[mikepk]

"I admit that mathematical science is a good thing. But excessive devotion to it is a bad thing. If we evolved a race of Isaac Newtons, that would not be progress. For the price Newton had to pay for being a supreme intellect was that he was incapable of friendship, love, fatherhood, and many other desirable things. As a man he was a failure; as a monster he was superb." -- Aldus Huxley

[jsmthrowaway]

In Mark Manson's new book[0] he talks about how humans can excel at very few things, often barely one, and that "being a good person" for lack of a better phrase counts as one. It seems obvious in hindsight, but struck me because I hadn't thought of it that way before.

(The book is incredible, by the way. I've already read it twice, just like Derek Sivers. Recommend it highly.)

[0]: https://markmanson.net/books/subtle-art

[biofox]

I haven't read the book, but this doesn't seem to fit with what's known about general intelligence, nor the examples of polymaths from the renaissance period.

I suspect the causes are societal, from the constraints placed on our time and freedom to explore and become well rounded.

[imh]

I don't like the implication that you have to choose between excellence/"supreme intellect" and niceness. It excuses all sorts of assholes who believe that about themselves. What's wrong with being someone like Terry Tao?

[kiproping]

Who?

[thr0waway1239]

Counterpoint from the philosopher George Bernard Shaw:

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."