Smart

[rejectomorph]

Do you ever wonder who the smartest LJ user is? Of all the journalers I've read, (admitedly only a small percentage of all that post,) I'd say the person in first place so far is bram. He writes a great deal about science, and I can only understand a fraction of it. Be afraid.

Comments

Smrat

[eideteker.livejournal.com]

Is that what makes one smart? Not being understood? If so, I must be very smart indeed.

Blessed are the intelligensia, for they will need it. Accursed is the child of intellect, for one type of understanding, that of science or letters, will come easily. The other, the understanding of the soul, will not be so easy. Blessed be he who finds someone who can understand him.

smarts

[scottobear.livejournal.com]

so many definitions....

I've never read bream, but I've seen folks with a great range, from book smary, to street smart... to the ability to explain things so that the not so smart get it. :)

Re: Smrat

[rejectomorph]

Alas, being smart does too often lead to not being understood. But it is posssible for a person to have both sheer intellectual power and deep insight- otherwise, we would not have writers like Shakespeare, Cervantes, Octavio Paz, Murasaki, Li Po, Tu Fu, etc. And, I have known many people of a scientific bent who had great understanding of art and the humanities. They just happen to be more interested in science. I suspect that such people actaully make the best scientists.

Re: smarts

[rejectomorph]

True indeed. And I have seen very smart people do very stupid things (witness Bill Clinton and his interns, or JFK and his Bay of Pigs inavasion.) Thus I ended that post with my slightly tongue-in-cheek "Be afraid." But, having read some of Bram's journal, I suspect he is one of the more sensible smart people out there- and has considerable breadth as well. (Check his interests.)

Re: Smrat

[eideteker.livejournal.com]

Actually, I was talking about BEING understood more than understanding others.

I worry that Confucius didn't get enough hugs. :(

Groupthink!

[eideteker.livejournal.com]

Two heads may be better than one, but 15 closely locked heads can bring disaster...

Re: smarts

[scottobear.livejournal.com]

groovy! I often enjoy a good reccomendation. :)

Re: Smrat

[rejectomorph]

He probably didn't. Probably Lao Tzu didn't either. But, knowing the tao, they probably didn't worry about it. They knew that the hugs would all come into balance in the end.

Re: Groupthink!

[rejectomorph]

As can two, if they are mad enough. I've forgotten the spelling of the french term that which means madness for two, (I think it was follie a deux) but something similar happens in groups of all sizes- people either forgetting who they are, or forgetting that particular part of themselves which doesn't require anyone else's approval. (Odd, how loss of self is so closely related to intense egoism.)