture vs. nature effects is a challenge, and I'd
be interested in examples where neither prior fame nor economic advantage were
particularly beneficial. Cases of twins or siblings raised independently would
also be of interest.

~~~
narag
It's easier to understand if it's thought in a negative way. For "genius" you
need the confluence of maybe a dozen genes. The moment one of them is not
present, you don't get the whole potential. A genius' child could be very
talented, but not quite the same as parent. There is also the "nurture"
component, but people tend to underestimate or even discard genetics because
it isn't just a single gene.

~~~
dredmorbius
I understand that. The point remains that there are areas in which some level
of innate talent does in fact seem to track family lineages.

------
rhizome
This seems quite all over the place and I'm not sure what the point was. Was
it that sometimes mental illness and creativity are coincident? Everything
else seemed like a bunch of worldbuilding.

~~~
fritzw
Over all the uniting factor seems to be having an outsiders view of the world.
Creativity, or mental illness will both give you a unique view of the world.
Otherwise, the writing composition is beyond me

~~~
sunilkumarc
Your last sentence made me upvote your comment :)

------
fritzw
The article attacks the idea that genius is normal, and it maybe suggests that
it would be hard to be normal and genius.

Taking the title at face value, Your not a genius if you think you are. I will
say that dealing with people who don't have basic math, science, logic,
physics, chemistry and philosophy understanding it's pretty easy to convince
yourself that your both genius and crazy.

~~~
sitkack
There are tons of geniuses that are perfectly normal. What his article was
talking about was eccentric geniuses.

~~~
taneq
That's a contradiction in terms. Genius is exceptional by definition, if
you're a genius you're not normal.

Most of the smart people I know struggle with some form of depression or
existential issues. The really smart ones are invariably a bit odd.

~~~
sitkack
We have to put these tropes to rest, they are damaging to everyone.

------
known
"We act as though comfort and luxury were the chief requirements of life, when
all that we need to make us happy is something to be enthusiastic about."
-Einstein

------
dredmorbius
Creativity, a component of genius, and problem solving (likewise) are of
themselves both in part _skills_ and not _necessarily_ some innate talent.

I've been poking around the Skills and Creativity pages on Wikipedia for the
past few days, as well as their references, looking at the state of art and
understanding of these topics.

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi's five-phase model of creativity seems pretty
accurate: preparation, incubation, insight, evaluation, elaboration. (
_Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention_ ).

I'm also quite captivated by Liane Gabora's "honing theory", which ... gets
into a whole mess of areas: world models, systems theory, epistemology,
evolution, communications theory, and more. I've only just run across it but
it's quite exciting, as is much the rest of her work (bio page with links
below).

Another element I'm finding useful is to have a useful _concepts and interests
capture system_ , for which I've gone retro: 4x6 index cards and a series of
file boxes. The immediacy, free-form nature, adaptability, and _physicality_
of the system make it hugely useful (my HN user submissions history includes a
link to a POIC, "pile of index cards", data management system). And the list
of people who've relied on index cards, starting with Carl Linneaus who
invented the damned idea, is pretty impressive. (I particularly recommend John
McPhee's essay, "Structure".)

I've known researchers myself who've used the method and am coming to
understand its merits. And yes, search and grep are challenges, but the review
such attempts trigger seems to be a more-than-ofsetting advantage.

[https://www.worldcat.org/title/creativity-the-psychology-
of-...](https://www.worldcat.org/title/creativity-the-psychology-of-discovery-
and-invention/oclc/910934813)

[https://people.ok.ubc.ca/lgabora/](https://people.ok.ubc.ca/lgabora/)

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creativity](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creativity)

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skill](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skill)

------
epalmer
> Instances such as these have led many to suppose that creativity and
> psychopathology are intimately related.

I wonder if this is true is that why some think that using psychedelics have
helped them see the world from different perspectives and be creative in their
work world?

------
geoka9
I think the fact that this submission is on the first page is pretty damning
of the community ;)

------
Mendenhall
When I pondered if I was a genius I realized the list of things I will not
know will always be vastly larger than that which I do. Anyone swathed in that
much ignorance cant be a genius IMO. To me its a battle to be less ignorant.

------
baron816
Is the rate of mental illness really any higher among those deemed genius than
in the general population? I doubt it. Lots of people have mental illness,
it's bound that some of those will do great things.

------
mkempe
Only a madman would see fundamental commonality between genius and insanity.
This mis-integration is on a par with a theory grouping cigars, the aura of
saints, and the moon -- they're all round.

------
funthree
Please quit judging upward. How many thousands of years have geniuses been
hounded by those with smaller brains? How many great sorcerers, magicians,
electricians and plumbers have been lost because of this thing where people
think they have the right to speak confidently and negatively of men who are
of higher caliber?

Maybe geniuses are kooky because of how outnumbered they are by irrational
people? Or something else like that.

------
dennis_jeeves
A corollary to this is that the regular masses have somewhat collectively the
same delusions.

------
erikbye
There was never a genius without a tincture of madness -Aristotle

------
zghst
I believe I'm crazy but far from a genius...

------
koolba
While not every crazy person I know is a genius, every genius that I know is
crazy.

Pretty sure people that know me would place me in at least one of those
categories as well.

~~~
rublev
What's the point of this comment without explaining why? If you're going to
pat yourself on the back, don't only do it once, spill the beans! There's
nothing wrong with your implication, just be able to back it up because it's a
fairly large one.

~~~
jacquesm
> If you're going to pat yourself on the back

That's not how I read it.

------
charles-salvia
As much as some of us might feel some misguided excitement over the idea of
being some kind of tech savvy Hannibal Lecter, the reality is that there is
_no_ real correlation between psychopathy and intelligence (perhaps even a
_negative_ correlation.)

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16178679](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16178679)

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23551975](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23551975)

[http://www.soc.iastate.edu/staff/delisi/Hannibal%20Lecter%20...](http://www.soc.iastate.edu/staff/delisi/Hannibal%20Lecter%20PDF.pdf)

In other words, psychopathic people aren't necessarily smarter. In fact,
contrary to the Hollywood idea of the "super-intelligent serial killer", most
actual serial killers were basically kind of idiots who got caught in stupid
ways, with a few notable exceptions.

It's also hard to read anything Einstein (an _actual_ genius) wrote and
conclude the man was bereft of warmth and empathy.

~~~
Psychthowaway
This whole line of reasoning that Psychopath = Super Intelligence Serial
Killer is misguided.

All of the studies to date have used the criminal population as the sole
source of research for psychopathy - as your reference does.

The point I was making with my lengthy post is that, in fact, genius level
psychopaths don't become murderers; they become Presidents, Dictators and
Hedge Fund managers.

~~~
charles-salvia
Because the set of criminals used in the research are confirmed psychopaths,
so it's the only way to conduct such a study. You cannot round up Hedge Fund
managers for such a study. But this also makes what you're saying somewhat
non-falsifiable. Highly successful people basically are extremely driven and
ambitious, and they work _all the time_. (I'm assuming you relate to this.)
But there is no evidence (as far as I know) correlating tendencies to be
extremely ambitious, and psychopathic tendencies such as inability to feel
empathy. Although, obviously, tendencies associated with both things may
overlap, since a very ambitious person is more likely to appear very selfish
to an outside observer.

Also, many actual confirmed geniuses like Einstein, Alan Turing, etc. clearly
were simply _obsessed_ (which is really just a more negative way of saying
"very enthusiastic") about their work - they didn't necessarily care to become
powerful men (Einstein famously turned down the Presidency of Israel because
it was boring to him). These people were just _really_ , _really_ interested
in the problems they were working on. This seems to intersect better with
something like OCD rather than psychopathy - and indeed, there are of course
many anecdotes around Princeton University of Einstein exhibiting OCD
tendencies.

~~~
Psychthowaway
Actually there are studies and books on this:

Book: The sociopath next door - Martha Stout

Study from Bond university finding 21% of CEOs exhibit psychopathic behavior.
[1]

Also it's not about seeking power... Another misconception. It's about not
having empathy and if you look at eg. Einstein's personal life (first
marriage, obsession with ego etc...) it's clear that he fits the profile.

[1][https://www.google.com/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...](https://www.google.com/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/psychopaths-
ceos-study-statistics-one-in-five-psychopathic-traits-a7251251.html%3Famp)

------
ikeboy
It is sad that the state of statistical knowledge is so low that the third and
forth paragraphs are necessary.

