Comment by Exuma | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Exuma | Hacker News Reader

Does anyone else feel like you're at a weird in between with intelligence?

I have been developer for 15 years, and have probably put in over 15-20K hours of very heavy learning. I've produced well over 100 projects, and have had some very huge wins. I have an absurd work ethic.

In my small peer group, people constantly talk about "youre smartest person I know" and this makes me somewhat cringe on the inside, because in my mind.. the people who _I_ consider are actual geniuses, who have such an insane otherworldly level of learning ability, math ability, talent, programming ability (ie like John Carmack).

So, I constantly am called smart, smartest, etc, yet in my own head I often feel incredibly dumb because of the people who I look up to, and don't even remotely hold a candle to. It feels like being stuck in a sort of no man's land... where I have enough IQ to realize how little IQ I have.

I always feel like certain subjects often lie JUST outside my mental grasp and I must spend considerable effort to visualize it before I can understand it. For example, I'm starting to build an algorithm for trading and it involves bayesian statistics, and calculus, linear algebra, with a dash of machine learning. All things which have long been forgotten. I spent about 60-70 hours over a few days re-learning a lot, and making huge strides in understanding, feeling pretty good I just got such a huge chunk of learning done quickly, and then I go on youtube videos of math geniuses who probably accomplished what I did effortlessly in the blink of an eye.

I suppose I have no other question, other than does anyone else feel like this? It really kind of sucks, as I do highly value intelligence, and it would be different if I weren't 1/4 or 1/2 of the way there.

I think the problem is you place too much value on intelligence, since other people told you you are smart, you consider it core part of your identity, which makes it feel bad when you realize you are not the smartest, you felt like a fraud, that you don't belong to the group of smart people, which sounds quite like imposter syndrome.

Those folks you look up to, by its definition, is quite often people who you think are better than you in one way or another, that's why you look up to them anyway, there is nothing wrong looking up to those people. However, it is necessary to build your identity around more than just intelligence, that way you should not feel so anxious about this intelligence superiority.

Intelligence is tricky in itself, likely no one came up with relativity theory before Einstein, but I'm pretty sure someone before Einstein is smarter than him, we just don't know who, but that someone didn't come up with general relativity, because he would not have had the kind of tools and access to knowledge Einstein have. Intelligence doesn't mean you already understand how the world works when you are born, it's not like it's burned on a disk, it means you have the ability to understand and the creativity to come up with ideas. What should matter more is always what you do with your intelligence, rather than what you have.

Hmm that makes sense. I have always felt it is more damaging to hear that than anything (I'd rather people not tell me that) because you're right, it starts to seep in my subconscious. Thanks for your perspective, I like seeing fresh perspectives here to keep my mental space in check.

This is a fairly well-known effect in psychology - https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1998-04530-003

> Praise for intelligence can undermine children's motivation and performance.

https://www.azquotes.com/quote/1351262#:~:text=like%20compou.... So the use of what you have is like the interest rate, more important long-term than the premium/starting amount.

If you're surrounded by people that constantly tell you how smart you are, you should take it as a signal and go find new (more intelligent) people to surround yourself with.

You don't want to be the one-eyed king.

Also, on the subject of "genius", having met a few in my life, many people seem to have a simplistic idea of what it takes to be one. According to one popular model, all that is required is an increase in the magnitude of certain qualities which everyone already possesses in some measure. Make the particular qualities pronounced enough, and you get to genius. But a better way to understand the concept may be that a genius has a particular capacity, which on a certain level can seem obvious or unremarkable, but which no one else has. A genius, on this understanding, is a person uniquely capable of making a leap ‘off the path’. With hindsight the leap may seem simple or obvious, but at the time no one else was, apparently, capable of making it. A potential leap of this kind is made possible by preceding leaps. Nevertheless its actual occurrence may go on not happening for decades. During that time there may be clear pointers towards it. Yet it is not until a genius comes along that the leap actually happens.

A good perspective, I appreciate it. Also as a sidenote, just because I don't want to give the impression of any hubris, I always immediately dismiss it directly, and it's also not "constantly," (will edit where I used that word) as if I somehow get enjoyment out of it. I hear it enough though, for it to be noticeable (objectively).

You sound as if you're doing well, professionally. Esteem from your work comrades, who share your work environment and it's challenges, is not to be taken lightly . . . you have excelled, given what you have to work with.

Personally, I thought in my younger years, that I could understand anything, given enough study time.

Further, I thought I could (probably) suggest innovations, if circumstances permitted, after that time of study.

I'm older now . . . and realize that I can both contribute to innovation . . . and stand aside in admiration when others innovate without my input.

There's a certain utility in that. No one can do it all; time is limited . . .

It is relative, many people who never attended college thinks that all engineers and doctors are geniuses. If you were less talented you'd likely call the current you a genius as well. If you were more talented maybe you wouldn't consider Carmack a genius, who knows? He probably doesn't consider himself a genius at least, he can point to the likes of Einstein and Newton and say that he is very lacking in comparison.

Not genius. What you're describing is the difference between a problem and a mystery.

If you have some basic skills in a domain, when a problem arises, you usually have some idea about how to solve at least part of the problem. But if you have no skills, every part of even the most basic problem is a mystery that you have no idea how to begin to solve. Then when you see someone solve your mystery, especially if they can do it adroitly, to you they appear to be a genius. Mystery solved.

On that basis, a genius is someone who can solve a problem that other experts had no idea how to solve. A supergenius is someone who solves a problem that other experts didn't realize even existed. (AKA, they hit a target others could not see).

Genius is relative. For most of the world any dev is a genius. For devs, john carmack is a genius. For EE Shannon is a genius. For academics Galois/Gauss/Grothendieck are geniuses.

True genius as in having a burst of epiphany, an indescribable out of control impulse leading an eureka might not even be tied to a person..

It's something that I wonder often about because as a kid I had a few eureka moments and this was a rare bliss. Since college I lost it. I failed hard in maths yet with time I finally clicked .. and I wonder if the smartest people also have similar struggle or if everything is always lightweight inspiration after inspiration finding partial solutions then improved solutions.

Reminded me of a passage from a DFW short story called Good Old Neon [0]:

"He asked if I ever played chess, and I told him I used to in middle school but quit because I couldn’t be as good as I eventually wanted to be, how frustrating it was to get just good enough to know what getting really good at it would be like but not being able to get that good, etc."

You might like the story, it's pretty well-written and maybe touches on something similar to what you're feeling.

[0] http://sdavidmiller.com/octo/files/no_google2/GoodOldNeon.pd...

Wow Everly, from the sentence it looks like that could be really good. Thanks for the suggestion I will read it tomorrow.

I assume you're on the upper end of the bell curve. Well, unless you're the furthest to the right (in some combination of talents), then there's someone further out there than you. You can beat yourself up about not being as smart as they are, but you'd have to be the smartest to avoid it. So, maybe you should stop expecting that you should be able to keep up.

What's more, for some of these people, it wasn't easy for them, either. General relativity wasn't easy for Einstein. He literally asked someone to "come help me with the mathematics before I go mad". That is, Einstein thought he wasn't smart enough to understand it!

Comparing yourself to others on smarts is a game you can only lose, because someone else is always smarter. Even if you're the smartest (Einstein, maybe), there's some related area or different combination where you're not. Someone else is better at math... or has more background in algebraic topology... or Hilbert spaces... or...

So don't be so hard on yourself. Stop playing the comparison game, because you can only lose. Instead, be who you are, and make the most you can of who that is.

Thank you, I really appreciate that reply - it makes a lot of sense. I think I've come a long way being nicer on myself, I suppose there are just remnants that are triggered by certain events or things. Thanks again

It’s a good attitude to have unless you feel bad about yourself and it becomes a problem (like a crushing self defeating impostor sindrome), being modest helps keeping the ego in check. You can self compete and aspire to whatever minds you keep in high regard and it’s likely you’re on the right path. Just keep at it

When it's yourself, you see how hard you've worked. Time spent going down the wrong path, learning a lot of incidental things like how some lib works, reading papers.

When you meet someone else, you see the product of that work, a summary of their training that seems to have an answer to whatever comes up.

If you go through life comparing yourself to people who are "better" than you, you're bound to be constantly disappointed by your relative lack of success.

The only person worth comparing yourself to is yourself.

Comparing yourself to those better than you doesn't automatically lead to disappointment, it is about perspective. You could say "I'll never be as fast as Usain Bolt", or you could say "I'm just 15% slower than the worlds fastest man, great!".

Genius does not wait 15 years. You are fine.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com