Heather Berlin on the Link Between Genius and Disorder | Big Think.
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 вер 2024
- Heather Berlin on the Link Between Genius and Disorder
Watch the newest video from Big Think: bigth.ink/NewV...
Join Big Think Edge for exclusive videos: bigth.ink/Edge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As part of Big Think's partnership with 92Y's Seven Days of Genius series, New York Times columnist Carl Zimmer asks Heather Berlin about the research that illuminates our understanding of genius. There's a societal conflation between madness and genius that Berlin says is unnecessary, yet there is truth in that highly successful, creative people may benefit from the byproducts of disorders like OCD. She also recalls what she learned from viewing Einstein's brain.
This is the latest installment in an exclusive, week-long video series of today’s brightest minds exploring the theory of genius. Exclusive videos will be posted daily on UA-cam throughout 92nd Street Y’s second annual 7 Days of Genius Festival: Venture into the Extraordinary, running March 1 to March 8, 2015
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HEATHER BERLIN:
Dr. Berlin conducts research to better understand the neural basis of impulsivity, compulsivity, and emotion with the goal of more targeted treatment. She employs neuroimaging and neuropsychological and psychopharmacological testing of brain lesion and compulsive, impulsive, and personality disorder patients. She is also interested in the neural basis of consciousness and dynamic unconscious processes. Dr. Berlin has conducted clinical research at hospitals in both the US and UK including Bellevue Hospital and the Institute of Psychiatry in London.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIPT:
Carl Zimmer: It seems like when we talk about genius there is a sort of that creative capacity that we all have to some degree. But then there is the question of degree. So I mean do you think neuroscience is giving us some answers as to why some people have it and some people don’t?
Heather Berlin: Well I think neuroscience and genetics as well. So recently there has been studies looking at like musical talent and it shows that there is actually a really large genetic component involved. And so I think when we see these people who are at the way, you know, top ends of - like three standard deviations out from the norm you’re looking at a combination between somebody who’s born with a particular predisposition to have a talent plus the practice. So for you maybe you can practice from now until tomorrow and you’ll only get to be so good as a concert pianist. But if you were doing that plus you had a genetic predisposition you might get to these really far extremes and people might call you genius. But it’s a combination of the two. I once went around the world and met these people called super humans who were like extraordinary in a particular domain.
Carl Zimmer: Like what?
Heather Berlin: Like, for example, a person with an extraordinary memory or who can withstand an enormous amount of pain. And there are all sorts of these things that are way outside the norm. A man who could hold his breath under water for 22 minutes which is actually amazing. And when you look at it and we did experiments on them it’s a combination of having a different physiology like so for instance the man who could hold his breath under water had a larger lung capacity. But then he practiced and learned meditation, learned how to slow his body’s metabolism and did all these other things that led him to hit this extreme. And it’s the same thing with cognitive capacity. So even IQ, right. It’s a measure of different cognitive aspects, you know, reasoning and verbal abilities. But with practice you can get to be the best within your biological constraints.
Carl Zimmer: You know, you hear about genius being associated with some of these disorders like schizophrenia, obsessive compulsive disorder, these things. I mean do you think that they’re interrelated or do you think at the very least we could learn something about genius from looking at people who are dealing with these disorders?
Heather Berlin: So yeah. I mean there’s a lot of controversy in this area because it’s not necessary to have some sort of, you know, psychopathology in order to be a genius. And a lot of people conflate these two ideas. Like the mad genius. And it happens that yeah, there are a lot of people who are very talented who also happen to have a mental disorder. A lot of the mental disorders are initially things that are adaptive. Like even OCD, you know, it’s good to sort of have structure and have certain rituals but when it gets to be extreme then it becomes problematic. So these are things that we all have that are adaptive ....
To read the transcript, please go to bigthink.com/v...
I agree with your general idea. As someone with Asperger's Syndrome (HFA) my ability to amass large amounts of information and data is far beyond what my peers are capable of, however I find critical analysis much more difficult because I often don't get implied meanings that are meant to suggest other paths and connections, and my creative capacity is limited because I remain resigned to my facts and figures.
At the same time, it took me a long time to develop the memory that I have, and the main drawback is sensory overload, which is some of the worst pain I've ever suffered.
Variations in neurological structure and mental conditions/disorders do give you certain advantages, but there can be and often are significant drawbacks as well.
By the way I am in no way implying that I am a genius on the level of someone like Einstein or John Nash, I'm merely affirming the view that mental variations are just that - variations that are not necessarily essential but are certainly beneficial.
im on a similar boat, though if you already know, two people with Asperger's Syndrome don't have the exact same symptoms, so while i understand things well, i too lack good memory to which i struggle to develop on my own, however my thinking is heavy in both fact and fiction, i just struggle to put my ideas on the table since i can't truly explain what i think
i have worked a lot on metaphors and other figurative languages, probably caused i was bullied a lot for not understanding it, so i was at a social drawback at some earlier points in my life
but now, i can understand and use these because i figured out how to make a connection with whats relevant and what sounds appropriate or funny [i joke around a lot more since i got used to using them]
my critical analysis is above par in some situations, it really depends on what you were talking about
the best way to deal with any mental drawbacks is by learning to overcome them in anyway you can or eventually learn how to overcome them through life experience and/or struggles
even though you implied your no genius, you're the only one stopping yourself from that, just keep learning, work on creative thinking, maybe playing some video games or other fantasy related hobbies are helpful for that once you get into it [you want i could give some recommendations for you if your interested, it not what main stream says it is if you have negative bias on it, it really only hurts you not to explore others ideas, both real and fictional], and that should help you brainstorm original ideas more then you would ever expect to, even ones that can even be implimanted in reality
I completely understand how you feel. I had very poor communication skills as a child and it took many years for them to develop to the point where I have good friends.
I've studied English Literature quite a lot so my understanding of metaphors etc. has developed quite a lot. I find it quite easy to analyse literature because I like analysing words and structures and investigating meanings.
It's just difficult for me to be creative. I find it difficult to be constructive. It's much easier for me to deconstruct an idea than to invent my own solutions.
What games could you recommend?
GB Dawson depends on what you like most,
professor layton [ HUGE variations of puzzles and a decent story],
Phoenix wright ace attorney [an excellent LOGIC based game, were you defend innocent people who would other wise be called guilty of a crime they didn't commit, do to circumstance making it seem so, you use logic to prove other wise by finding contradictions in testimony and finding evidence]
Monster Hunter [an action/RPG game where you take the role of a hunter to fight exotic creatures and use their body parts {not as gross as you would think} to forge better weapons and armor to fight stronger and more exotic monster; also has solid online co-op if you can work with others efficiently; though not mandatory, it makes the game easier and more fun ]
Final Fantasy series(1-12) [the standard of basic RPG's, each one has a different story fighting system,etc. as the name implies, lots of fantasy based enemies to fight as you get stronger and stronger and ultimately you reach an amazing final conclusion, you which you will probably be feeling very sad in a good way once you reach the end {assuming you get that far}
shin megami tensi: persona series [An RPG that puts you as a lead of a group of high school kids who have supernatural ability to summon persona's {essential mind monsters based on your true self} that only work in the shadow realm {each game is different, so where you in counter shadows and plot relation vary by game be it the dark hour or the tv world, and each game host different ways to summon persona's so even though the concept is retained through out the series, each game in the series is COMPLETELY different from one another} it is really hard to generalize the persona series after that, so you would have to see which one you like the most, they are all quality games though]
and that is just a small list of games to help entice your imagination, if you have any questions about what system each game is for, MORE DETAILS, etc. please feel free to ask, I am more then willing to share my knowledge of video games to anyone who is even remotely interested
I think another possibility is that we tend to notice geniuses with disorders more often than we notice the same disorders in people who aren't geniuses.
The real smart ones know how to hide it n blend in when necessary. There ain't nothing romantic about "mad genius", unless you're devoid of any talent .
Love that under videos like this, there is always a horde of people claiming to be geniuses.
Intelligence is gauged by one's ability to come to accurate conclusions.
And the tool by which accurate conclusions are reached is called "logic."
Therefore, the more logical you are, the more intelligent you become.
Genius, to me, is the ability to find good solutions to extraordinarily complex problems.
But whether we are talking about general intelligence or genius, the only thing that separates the two is an individual's mastery of logic.
I would not say that logic is the only tool you need to come to conclusions. It depends of the probelm I guess. If it's a discussion then sure, logic is your best friend. But what if you want to, say, find the best rythm for a good song, or get the only correct shot on a basketball game. There you need skills -or tools- like creativity and accuracy to solve those kinds of problems.
yea dude, agreed. but Logic is only one side of several factors that distinguish the definition of a "genius" from your typical field expert/intelligent individual. Don't forget that creative capacity is a heavy focus in this discussion. and creativity isn't always congruent with accuracy. Many geniuses have challenged facts that were taken for granted by expert logicians. Many geniuses were also proven wrong. E.g. Aristotle's argument that justified the rightness of slavery was accepted as logically sound. Until it was challenged and proven wrong, which is the belief the majority of us hold today. Therefore, I wouldn't define a genius by their mastery of logic, or even synonymous to intelligence. That was one of the main themes of this interview; to discuss the potentiality of an irrational/mad individual to be a identified as a genius.
Logic is merely foundational. It can be found in both general intelligence and geniuses.In a genius I see creative capacity to be more definitive than logic, since it's mastery is "almost" exclusive to the genius
From what I have been told, I've come to the conclusion (correction, I agree with the conclusion;) Intelligence or IQ is your "ability to learn." Meaning less intelligent people can know more, or be smarter than, "more intelligent" people. BUT from my experience alone; I have an IQ of 140, I learn the same concept much quicker. or at least get the "jist" of an idea equally in less time than a person with a "lower" IQ.
Also I should add, I am schizophrenic
Gerald Anderson
Hey man, how is it going.
Just wanted to know if you are aware that IQ tests have had a big underrating in the last few decades due to plenty of studies that show that these points only adress one human capacity of solving problems, which is the logical thought. But there are many theories that say that intelligence is not only about reason anymore, and that there are many other kinds of skills that help you out to solve problems.
Yeah. I remember taking a couple of gen-ed courses in psychology and they really pooped on the validity of IQ tests. And, regarding the basket-case association with genius, if you pry hard enough or look very close at a mind then you'll see that everybody is a little nuts. So I guess everbody is a little genius too.
I have hypomania, and sometimes the episode really helps my creative process and my concentration, i can write, draw, compose obsessively for hours without ever taking a break. Sometime it could be a pain in the arse when it screws up my concentration, i could not focus, i can't do my job, i can't even communicate decently. I'm afraid to take my medication because i fear i might lose that obsessiveness. Well it's worth the risk
This means society should be able to support, and maybe even exploit, the strengths that might come from your divergence, and compensate for the shortcomings you have because of the same disorders.
The only problem is societies reaction, not your individuality.
I feel you. When I’m not in hypomania it’s what I imagine ADD is like. It’s hard to want to take meds when you know it’ll subdue a highly productive and creative mental state. For me, making art while manic is the closest think to ‘god’ I’ve ever experienced.
Despite of genetic deafness, and psychiatric disabilities since my age of 14, I now have I.Q. of 165 as the late bloomer as I have the remarkable and excellent memory and then I have the remarkable abilities to recall and to remember as my 91 years old mother honestly knows about my true backgrounds in my life when I grew up. Now, I have my B.A. in my double majors of Biology, and Chemistry from Gallaudet University, Washington, D.C. with Class of 1981. Otherwise, I have my excellent artistic talents, and my strong English skills in reading and writing skills, then I am the High-Tech Savvy as I am 63 years old. Still, I seek these challenges in my life in way in a fact. Thumbs-up! Christa D'Auria
Who's to say that genius thwarted doesn't just degrade into mental illness? Maybe it's just that simple, and applies regardless of how successful a genius has been. Surely that's been looked into. It seems obvious that a frustrated genius would be _highly_ susceptible to mental illness. I'm not bragging in saying this, but I have an IQ of 180 (or did when I was last tested), and can attest to the fact that awareness of things others aren't, coupled with things like social isolation, can make mental health, um, a challenge.
The only way out is to use your intellect, but of course that's something that requires constant effort and minding (no pun intended). It takes a strong will and discipline, so it's not hard to see how some crack under the stress. Often, geniuses will slide by on their abilities and never be forced to take charge of themselves like that...
wow great point, never heard it argued before.
Geniuses are people that can help the community alot. There is no real need for them to be good at anything else than being a genius. They dont have to be good at social interactions, only normal people do.
Geniuses are the people that help the whole humanity, normal people are the ones that "have to get as much kids as possible"
Normal people need to be good/normal at everything they "have "to look good , they have to be healthy, they have to be like " everyone else"
The ONLY thing that a genius has to do is being smart.
(It wouldn't make sense having to many geniuses because they wouldn't get as much kids as normal people do. If you are good at one thing, you are going to be bad at another one.
Merthan E. That is certainly one position. Another is that geniuses have to be able to function normally like everyone else, be self-sufficient, etc. That's the dominant position these days, and it's only becoming more so the case. I wish you luck in defending the position that geniuses deserve special treatment or status, because the idea that _anyone_ does is all but dead in Western civilization.
You say that we can't have too many geniuses. Well, if a genius can't take care of their business and still achieve as a genius, then maybe they're a second-rate genius...
Keith hey man , i saw ur comment i think it's true in several cases, actually i might have some questions to ask you I hope you don't mind
Since as early as 1st Grade, I've demonstrated a strong proclivity for Music. If I wanted to play an instrument, I simply could, even going so far as to perform vocals, harmonica, guitar, and three-piece foot drums all at once. It doesn't surprise me to find out, "There's really a large genetic component involved," especially since, a couple of years into my one-man band exploration, I found out my great-grandfather performed as a one-man band in HIS younger days. Quite a revelation.
The downside, according to a very skilled fellow musician, is that my musical diversification (one-man band) keeps me from focusing on just one instrument, so while I am good on every instrument and impressive when playing them simultaneously, I'm not GREAT on any of them individually. With regard to this video's practice-related discussion, I often argue with myself (rhetorically not schizophrenically) over diversification vs. specialization.
I also wonder about the "chicken or egg" connection between my musical ability and the ease with which I learn other subjects from math to language to martial arts. Does the genetic predisposition for music also create genetic predisposition toward these other things, or did my musical practice simply train my brain to learn other subjects more effectively? For that matter, did I just catch a lucky collection of otherwise independent deviations?
At any rate, after watching this video, I just feel fortunate that my genetic deviation created musical and academic proclivity and not...say...cannibalistic homicidal tendencies. The genetic mutability, neurological diversity, and synaptic plasticity create so many possible outcomes; it's almost frightening to contemplate.
Too much time spent planning can often mean too little time spent doing. The same could be said for thinking. Some people can be so deep in their thoughts that they become detached from reality.
Why aren't my thoughts a reality
Wow, never seen Heather before, but she is a great speaker!
I just think about it in way that if you consider everyone's brain as equal in volume then someone lacking at some brain function would mean that the missing part is invested somewhere else. But it's not like size=smarter granted, I mean in terms of 'potential'. Rather I'd say that I brain can just as well be full of shit if it's capability gets filled with shit. I'm who I made myself to be, I'm result of myself living my past life repeating things and producing my own habits, patterns and values. Sadly a lot of that is useless and now the sad part is trying to change myself when I can't exactly erase part of brain in which I have one of my garbage habits recorded. Instead brains keeps reconstructing itself after pieces of puzzle goes missing, which is the problem.
Divergent thinking doesn't come from mental illness, it just comes from breaking with the norm, in any number of ways, from being from a different culture, to breaking gender norms, to just being born like that. I'm glad this lady was here to put the interviewer in his place with his wrong-headed stereotypical and offensive questions.
his stereotyping of mental illness was offensive. He's ignoring what we know about mental illness in favour of romanticized (so to speak) notions of mental illness.
My ideas about the birth of genius may not be perfect, but your disapproval of them is just as flawed. I said that genius required our thought to break the norms of thinking, and can take many forms; I never said it was the end all be all of genius. And as far as alienation goes, geniuses often are alienated, for their breaking with norms, just look at Alan Turing.
Divergent thinking can be the result of any number of things, mental illness being one of them. A person with mental illness is likely to live a life that is very different from a more normal experience, so that in itself can yield ways of thinking that are more unusual. Anxiety and depression can be related to extreme sensitivity, yielding an acuity of experience that can be exceptional, in a way. That doesn't mean it's the only way to get there, but it can be one way.
What's offensive is thinking of mental illness as being entirely a deficiency, that couldn't possibly result in anything good. It is often problematic, but the mind is far too complex to stereotype these problems in a strictly negative light, too.
Have to find the perfect balance
I think Neuroscience is still grasping at straws here. I believe everyone has genius in them. I have or had a recognized disorder with maths called dyscalculia, despite my " genetic predisposition " I studied my ass off and changed the way I thought, and now Im doing maths I never dreamed possible. your genetics is not the end all be all. I believe it's more how you think. if you think your bad at something chances are you will be. its all mind over matter.
I love this channel.
Interesting. Just a thought here, what do we mean by 'Genius'? Usually it seems to mean somebody who is incredibly skilled or capable inside one particular area or field. Examples are cited from music, and theoretical physics... In many popular cases, these people were significantly flawed or broken in other areas of their lives. So here's a challenge. Name a general purpose genius. I can only think of two. One was Leonardo DaVinci, and the other was Gias Julius Caesar. One is famous for military and political exploits, and the other for art and ideas, but both had exceptional capability at a wide range of tasks. Both qualify as Genius, and neither needed a nanny to follow them around and make sure they stayed properly dressed.
So how long before we can bio-engineer super humans?
If you take enough punishment in life, you can really dish it out on a page.
Nicholas Stillman, ah so THAT'S how I can make my kids into geniuses
Schizophrenia is often confused with Genius vise versa in psychology.
To be a genius or not to be?🤔 That's not a simple question. Amazing how people with similar brain structure or brain damage can be different in terms of intelligence, cognitive abilities.
I think the genetic predispositions only help you at the beginning when you start your talent. But people are geniuses at things, are only that way EVER because they put a shit ton of time and effort into it. People with extraordinary memory can practice that, same for people who endure extraordinary pain.
I don't think you have a good point here lady.
Obviously certain people excel physically because they are physically different from other people in a way that helps them do exceptional in a particular thing, like breathing under water for a long time.
The thing is too, you don't even have to have a genetic favorable predisposition to a thing to be a genius at it. In fact it could be the opposite. An amazing, short basketball player would be one example.
First though it has to be established what we all mean by 'genius' because it's a pretty broad term if you ask me.
Why do people persist in labelling merely different human character traits as "disorders"? It sounds so Victorian to my ears, it just stigmatises people and treats them as "other" because of what? Because of brain chemistry? Jesus! Come on people, it's time to think bigger.
I'm just saying the word disorder implies there is something "wrong" with someone. I don't think there is anything "wrong" with a person who finds emotional life difficult to deal with within their culture. It was just my opinion framed in a rhetorical question.
locohombre79 You're correct in making that conclusion. I'd like to expand on that, however.
If an elevator works and does its job, people won't really think about the elevator's existence; everything is fine. But when the elevator breaks, it's "out of order" and their lives are disturbed in a myriad of ways.
The same could be said for a "disorder": the behavior is startling enough to be "out of order", and is far more noticeable than the rest of society's behavioral patterns. Effectively, that which is "in order" is what is normal, expected, average, doesn't call attention to itself. But when something breaks the mold enough to be an outlier, people take notice, and it's generally a negative feeling because that upsets the delicate ballet that is their life.
Additionally, if behavioral traits like Autism, Depression, ADHD, etc. are far more frequent than behaviors that LACK the qualities of those "disorders", then the people who are "normal" are now the people with "disorders". And those who would have originally been labeled as having a "disorder" are now the group of people who are normal.
Anyone as industrious as I will achieve similar results ~ J.S. Bach
Mmmhhuh.
Mhuh
Why have smart, young American women started to begin every reply with "so...?" It's driving me up the wall!
Peoples like the me have not an social of the barriers you the not genius have do have. is why i am an genius. is why you am not an genius. is the very simple. not for an you though.
Too obvious, try again troll
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
JewTube
yes please very much so yes. for why?
Crouchy232323
Very creative troll nice
Bob Le Blanc
Why thank you, my dear. xx
Can 7 billion concious beings decide not to kill each other for what they believe? -you're all welcome
I want a pet femboy.
One that looks and sounds like a girl, but also has a 7 inch fire hose.
Is she sure about what she is telling ?
the only thing that is disordered in this interview, shallow and irrelevant. The old chestnuts. Perhaps my expectations are genetically determined, probably so.
nice Reason you got there m8! ^_^
So the question is could we be gassed? by we the insane person like myself. The problem is that a coupling of the genius and gene might mean that you would lose genius from the gene pool and therefore consign the human species to extinction. I guess that ones that express genius befor taking their own lives are useful. the ones that took their lives before expressing genius, well that could have been a loss, and the ones who had no genius but only madness to express, well, who gives a shit about them anyway? But certainly it would be difficult to justify intervention in this regard with resort to the gas chamber. Personally, I would go into the death chamber willingly, since i have not got the sand to end it all, since the only genius i can express is insanity. The collective will is all, the individual is nothing; a person is only good insofar as they are useful to the community.
Mhmm, mhmm, please tell me more. Such an annoying habit for someone to have in a conversation.