Ericsson’s memory research is particularly interesting because random students, trained in memory techniques for the study, went on to outperform others thought to have innately superior memories – those you might call gifted...
The interviews uncovered strong evidence of an adult or adults in the child’s life who valued and supported education, either in the immediate or extended family or in the child’s wider community. Children talked about the need to work hard at school and to listen in class and keep trying. They referenced key adults who had encouraged those attitudes.
Einstein, the epitome of a genius, clearly had curiosity, character and determination. He struggled against rejection in early life but was undeterred. Did he think he was a genius or even gifted? No. He once wrote: “It’s not that I’m so smart, it’s just that I stay with problems longer. Most people say that it is the intellect which makes a great scientist. They are wrong: it is character.”
Great article, and great food for thought! It is obvious that a well-trained mental athlete like Alex Mullen or Simon Reinhard would be able to trounce any “gifted” memory person who doesn’t train. At least as measured by the disciplines that are commonly trained.
The fact that memory techniques work much better than anyone’s natural memory points to nurture over nature in terms of intellectual ability. That is why a certain someone could fake being an autistic savant when he was truly using memory techniques and wasn’t born a “genius”.
I like what Professor Stephen Hawking said when asked what his IQ was. He said something to the effect of having no idea what it was because he thinks high IQs are essentially for bragging rights. There’s a thread elsewhere on this forum about how IQ tests just test what the makers of the test think people with high IQs should excel at.
I think that Richard Feynman got a score of 125 on an IQ test, which is considered “low” for a physicist. I don’t think that the score should be seen as a limit.
One thing that might help is if people stop using language like “I have an IQ of…” (do you also “have an SAT”?) and instead say something like “I scored a ___”, which more accurately suggests that the score is not an immutable trait.
Also, “intelligence” is a very ambiguous word that needs to be defined before using it. I think that using it in the name of a single test doesn’t give the right impression about what is being tested and what it means. In the end, it may create false limitations and stress for people.