Re:Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children
by MagnumOpus on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @01:24PM
(#12445288)
That is exactly what he argued - that his achievements are due to being smart rather than "laser focused".
Not being a genius means that he is merely 2 standard deviations smarter than the mean (think "there's a few of those in every high school class") rather than 4 standard deviations smarter like the kids in the SMPY.
Re:Lessons from a 45-year Study of Super-Smart Children
by dx034 on Thursday September 08, 2016 @02:09AM
(#12450653)
>think "there's a few of those in every high school class"
Rather a few of those in every high school. 2 standard deviations means 2.5% per side. This is one in 40 people, so probably on average 2-3 people per year in an average high school.
Of course, pre selection can lead to higher values, but having several children outside of 2std dev in a class won't be average in the vast majority of schools.
And yet you also told us:
I was reading calculus textbooks when I was 10 years old.
I scored in the 99th percentile in math on the California high school exit exam.
I transferred to a university as a junior at 17.
Regardless of the nature/nurture debate, if you can achieve those things at those ages with any amount of work then you are clearly far smarter than most people, at least when it comes to mathematics.