[IMAGE] There is a genius lurking inside everyone!

[IMAGE] There is a genius lurking inside everyone!


Hi there! GetMotivated has a new, friendly, discord server and would love for you to join and check it out https://discord.gg/tfwPhhfrCY. Please excuse this stickied comment, we just want to get the word out. We will turn it off after a short while, enjoy your day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GetMotivated) if you have any questions or concerns.*


After working with a bunch of very smart people for years I have come to realize the opposite: Everyone, regardless of how smart, has an idiot lurking inside of them.


Once I began thinking of myself as an idiot with occasional bouts of brilliance it got a lot easier to work on my writing.


Now this I like. True.


Also, I'm a firm believer that for the vast majority of people who are experts/hyper smart in their field, somehow requires giving up smarts in other most basic things (People skills, being able to hang a picture, knowing how to operate a screwdriver). I mean I know PhD Physicists who have no clue how to interact with other people or use a drill to hang a picture.


It's not a zero-sum thing, like spending point in an RPG when creating a new character. There are also people of unimpressive intelligence who *also* don't know how to interact with people, etc.


You called?




It's more of an RPG system like Skyrim- you might start off being better at certain skills, and you might progress more quickly with some than others, but anyone can learn anything if they put enough time and effort into it. It's just a question of whether it's worth it.


More advanced subjects (like university-level math) can't be learned by most people, even in principle. For example, many people can't even learn high-school level math. Etc. Many areas of knowledge and understanding forever stay beyond the reach of the majority of people, even if you gave them infinite time.


Eh, I don't think it's a matter of can't so much as won't. There are many other factors to learning than just baseline IQ. Motivation being maybe the most important factor. Intense motivation combined with average IQ can take you quite a long way in almost all subjects.


Theres a certain amount of mental gymnastics required in really high level math that not everyone can do. Theres no shame in it. Even people with high IQs frequently struggle with it if their particular talents dont lie in that direction. Not every battle can be won with persistence alone. Thats not to disparage dedication either. I'd argue that its better to be average and dedicated than intelligent and unfocused. Like i have an eidetic memory but im afflicted with really soul crushing boredom. Its not just meh i dun wanna do this today and more like i completely cannot focus at all if my mind has no desire for that subject so im a sort of intellectual nomad. I consider it almost like a disability but when i go and rattle off any number of obscure facts about mushrooms i learned 10 years ago without skipping a beat, ppl are like holy crap! I wish i could do that! Im like nope i wish i could pay attention to one thing for longer than 3 days at a time. You are hinting at one important point tho. Everyones put together different and we are most successful when we pursue our strengths relentlessly. I happen to be a professional mushroom forager now. Someone whos amazing at math can get a grant researching intriguing new fields. Someone whos good at working with cars can start a great business. As a species we are greater than the sum of our parts.


No, it's can't. Do you really think everyone's capable of high-school math?


You replied to my answer. I'm fucking positive that's the case.


And I'm equally positive that it's not. Even for people with average IQs, a few outliers will have some sort of attention or emotional problem that makes them incapable. Why exactly are you so confident? Genuine question. What are you basing that on?


Not zero sum, just way to easy for folks to let one thing define themselves and focus on it to the neglect of a full experience. It makes sense, in a way, because playing to your own strength is safe. To use you're analogy, as long as the fighter never tries to learn to pick a lock or cast a spell, they'll never get embarrassed. Gotta be a big cause for the "mid-life crisis," though, when people realize they've burned out on the thing they've centered their identity on. We are all capable of being artists, athletes, & academics, no reason to put oneself on a box.


> We are all capable of being artists, athletes, & academics Eh...


A person of very average intelligence could definitely become an academic if they wanted to, especially in my field, history. As long as you have a long attention span and love reading boring crap, you can probably be a decent historian. A person of average athletic ability could become a pretty decent runner if they train hard enough. They may not win Boston, but they could get there. And so on and so forth.


In the athletic ability I agree that anyone can become pretty decent, but when it comes to pro, there are other factors that need to be taken into consideration, such as simple factor, as body structure and genetics a so on, but at pre-pro-level its doesnt matter as much I think. In the academics I believe that anyone can learn anything, the reason why there are students that either dont perform well when trying, I think its because they arent being taught in a way that its easier for them, thats because everyone understands things differently, students that do well in school are because the way that things are taught alligns with how they understand the world. Other students have different ways of understanding, I´ve seen this with my sister. I got the hang of math pretty early in elementary-school, so I performed well, new subjects became intuitive and easy to understand. It always puzzled me how for the other students worked so hard to pass the subject. That continued until I had to help my sister with her homework, I had seen how my father tried to help her and I saw that she always struggled in how my father explained things and she ended up crying out of frustration, that contiuned until she started to refuse asking for help to my father, so my mother asked me to help her, at first I did the same thing my father did, since for me and him, it was logical, and intuitive the explanations, when I saw she wasnt understanding, I tried changing how I percieved the problem or topic, thinking of different angles, until it clicked for her, and that problem became way easier for her, when she explained to me what she thought was intuitive for her, I realized that it was not intuitive for me. So that taught me something really cool, it also came as a surprise when in college there were complex topics or problems, one would always play with the problem in the head and see from which perspective it became easier to understand, which in some way is a more self-method of some one teaching you something ​ Srry for bad english Lol


I feel like this puts down history, rather than pulling up normal people, but I see what you mean. (I'm slightly skeptical about the person of average athletic ability becoming a pretty decent runner.)


History is dead easy. It just takes dedication.


And that's what I was getting at. That you have 0 existing skill in an area does not mean it's out of your purview. It's just a matter of the doing. You may never win strong man competition, you may have to start without putting a single weight on the bar, but you are not a "mental" person who will not benefit from going to the gym, or for a run, and taking care of your body. You may never win a competition, but physicality is a part of human experience. Likewise, that you are a physically excellent specimen does not preclude you from knowing more about your world. You don't have to have dreams of filling stadiums or museums to pick up a guitar, paintbrush, hammer, what have you. You're not an artless "numbers guy" or "blunt object," we all have some drive to create for the sake of it. And all of that remains true even if someone has various physical or mental limitations, just in ways idiosyncratic to those individuals. Again, not saying "why aren't you a renaissance man you lazy bum!" but, rather, that none of us are 2D fictional characters limited to the role within which we are cast among our various peer groups.


I remember being the idiot in highschool that never bothered with lifting weights or athletics very much as a “smart kid”. Senior year I joined wrestling, one of the best choices of my life that set me on a path into martial arts. At the time I maxed out at two push ups, yep 2. By end of the season I had done 400+ throughout the course of a practice. I made the mistake of putting myself in a box early before realizing I really enjoy the physicality of athletics. Years later I’d end up going through the same thing with learning hiphop dancing. I’m not a particularly spectacular physical specimen now by any means but I’m physically capable enough that it shows and has done wonders for my confidence. I write this, not because my own journey is of any note, but because I think there’s a lot of people that similarly paint themselves into corners by saying “I don’t like this” preemptively when they just don’t like the idea of something. Give it a chance, try learning something outside your skill set (art, math, languages) you will suck at first and that’s okay and expected. What you might realize is that the things you aren’t good at are just skills you haven’t sharpened, and the more you try out, the more you’ll learn what you truly enjoy - and it might surprise you.


No its true. You just may never be the best at those things but anyone can work at those things to at least be above average.


Most people can't become academics even in principle (unless they pick humanities - apparently there is a historian here convinced that people of average intelligence can do history, which I could possibly believe). Not athletes (let alone above-average athletes), but I can see your point.


I’ve literally watched both so agree to disagree I guess.


Not all those at once obviously, but I have no issue guaranteeing you that every single person that has ever lived or currently lives has been good at *something*.


No, that's basically a myth. We all have different levels of ability. Some people suck at everything. Others are good at most things. Some lives are worth a hell of a lot less than others, and the idea that we're all geniuses at something is feel-good idiocy.


Why'd you have to do me like that?


It is zero-sum, just some people start with 100 stat point and others start with 10


I think its a mixed bag. Some PhDs have no skills overall past their specific field. Others try to broaden their horizons. Its not RPG spending points and hitting a limit, its RPG grinding for mastery in each thing.


Story time!: The dean at my medical school told us about the time they rejected a guy with a PERFECT MCAT score after his interview because "he was so weird he belonged in a test tube so experts could study his behavior". Also I had another guy in grad school who was so smart he got a 102 out of 100 on one of our tests. There was NO extra credit, his answer was so good HE TAUGHT THE PROFESSOR SOMETHING he didn't know in one of his responses he ended up going to Harvard to do his post-doctoral fellowship. And YET... this guy was so socially inept he actually thought nothing of asking out two different girls at the same time, EXCEPT they were roommates, and HE KNEW THIS and still thought nothing of it. How do you get to be so smart and not realize this dating strategy is not likely to EVER get you laid???


Or he was aiming for a threesome. Why aim low when the sky is the limit!


Maybe he was just playing for the "two dates to the dance" trope...?


I deal in international pharmaceutical supply and am working with big pharma scientists on a daily basis. One of my biggest issues is dealing with dumb stuff like them wanting to ship something but they don’t have a box. And they don’t know where to even obtain a box from, or how to give a package to FedEx. So I often get to ship a brown cardboard box across the globe, going through formal customs clearance and tens of thousands of miles of transport because someone who can develop new drugs doesn’t know how to buy a fucking box. Jokes on them because we make a ton of profit off dumb stuff like this, but it really boggles my mind. But it bothers me because this sort of thing ends up making the drugs more expensive since it’s a waste of money all because the scientists are unable or unwilling to do something so simple. Amazing how stupid or lazy some otherwise brilliant/successful people can be.


Can’t you just order the box from their nearest box-shop?


No unfortunately, I would need to set up local accounts in order to do that, and I’m not setting up Fedex/DHL accounts in every country to buy boxes for the random scientists that can’t do it themselves.


Orrrr they're not being employed and paid to ship items and it's not a good use of their time to locate boxes and handle the logistics on shipping items.


I think a lot of the high level academic ones like this could come from a combination of (more than likely) little to none manual labor experience and overthinking and over analyzing how to do what most people see as a basic task but they start looking at it from their academic angle. Ex like start trying to figure out the most efficient way to drill the screw into the wall when as long as you drill it into a stud you should be fine


I feel you, im an expert at old technology. I know how most tapecorders, TVs, radios, computers, and cars work from that era, even the obscure stuff. That said I'm absolutely shit at math.


I call this my Circular String theory. Tie a string together at both ends to make a circle. Then consider a person’s attributes for each degree and start pulling on attributes said person excels in/at. Example, a person excels at “logical reasoning”, so you pull on the side of the circle that represents this, you’ll immediately notice all other attributes are reduced. In other words, there’s only so much to go around despite the size of the circle we start with. The smarter someone is in one area, the more likely they’re lacking in another because of it.


Physicists talking to people, yeah there are -some- (maybe 5%) who are like that. That's because mathematics, physics, software engineering and the like are a very good place for people who are socially inept to study as it is fiercely logical and structured. People on the autistic spectrum appreciate that.


You obviously don't know many of these people and base "justmyopinion" off stereotypes, lame humor, and television sitcoms. Which indicates that while you may find it easy to talk, your communication skills are miserable.


He didn't say he knew many of those people, he said "-some- (maybe 5%)", which seems like a fair assessment. I studied physics and I had two classmates there who were deep on the spectrum. Our graduating class only had 15 people, which means 13.3% of the students in our year were like that; which I would venture a guess to be higher than most other disiplines.


I do know quite a few though. Any given the area I work in, the % is a LOT higher than 5%. But it varies depending on the area within phsyics. My experience is the more abstract the area (quantum theory vs. laser optics for example - and yes, there is overlap) the higher the % tends to be.


I wish people wouldn't automatically assume I have no people skills just because I do not care to be subtle, empathic or to make small talk.


I mean... what you just said is a literal demonstration of not having people skills. "Being subtle, empathetic, and making small talk" is the embodiment of people skills in the vast majority of social settings. It's one thing to "turn off" those skills if you're say, at a store for a few minutes or picking up food and you don't feel like interacting with strangers, but if that's your default attitude- including with people you spend a lot of time with, like classmates, roommates, coworkers, etc- then their assumption is hardly baseless.


I can’t tell whether you’re being sarcastic or not.


So you're saying your "people skills" are 1) Getting rid of dead bodies 2) Going all Dr. Frankenstein 3) Something else?


And a lot of "average" or less-than are as or more inept. If anything, the relationship is the inverse of what you think; many "hyper smart" people earn the moniker because they know how to solve problems. I have 3 degrees, including a post-doc Master's. I can hang a picture, fix my car, build an addition on the house, and win 3 straight elections in my community. As well, I can plan and execute the repair of jet engine components as well as model their reliability. Add to this the implication you somehow believe that an expert physicist is hyper smart, but an expert machinist or master carpenter may be, at best, a bit above average, when they are actually hyper smart in their field. This makes you a bigot, twice over. I'm a firm believer that the intellectually lazy make broad, wholly unsupportable comments to make themselves appear smart instead of putting in the work to actually **be** smart.


And you have zero humbleness, most of your post was a "hey look at me and my accomplishments and ego! Bow down as you're not worthy!" I mean I'm shocked you didn't post your dick length or boob size (not making an assumption your a man or woman). I didn't realize vast majority included every single person; or is reading comprehension not one of your three degrees and strengths? I purposely left the claim as NOT ALL due to the fact there are obviously people who do not fall under my claim from my personal experiences. Now if I said ALL, then it would be a blatantly false claim, and easily disproven. Now if you can prove that my claim based on my experiences is false then I'm open to be proven wrong. But that would be a hell of an accomplishment as you don't know me personally, don't know what people I've met/worked with/been around/know in order to base my claim on. My post obviously struck a nerve for some reason with you. I'm kinda interested into why you came out swinging with personal accomplishments and ego tripping, then making huge baseless claims while trashing people who make huge baseless claims. I'm interested into why THIS post struck such a nerve; who are you trying to impress? Why do you care so much? The only reason people reply like you did is because this struck a personal nerve; I'm interested into the real nerve/reason but I'm willing to bet you won't answer and will go off on some chest pounding defensive mode. But like I said, I'm always willing to admit I'm wrong/be proven wrong.


And you are exactly why i find many smart people to be utterly insufferable. A really smart piece of crap is still a piece of crap. If you really are what you think you are then you had the chance to do some good and utterly dropped the ball. Instead you decided to narcissistically post this drek on reddit to pad your own inflated ego. Frankly, i don't think you are smart at all. I think you are average or barely above average and are desperately insecure about your intelligence. Your last paragraph applies laughably well to yourself.


I think your low self-esteem is triggering you. I cannot reconcile this post with what the guy above actually wrote. The only link I can find is jealousy. So in your opinion the only people allowed to think they're smart are idiots? Ah. I think I get it now.


Lmao no, i think you should read that persons post a little bit more closely. They start out by rattling off a huge wall of text about their abilities and then go on to accuse everyone of being bigots for making assumptions and then top it all off by saying intellectually lazy (code for dumb) people make blanket generalizations and are just too lazy to be smart. So not only did they add a buncha worthless ego padding fluff that contributed nothing to the conversation, they even proceded to generalize everyone by saying everyone is a bigot because everyone generalizes people by profession to some degree. Its toxic when it leads to prejudice but otherwise is a perfectly normal thing that everyone does. Our brains evolved to take in a lot of info very quickly and whittle it down to what is most relevant. Assumptions are a well documented part of that mechanism. I despise the arrogance of this post. I find that scathing contempt for their peers is a common trait among the intelligent. I dont honestly care if someone is smart or not. Its how they compose themselves that matters to me. My own (obviously anecdotal) personal experience is also that the ppl who feel the need to beat their chest the most tend to be the ones who feel they have the most to prove. Most highly intelligent ppl ive met dont do that. They dont rattle off a grocery list of accomplishments on reddit for strangers approval.


I did well in school and have been told I'm quite smart growing up but I feel like an idiot. There is so much I don't know that I don't understand how people can act like they know so much with confidence.


Appropriate quote here i think: Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. Mark Twain


Dunning–Kruger effect look it up it’s documented and explain so much of the stupidity on social media.


I've oddly seen recordings of myself talking about something that I know about, and thought that...


I’m an idiot, can confirm


None of us are as stupid as all of us.


I think we are too hard on each other. Making mistakes is a powerful teacher and maybe how I learned half of what I know. Sometimes people need to be an idiot and to embrace it as a chance to grow.


This is a saying I can get behind. I’ve always hated the “everyone’s a genius” quote because “genius” is such a nebulous term and the quote itself takes away the complimentary nature of that word (To steal an idea from “The Incredibles”: if everyone’s a genius, no one is). By contrast, if you assume all people (including you) are idiots about some things, it might make you feel a touch more empathy when a person’s idiocy affects your day to day life. Like “Oh well! Everyone’s entitled to have a few idiotic moments!”


On est tous le con de quelqu'un.


Or as Connie Francis put it, everybody's somebody's fool.


That's just the literal translation of what I wrote in french, sacrebleu


Is "dancing" and "learning basic knowledge" mutually exclusive now? She went in to get checked for a learning disability, the doctor notices she enjoys hopping around to music, and then goes: "Welp, there's your problem, she is good at dancing." Like, can't she be a dancer AND have a learning disorder? Shouldn't she get rhe chance to get a proper education as well, adjusted to her needs? Doesn't mean she can't learn to dance as well. Try going: "Here's little Billy. He's completely failing school, but he's really great at super mario. We should get him some streaming equipment, instead of trying to improve his grades."


She can dance good, but boy is she a dunce!


Its one of those quotes/stories we tell ourselves and each other to alleviate our inevitable disspointment when our goals or hopes fail to manifest themselves. Did this actually really happen, or is it just something someone came up with afterwards? Who knows. Its like 90% of what gets spread on facebook. On the surface, might be inspirational, but given even a modicum of though it can easily be depressing as hell.


I did a little looking up, and it seems that she was brought in to the doctor not because she didn't understand the material, but because she fidgeted and struggled with paying attention. ADHD wasn't a diagnosis- especially for girls- when she was growing up, so it's very possible that is what was going on with her. But if it wasn't a known disorder at the time, then the doctor 'wouldn't find anything wrong.' Letting her dance was probably a way for her to engage her body and keep moving in her own fidgety way.


Sometimes, kids dont have learning disorders, they just need to be engaged in different ways. My college sociology professor said that he was hauled into the school to talk about his kindergarten age son. They said that he was developmentally disabled because he had difficulty clap to the rhythm like the other kids did. They said, "But dont worry, he's not the only kid in his class having problems," and the professor said, "That'd be Leroy," and they said, "How did you know?" The professor explains, "Well, Leroy's dad is a Reggae musician. My kid plays with him and spends time over his house. So they're used to listening to more sophisticated music than normal kids songs. When you have your kids clapping on the ones and threes, they're looking for the backbeat, cant find it, and struggle." Those kids were going to be put in special education because they were Reggae fans. It's kind of sad where people can get trapped just because of their natural inclinations.


Thats actually hilarious, the tragedy of a genius.


Is that a thing?


It is, in an abstract way. But in a concrete way, such tragedies suck.


I'm 36 and I've recently found out that I work better in school with groups. I like to learn by bouncing ideas and I talk a lot.


Hard agree. Well-put and interesting point!


This is the best thing I've read on Reddit in 23 days.


Love to know what you read 24 days before.


>Sometimes, kids dont have learning disorders, they just need to be engaged in different ways. My kid always had trouble following in school until I started beating the shit out of him for every bad grade he brought home.


A little percussive treatment was all my boy needed too! And they said parenting was going to be hard lol


The hardest part is finding a durable pair of jumper cables.


I feel like normally Reddit would smite this type of comment with downvotes lmao


Way to teach your kid that you can solve your problems with violence. Enjoy never meeting your grandkids.


This is a famous story, simplified for effect. It is not as though the doctor didn't do any diagnosis and just saw her dancing. He couldn't find a learning disability, and suggested her lack of academic performance had to do with preferences and learning style.


No no no. You’re missing the point. World renowned dancers marry rich guys. The doctor is helping find a career for her.


I mean, you can say that sarcastically all you like, but school and “improving grades” isn’t something that anyone can do. It’s a skill just like anything else, only one more commonly valued than shit like Twitch gaming. But if Billy isn’t handling school well, and no matter what we do his talent for gaming wins out, it’s kind of pointless to fight the tide. You could lie to yourself and force the kid through schooling and experiences they simply won’t want and won’t forgive you for, or you can recognize some people are different and will not thrive under schooling in any situation.


I understand your point, but improving grades absolutely is something anyone can do. It doesn’t just mean “Smack her in the head and shove her face into the book.” It could also mean tutoring, finding alternative learning styles, explaining the material in ways that she’s more receptive to, etc. We shouldn’t be draconian in the way we educate kids, but to simply write off education (especially fundamentals like reading/writing/basic math, etc.) and just saying, “Well she can dance so she’s fine! No reason to pursue education now!” is an incredibly shortsighted and unwise thing to do to a child. You’re leaving here at a severe disadvantage for the sake of a cuddly feeling. Like I said, I get your point, but it isn’t anywhere near that simple.


Depends what we're talking about here. Is the kid struggling with basic counting, math, literacy? "Schooling" shouldn't be an end to itself, and there's no reason to shove a traditional curriculum down the throat of a child for whom it's clearly not working. Yet, you can't just give up on giving them skills they'll need to be a self-sufficient adult. Every story of an athlete, artist, or entrepreneur who dropped out and made it anyway drags massive load of survivorship bias with it. Talent should be nurtured, but a kids education needs to give them what they need to survive if these high risk / high reward goals don't pan out.


This is stupid She still needs to know how to read, do math, have basic knowledge. Even if you're a dancer.


I think it's funny. I wanna be a doctor who just tells people what to do with their kids. "Ma'am, your son may be dumb as a brick, but that's only because he has bricks on his mind! Put him in building school."


He's not stupid, he just has the brain of a fish.


“She’s not dumb; she’s a dancer” Ummmm, maybe she’s just dyslexic and highly coordinated? I’m not sure how anyone could take motivation from this and you mirrored my thoughts exactly. Thank you.


Sorry, I can't read what you wrote but I'll dance to it


I'm so glad I'm not the only one that doesn't like this quote. As a teacher it gets thrown around everywhere and every time I hear it I just want to scream 'but that's what tests are for!'. All the fish learns is that it can't climb trees, which it can't, and shouldn't, because it's a fish. And to be honest, if a fish is trying to climb trees it is stupid and should be told to stop before it kills itself. Tests are to find out what we are good at, what we are not so good at, and what we can improve. If you fail a test you should learn from that. Learn how you can do better, or learn that you maybe shouldn't do that thing at all, it's got nothing to do with your general intelligence.


Nah, some are dumb no matter what.


Yeah this idea that everybody is just as smart as everyone else is another one of those, “Everyone is beautiful” things. It’s a destructive lie that doesn’t need to be told. Not everybody is smart/beautiful just because it makes us feel better. The important thing is to remember that being smart or beautiful isn’t the most important aspect of someone’s value. Like, I’m smarter than my sister, but she’s much more compassionate than I am. She’s better looking than I am, but I can read people better. To quote Donny Darko, “There are other things that need to be taken into account here. Like the whole spectrum of human emotion. You can't just lump everything into these two categories and then just deny everything else!”


I would 100% trade in compassion for smarts in a heartbeat.


I overvalue my mind, so I might make that choice too, but I am pretty sure it would be the wrong one. If everyone did this I doubt the human race would survive. Compassionate people can work hard to do smart things, but people without compassion rarely see the need to learn it.


Yeah compassion is a dumb trait to use here, it's very one-sided and can be extremely unfulfilling. Compassion won't help you succeed or be happy in life.


“I’ll tell you what he said! He told me to forcibly insert the Life Line exercise card into my anus!”


You dont judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree... unless of course all the other fish could climb trees then you would question yo wtf is wrong with this fish? It ain't climbing trees the way all the other fishes can


I hope Gillian's mom went for a second opinion.


Not everybody's a genius. Like WTF? How stupid can this stuff get?


Sounds like someone hasn’t tried dancing yet.


Oh no, I tried. Definitely not a genius. Just trust me on that.


There is something for you out there, you'll see!


Have you even tried clinging a tree? It’s possible you might just be a genius monkey.


This is funny why the downvotes


I don't know, maybe because it's just vacuous idiocy? YMMV.


Sounds like someone hasn’t tried dancing yet.


Is it idiocy because you disagree with it? Is it vacuous because it doesn’t make you feel good?


I've explained why the usage of "genius" int his way is stupid in other replies to this post. It's vacuous because while some may "feel" like it's positive, it's actually not. It's pandering and patronising. But hey, just my opinion man.


Wait, the original part is vacuous and idiotic, or the comment u/its_beans made is?


The original part.


Oh man I totally misunderstood what you meant and had downvoted you. I’m sorry. Let me fix that for you...


I think people are downvoting you cause they think you’re referring to u/its_beans comment and not the original post. HEY EVERYBODY DON’T WORRY HE’S NOT A DICK IT WAS JUST POSTED ON A CONFUSING WAY!


Proper toxic positivity.


The word toxic is becoming toxic to hear.


Leave Britney’s best song alone!




Not only that, but there's a good chance most people aren't good at anything.


It just means that people have abilities that aren't always measured as a base for society. It's also an Einstein quote they decided to claim as their own.


[It's also not an Einstein quote](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/04/27/fact-check-einstein-never-said-quote-fish-climbing-trees/7384370002/). Any time you see an Einstein quote, it's good to ask, "would this go viral among people who don't fact-check if someone pretended Einstein said it?". If so, it becomes a lot harder to believe Einstein said it. Plenty of other Einstein misquotes out there, there's even a tag now [on Goodreads](https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/misattributed-to-einstein)!


"Everything on the internet is 100% true!" - Alfred Einstein


First of all, Einstein didn't say this. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/04/27/fact-check-einstein-never-said-quote-fish-climbing-trees/7384370002/ Also, it isn't saying that everyone has abilities. If that were what it were saying, I doubt it would have quite so many strong reactions. Rather, it is saying that every person on earth is a "genius" in at least one way. Not just capable in one way, but an actual genius, which means in relation to their peers. I mean, the post literally says that "everybody is a genius." It is either a case of poor reading comprehension or disingenuous debating to imply that the real meaning of the post regards ability, rather than genius. Beyond that, I am sad to inform you that it is not true that all 7.6 people on earth are literal geniuses in at least one way.


I know what it means. It doesn't make it true. If it makes you feel good to believe fake crap, go ahead, good for you. There are billions of people on this planet with absolutely no "genius" traits at all. That's the sad truth. What are you genius at?


You don't know what it means, and you saying "it doesn't make it true" doesn't make it not true. I didn't say I believed it, I didn't say everyone was a genius. But since you decided to be the objective deciding body on the abilities of 8,000,000,000 humans, i just wanted to clear up that it just meant that people have varied skills and natural abilities. I mean some people get annoyed at Reddit posts and feel it's their duty to yell how they are sure that not everybody is a genius, brilliantly proving their own point. Seems like you're more concerned with making sure people know you're declaring this stuff "stupid" but I'd argue wasting the time to read a post and yell your subjective thoughts on the matter is probably higher on the "how stupid can this stuff get" scale than the stuff itself. I dunno. You do you, it's gotten you this far. 👍


Oh dear. Do you even know what "genius" means? Go google it, I'll wait.


Oh dear. Do you know what a metaphor is, I'm not gonna wait for you to google it. It doesn't have any impact of me but for your own benefit you may want to check it out. The quote doesn't mean a literal genius. It simply meant that people have their own natural abilities that when measured against an arbitrary yard stick that someone else chooses doesn't bode well for most people. The fact that you think Einstein meant a literal genius is in everyone says more about you than the post itself. Keep up the irony letting people know just how smart you are, I'll do some digging and try to figure out the meaning of genius. Later gator.


The quote says "genius". I took exception with precisely that wording. And you think you're clever coming in here arguing with me having a problem with precisely that wording and you think YOU'RE the smart one because you're now backing out under the camouflage of "metaphor"? Really? The sentiment is well-meaning and I fully believe we need to re-evaluate our unidimensional performance-based idea of human value. But incorrectly applying the word "genius" where it CLEARLY is not warranted kind of undermines the whole thing. That is what makes it utterly vacuous in the end. You can't make everyone a "genius" by abusing the word to just represent "inherent human value". So I would counter with another quote from old Al. "A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be."


What ever gets you through your day my man. I never said I was smart, never even mentioned it. Never tried to argue with you either. Just pointed a light down a different hallway to take a look. But you def proved e wrong, and your unidimensional view of humanity, and telling me how einstein never actually said it, and ending with another quote. Read back our exchange, I get it, trying to prove a stranger who was never even arguing with you gives people a sense of control and a sense of meaning, or validation. You've argued every point you could get from a short back and forth exchange except just being able to look at something for its intent, you've made it this far in life, I'm not judging what gives you what you need in life. At least you showed Reddit that there isn't genius in everyone.


Yes, I know what a metaphor is. Your mom saying "You're my little genius" is a metaphor for "Oh, I have to make up something fake to improve his self-esteem because to be honest, I have absolutely no faith he'll ever manage to achieve it on his own, being so limited and all. At least he's gullible." Why you're gullible? You didn't bother to fact-check whether it actually IS an Einstein quote or not. You're just talking rubbish.


And no, you're mom saying "you're a little genius..." isn't a metaphor. It is however a really big window into the mind of your genius. Make sure you bring those sick burns to your Mensa meeting. You sound like an absolute pleasure to be around. And yea I didn't know it wasn't a Einstein quote, and I'm humble enough to say wow I was duped. But yea, take everything as dead on literal, that should serve you well in life. Either way, this has been fun. 👍


"This nuclear bomb is really gonna fuck some shit up." - Einstein


I'm sorry. This just isn't true. Statistically you aren't a genius just waiting to find your immense talent in some field/hobby you just haven't discovered yet. You are probably just average and that is just fine. If you are waiting for life to just hand you something you are amazing at you will live a life full of disappointment. Instead find things you enjoy doing and do them because you enjoy doing them. If you are competitive find out what level you are at that thing and compete at that level. Only one person is the best at any given time. They likely don't even know or believe it. So realistically if we are all trying to be the best we are all going to feel a bit depressed.


Being the best at something isn’t the same as being good enough at it for criticisms about your other qualities not to matter. There’s so many different forms intelligence takes, and test-taking is absolutely not the only one of them. The point of this quote really doesn’t seem to be “don’t let anyone put you down, you’re probably the best at something out there!” It more seems like “don’t let anyone put you down, you’re probably talented at something out there.” In my opinion talent and a desire to use it is way more important than being the “best” at something


Right, but the example given is for a professional ballet dancer come Broadway coreographer. That is not a field where being "good enough" matters. You litterally do have to be one of the best in the world to succeed in that field. Much like pro sports, it requires a great deal of physical and lifestyle sacrifices as well as blind luck that you don't suffer a career ending injury. Your point is taken, but it's just not a good example to attach to it.


The reality is many people take this literally and think "ok I just haven't found the things that are really easy and natural to me yet". Nothing is like that for most of us. It just isn't. Believing that it will be like that for ourselves eventually or that it is like that for others can be extremely damaging. It is a mental and emotional path directly to low self-esteem and self-worth. Which is the opposite of what the cutesy quote is trying convey. At best the quote doesn't have much value. At worst it signals the opposite of its intended message.


I agree. Effort is more important than talent in the vast majority of cases. I blame kids stories, surprisingly enough. Very few of them are about “Kid is average but puts in determination and effort to become better at it to achieve goal.” Usually it’s, “The chosen one learns to believe in themselves and unlocks dormant power that makes them the best at everything!” It’s not strictly a Western trope, but I’ve found most American stories tend to mirror this notion more than other cultures.


No one's kid who is *not* a juvenile Stephen Hawking or Margaret Meade *must* have some sort of learning disability or disorder, because God knows, **my** kid is a freakin' genius absent either of those. So every kid who has just one of or two out of 30 traits used to diagnose a disorder is "on the spectrum." This refusal to believe your kid might be average - or that there's something *wrong* with being average, stigmatizes your child in their own eyes and steals resources from the kids who actually need them. When I was in grammar school (back in the dark ages), my grade had 90+ students. There were 12 or 15 kids in "gifted" classes, a few less in the group that needed extra help, and 75 or so in the "normal" segment. Everybody got individual attention they needed, and parents accepted the "average" kid would succeed and thrive.




Not everyone is a genius. The mudskipper is.


And that folks is someone with ADHD.


If this happened today, the parents would say the doctor was an idiot and didn't know what he was doing, then they would proceed to look for a new doctor until they found one that agreed with the diagnosis they chose.


And I finally have a reason to comment here. [A great telling of the story through a TED Talk from Sir Ted Robinson on creativity.](https://youtu.be/iG9CE55wbtY)


So she was stupid but a good dancer?


It would seem so.


Everybody is not a genius and telling people that they are is setting them up for grave disappointment.


If everyone is a genius, no one is.


It doesn't really work as an analogy though. "If everyone's a citizen, then no one is". Just because everyone is a citizen of something (e.g. Polish citizen, German citizen, Japanese citizen), citizenship still exists and is in fact a major part of life and politics. Genius is a wide term. You can be a genius of math, genius of art, genius of cooking. Everyone being genius at something doesn't deprecate the values of others being geniuses in other fields. I don't believe that everyone is a genius. I'm just saying that incredibles analogy doesn't work in this case.


It does work because genius is a relative term. We are all geniuses compared to a sheep, but we only use the term ‘genius’ to describe people who are far smarter than average humans. So, if everyone is considered a genius, then nobody is, because it is a requirement of being considered genius to be smarter than most other people. Citizens isn’t relative. It’s factual.


There are different kinds of "genius"; see Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences. Nolan Ryan grew up thinking he was stupid because he had trouble with reading, writing, and math. He had more success in sports, especially baseball and basketball. We all know how that story went. One of his records in the Baseball Hall of Fame is the fact that he holds more records than anyone in the Hall. When his son Reese was in middle school, his academic troubles led his teachers to get him tested for dyslexia. When they told Nolan and his wife Ruth about dyslexia and the signs of it, they both realized that was what Nolan had been dealing with since he was in school. He wasn't stupid at all (which was quite clear by that time); he had a learning disability.


Gardners theory of multiple intelligences is pop psych, and highly disputed in academic circles. I would not construct an argument on it.


It was taught in postgraduate classes not long ago.


We don’t live in a fairy tail, no not everyone is a fucking genius. People that write things like this haven’t been out in a real world. There’s a million stupid mother fuckers for one genius, and that’s okay. I’m not trying to bring people down, but realize this not everyone is made out for greatness. Be average or stupid and fucking enjoy it.


Not everyone is or needs to be a genius the same way not everyone needs to be beautiful. It’s a destructive notion that everyone is equal.


Also incredibly damaging to your kids if you’re convinced that they HAVE to be a genius at something, because that’s what you’ve been told your whole life. Some of us are just average, the sooner we all come at terms with it, the less pressure there will be on all of us.


That doesn't make her a genius but a dancer though


This doesn't seems correct at all. Everything takes effort, a person isn't born a "dancer" or a "painter". The kid was simply poorly disciplined and the parents didn't made a good job motivating her.


Not necessarily, some kids have disabilities that make it hard to learn. Which is usually not related to dancing ability.


"Make it hard to learn" doesn't mean that they are uncapable of learning, only that they need specific techniques to learn. There are no scientific evidence to the multiple intelligence theory and even its creator disavowed it.


Still, people have limits to their intelligence and for some people, that limit is pretty low. Even with hard work, not everyone is capable of being a rock scientist. I really don’t see how dancing is relevant in a discussion about intelligence.


>not everyone is capable of being a rock scientist. Jesus people, being a scientist is just a job like any other, you don't need to be a genius to be a scientist, also i don't like the concept of "potential" because it's hardly measureable. >I really don’t see how dancing is relevant in a discussion about intelligence. I'm predicting that people that belive in the multiple intelligences theory will come and say "See! This proves the multiple intelligence theory, actchually just was just better in Bodily Kinesthetic and Musical intelligences than in others", but the multiple intelligence theory is mostly bollocks and nobody is able to explain by which mechanisms it works. My hot take is that most of "Educational Bodies" are painfully inapt at their work so they push those multiple intelligences and "unorthodox learning styles" to hide the fact that they are shit at managing teachers (because mostly, education is not something that can easily be commodified, i'm sorry but there's no such thing as a production line for educated citizens, and there's only so much one professional can do.)


When I was growing up, I thought I was stupid because I wasn't good at math. A lot of Indian kids tend to get better grades than me. I work hard, but my brain couldn't grasp certain things. As a kid, I used to doodle and spent a lot of time looking at "learning how to draw" books. I've been drawing for around thirty years now. I consider myself to be pretty good. I'm a freelance industrial designer who has worked at respected consultancies and corporations. I'm not great at math, but I gravitate towards things that are more artistic.


Figure out how to use your strengths to compensate for your weaknesses, a beautiful way to go through life.


"Everybody is a genius" Slow it down buddy


Nah bro. I've met a lot of people that just aren't geniuses. End of sentence.


Self-love is very important. Self-awareness? Waaaay more important! Not everyone is a genius


If you're judging a fish by how well it can climb trees, then you're DEFINITELY not a genius.


She was doing poorly in school because she's a dancer? I don't think that's how it works. They probably still should have tried to figure out why she wasn't doing well in regular school..


Ability to Dance != Intelligence. The dumbest fucker to ever live could've been the best at cutting stone into bricks. But that doesn't make him a genius. It makes him talented.


Saying everybody is a genius is like saying nobody is a genius.


Can't we just be ok with not being the best or truly talented at something? Most people are simply mediocre at life, and that's ok


"There's a genius lurking inside of everyone, don't let it hatch otherwise it'll overtake you and then everyone will expect more from you, dooming you to an endless spiral of depression and despair. keep the genius locked in the musty attic of your soul, only to be fed scraps of crumbs and maybe a dry rat or two that's been out in the sun for two weeks. geniuses become people who are overworked because society's favorite sort of fuel is the genius, and it gets used up with extreme vigor, the blood of the genius oils the gears of the economy, the bones of the genius feed the soil of the farms, the mind of the genius is kept in a gilded glass jar for all eternity, its dead eyes screaming in horror as everyone continues pointing at and misrepresenting its existence. truly the greater mercy is to seal the genius away forever and starve it, to avoid unleashing it in a world that would simply treat it as an object to be used for the "betterment" of the world. Only the dumbest geniuses let their genius be known, and every time that occurs the genius eventually comes to regret it. for proof, look no further than the atom bomb, an indirect creation of albert einstein who discussed the concept in passing. after the events of the hiroshima and nagasaki bombings he wrote an essay lamenting his lack of foresight. The genius truly is the most endangered creature, not because it is rare, but because it ironically makes for easy prey." -Some genius on the internet.


This is exactly why I think standardized testing should be abolished. The only thing state mandated testing does is to document someone’s ability to take a test. The same applies to IQ tests. They are not an accurate assessment of the knowledge or ability of the person taking it. One of my kids has hardcore testing anxiety, and it’s taken 9 years to get her to realize that they don’t REALLY matter. Once she understood that it wasn’t a test that counts as proof of her intelligence.


For a post about getting motivated, a whole lot of comments lack wholesomeness to them. Yes, we get it. You're all morons who think you can't do better, don't need to go dragging op down to depths of hell for a good post that is "Supposed to cheer you up". If you don't believe in yourself or think you aren't a genius, that's on you. No one else. Now granted yes, some of you aren't. But you don't need to go dissing everyone who reads this, kind of ruins the message for everyone. If you enjoy doing that kind of shit, their is a special place in hell just for you.


This is from a great book “The Element” by Ken Robinson.


I often wonder if there will come a day when there will be tests, brain scans, whatever, that are so accurate, they will tell you (and hiring managers) you have innate talent in a certain field. Requiring less training and less proof of experience before getting hired. Basically connecting people with jobs they “were born to do.”


Not remotely true. Genius is rare and unevenly distributed.


I’ve never met a sad fish. Only yummy ones


I think this quote is from Einstein from Around the time he was trying to perfect the theory of relativity.


I’m sorry but no, you can’t be anything you want to be and not everyone is smart. Most people have no common sense and little, if any, book smarts. Over half the people on the road can barely drive a car correctly.


I've come to believe that children's minds are different in that there are phases in their life where they're "ready" for learning certain information. When they're not ready, they're dense as a brick. When they are, they can pick it up relatively easily.


Exactly right! I understood this as a SAHM. I knew people who were "potty-training" their kids at 18 months. This consisted of watching their children and rushing them to the potty seat when they showed signs of having to "go". It almost never resulted in the child going to the potty before the age of 2 or 2 1/2, when they're actually ready to understand the urge to go and to act upon it. They'll still need some help with cleaning and dressing themselves for a while, but they'll walk themselves over there because they want to. You can tell when a child is getting ready to learn letters and what they mean, especially if you read to them, because they will point to letters and ask what this one or that one is. They may also be making little discrete rounded shapes instead of just scribbling. They understand that the little shapes in books, papers, TV etc, mean something. You might ask "what does this say" and they might point to them and tell you what it "says". That child is ready to learn letters, and the sounds they make. This happens as different ages, but they should be at least starting the process in kindergarten, although some children "get it" much earlier.


Internet folks are so literal, good lord. ALL this quote is saying is that everyone has their "thing" but not everyone can be good at every"thing" and if you get caught up in the fact that you don't know every"thing" then you might miss/ignore your "thing". But you all decide to get caught up in the word "genius" for some reason. Are you all really like this in real life? So easily distracted and super pretentious about it? Go outside.


Ah yes. The "internet folks" point out the incorrect use of words in a subreddit dedicated to quotes. You, someone with a real life should tell these distracted nerds what to focus on in a super rude way, that'll teach them. Btw I'm outside now, where do I go to learn your rude demeanor and superior focus? I've tried to replicate the passive aggressiveness here, but how do I incorporate the gatekeeping like you?


People don’t see the forest for the trees. Just cynical people being downers for the majority of people who just want to live their life.


Wording is important I agree this one could be worded more realistically. Better phrasing/advice might be: Find something worth dedicating your life towards. If that is not math, then do not plan to become a mathematician. But for most they will be best served pursuing something they can make a living at first and keep the passion projects to a hobby.


You can talk to fish?!?!?


You can’t?!?!?


No, there are stupid people. Intelligence is absolutely a measurable psychometric.


If you ______ the you are A _____? I'm lost.


1) Fish 2) Genius


1) Dancer, 2) Terrible student


Saving this for the next "What popular statement is total BS" thread.


Considering how many idiots think they are geniuses, I doubt simply telling someone they're dumb is enough to make them think they are stupid. There are people who are gifted at things that society doesn't generally recognize as intelligence, but there are PLENTY of people who are just plain slow all around. There is not a genius hiding inside of all of us. The whole point of the quote is not to judge people on a single standard - intelligence is a spectrum and none of us are intelligent across the board.


Y’all sound miserable as fuck in these replies, it’s not that deep let people enjoy their motivation. If you’re average cool it is what it is, but don’t try to rain on other people’s parades of wanting to be great because YOU are complacent with being average.




*Mangrove killifish has entered the chat.*


My dad wanted so badly for me to toughen up because I was a very sensitive child, in tune with my emotions and had no filter on showing it. The more he pushed me and the harder he drilled it into my brain that something was wrong with me, I believed him. He taught me I would never be able to do anything without having an emotional breakdown so how did I even have a fighting chance when that’s the only future prepared for me? I’m 21 and can’t hold a job for more than a week because of my mental health. I have a slew of mental health disorders, and while I might have had these with a different childhood as well, I could have been equipped with the skills to deal with them. I’m learning every day with the help of my partner and full time intensive therapy how to be a functional adult and not a crybaby. I’m 100% positive it wouldn’t be so rough for me right now if I had the confidence instilled in me everyone around me had.