6 minrss原文 ↗

Beyond Smart

October 2021If you asked people what was special about Einstein, most would say
that he was really smart. Even the ones who tried to give you a

more sophisticated-sounding answer would probably think this first.

Till a few years ago I would have given the same answer myself. But

that wasn't what was special about Einstein. What was special about

him was that he had important new ideas. Being very smart was a

necessary precondition for having those ideas, but the two are not

identical.It may seem a hair-splitting distinction to point out that intelligence

and its consequences are not identical, but it isn't. There's a big

gap between them. Anyone who's spent time around universities and

research labs knows how big. There are a lot of genuinely smart

people who don't achieve very much.I grew up thinking that being smart was the thing most to be desired.

Perhaps you did too. But I bet it's not what you really want. Imagine

you had a choice between being really smart but discovering nothing

new, and being less smart but discovering lots of new ideas. Surely

you'd take the latter. I would. The choice makes me uncomfortable,

but when you see the two options laid out explicitly like that,

it's obvious which is better.The reason the choice makes me uncomfortable is that being smart

still feels like the thing that matters, even though I know

intellectually that it isn't. I spent so many years thinking it

was. The circumstances of childhood are a perfect storm for fostering

this illusion. Intelligence is much easier to measure than the value

of new ideas, and you're constantly being judged by it. Whereas

even the kids who will ultimately discover new things aren't usually

discovering them yet. For kids that way inclined, intelligence is

the only game in town.There are more subtle reasons too, which persist long into adulthood.

Intelligence wins in conversation, and thus becomes the basis of

the dominance hierarchy.

[1]

Plus having new ideas is such a new

thing historically, and even now done by so few people, that society

hasn't yet assimilated the fact that this is the actual destination,

and intelligence merely a means to an end.

[2]Why do so many smart people fail to discover anything new? Viewed

from that direction, the question seems a rather depressing one.

But there's another way to look at it that's not just more optimistic,

but more interesting as well. Clearly intelligence is not the only

ingredient in having new ideas. What are the other ingredients?

Are they things we could cultivate?Because the trouble with intelligence, they say, is that it's mostly

inborn. The evidence for this seems fairly convincing, especially

considering that most of us don't want it to be true, and the

evidence thus has to face a stiff headwind. But I'm not going

to get into that question here, because it's the other ingredients

in new ideas that I care about, and it's clear that many of them

can be cultivated.That means the truth is excitingly different from the story I got

as a kid. If intelligence is what matters, and also mostly inborn,

the natural consequence is a sort of Brave New World fatalism. The

best you can do is figure out what sort of work you have an "aptitude"

for, so that whatever intelligence you were born with will at least

be put to the best use, and then work as hard as you can at it.

Whereas if intelligence isn't what matters, but only one of several

ingredients in what does, and many of those aren't inborn, things

get more interesting. You have a lot more control, but the problem

of how to arrange your life becomes that much more complicated.So what are the other ingredients in having new ideas? The fact

that I can even ask this question proves the point I raised earlier

— that society hasn't assimilated the fact that it's this and not

intelligence that matters. Otherwise we'd all know the answers

to such a fundamental question.

[3]I'm not going to try to provide a complete catalogue of the other

ingredients here. This is the first time I've posed

the question to myself this way, and I think it may take a while

to answer. But I wrote recently about one of the most important:

an obsessive interest in a particular topic.

And this can definitely be cultivated.Another quality you need in order to discover new ideas is

independent-mindedness. I wouldn't want to

claim that this is

distinct from intelligence — I'd be reluctant to call someone smart

who wasn't independent-minded — but though largely inborn, this

quality seems to be something that can be cultivated to some extent.There are general techniques for having new ideas — for example,

for working on your own projects

and

for overcoming the obstacles you face with early work

— and these

can all be learned. Some of them can be learned by societies. And

there are also collections of techniques for generating specific types

of new ideas, like startup ideas and

essay topics.And of course there are a lot of fairly mundane ingredients in

discovering new ideas, like working hard,

getting enough sleep, avoiding certain

kinds of stress, having the right colleagues, and finding tricks

for working on what you want even when it's not what you're supposed

to be working on. Anything that prevents people from doing great

work has an inverse that helps them to. And this class of ingredients

is not as boring as it might seem at first. For example, having new

ideas is generally associated with youth. But perhaps it's not youth

per se that yields new ideas, but specific things that come with

youth, like good health and lack of responsibilities. Investigating

this might lead to strategies that will help people of any age to

have better ideas.One of the most surprising ingredients in having new ideas is writing

ability. There's a class of new ideas that are best discovered by

writing essays and books. And that "by" is deliberate: you don't

think of the ideas first, and then merely write them down. There

is a kind of thinking that one does by writing, and if you're clumsy

at writing, or don't enjoy doing it, that will get in your way if

you try to do this kind of thinking.

[4]I predict the gap between intelligence and new ideas will turn out

to be an interesting place. If we think of this gap merely as a measure

of unrealized potential, it becomes a sort of wasteland that we try to

hurry through with our eyes averted. But if we flip the question,

and start inquiring into the other ingredients in new ideas that

it implies must exist, we can mine this gap for discoveries about

discovery.

Notes[1]

What wins in conversation depends on who with. It ranges from

mere aggressiveness at the bottom, through quick-wittedness in the

middle, to something closer to actual intelligence at the top,

though probably always with some component of quick-wittedness.[2]

Just as intelligence isn't the only ingredient in having new

ideas, having new ideas isn't the only thing intelligence is useful

for. It's also useful, for example, in diagnosing problems and figuring

out how to fix them. Both overlap with having new ideas, but both

have an end that doesn't.Those ways of using intelligence are much more common than having

new ideas. And in such cases intelligence is even harder to distinguish

from its consequences.[3]

Some would attribute the difference between intelligence and

having new ideas to "creativity," but this doesn't seem a very

useful term. As well as being pretty vague, it's shifted half a frame

sideways from what we care about: it's neither separable from

intelligence, nor responsible for all the difference between

intelligence and having new ideas.[4]

Curiously enough, this essay is an example. It started out

as an essay about writing ability. But when I came to the distinction

between intelligence and having new ideas, that seemed so much more

important that I turned the original essay inside out, making that

the topic and my original topic one of the points in it. As in many

other fields, that level of reworking is easier to contemplate once

you've had a lot of practice.

Thanks to Trevor Blackwell, Patrick Collison, Jessica Livingston,

Robert Morris, Michael Nielsen, and Lisa Randall for reading drafts

of this.

如果可以重来,你还愿意花这段时间读它吗?

· 匿名阅读记录只用于改进推荐

Beyond Smart | DeepRead