but I'm not sure I've seen anyone else tie it to personality traits like that

its something many realize implicitly

consider the stereotype of the genius

basically, a kook

yeah

wait

so what happened

nothing

they shutdown the former altright server

init?

yeah

the altright.com server

https://twitter.com/discordapp/status/897170310348263426

ah i see

this place isn't really connected to that

yeah i get it

@UOC the basic idea:

Genius is a certain personality and certain traits

what are those traits?

The ability to become very good at something (in terms of deep understanding)

which requires higher than average intelligence, and dedication towards a certain field

Then the ability to be creative and innovate

partially that requires high IQ as well, but only up to the depth of understanding point

real creativity is psychoticism

clinical psychoses are the extreme end of a line that has genius and artist on it somewhere

this is easily proven, artists tend to have a preponderance of schizophrenia

it is my belief that there is no categorical difference between the artistic and scientific genius

nothing that divides them beyond just being involved in arts vs. sciences

Really? I would agree, depending on who you count as artistic geniuses. I think think "raw" creative genius often lacks the sort of Conscientious personality that seems necessary for other geniuses

but for someone like Bach or whoever, they seem to line up

ah but geniuses are often dedicated

but almost never conscientous

certainly no genius is more conscientous than the average person

usually the successful people have other figures in their life

or some environment

that allows them to live comfortably and sensibly

well maybe I'm using the wrong word. dedicated is better

my problem is Charlton has already surpassed and consolidated anything I could say

but at the same time

just linking a book doesn't end well

so I end up quoting or summarizing him with a smattering of my own ideas