All good points, Amy. I think we may have to agree to disagree on this one aspect even as we are mostly in agreement on the larger issue.
This whole discussion makes me think of one of Val Kilmer's first movies, "Real Genius", which explores the space between what might be called "measurable" smarts and the less tangible counterpart. Now, the science in the story is pure fantasy, and it has been mocked as such (in my opinion, unfairly -- it is 80s teen comedy after all!), but it draws on very real ideas about well-roundedness and social barriers to learning. In the movie, the character played by Kilmer has an epiphany that supposedly leads to a huge advancement in the science of lasers, and it is brought on by a spiritual breakdown of sorts.
In real life, I wonder how much scientific advancement is revelatory in nature, and how much can be attributed to sustained "outside-the-box" thinking.
Eli, I think perhaps there is a bias about thinking about individual super intelligent outliers. If you consider physics (and most science for that matter) is done now on complex and expensive equipment in fairly large teams, then diversity of viewpoint, thinking, and experience within that group becomes more clearly relevant. You know, like the adage, “it takes all kinds.” And if you know many scientists, especially physicists, they definitely come in some strong flavors… =)
All good points, Amy. I think we may have to agree to disagree on this one aspect even as we are mostly in agreement on the larger issue.
This whole discussion makes me think of one of Val Kilmer's first movies, "Real Genius", which explores the space between what might be called "measurable" smarts and the less tangible counterpart. Now, the science in the story is pure fantasy, and it has been mocked as such (in my opinion, unfairly -- it is 80s teen comedy after all!), but it draws on very real ideas about well-roundedness and social barriers to learning. In the movie, the character played by Kilmer has an epiphany that supposedly leads to a huge advancement in the science of lasers, and it is brought on by a spiritual breakdown of sorts.
In real life, I wonder how much scientific advancement is revelatory in nature, and how much can be attributed to sustained "outside-the-box" thinking.
Eli, I think perhaps there is a bias about thinking about individual super intelligent outliers. If you consider physics (and most science for that matter) is done now on complex and expensive equipment in fairly large teams, then diversity of viewpoint, thinking, and experience within that group becomes more clearly relevant. You know, like the adage, “it takes all kinds.” And if you know many scientists, especially physicists, they definitely come in some strong flavors… =)
I don't doubt it!