Great people are warranted discussion, but as someone who was once in the academic math world, I had to quit reading after a few sentences.
Genius is a very real thing, but I don't need to read adulation after adulation in a series of anecdotes and quotes that will only make me feel inadequate.
The mathematics itself is greater than the mathematician, who himself craps on the toilet like anyone else. Focus on the math, not the mathematician. It will make you happier.
Focus on the math, not the mathematician. It will make you happier.
Personally I don't feel inadequate when reading about someone like von Neumann, as I'm not really tempted to compare myself to him in the first place. Colleagues are peers, people I graduated with are peers, but von Neumann is almost like another species.
I forget who it was who pointed out that Silicon Valley billionaires tend to dress like 'normal people', in sharp contrast to aristocrats. People don't tend to feel poor for comparing themselves against the Queen, as they perceive too much distance to make a personal comparison.
Colleagues are peers, people I graduated with are peers, but von Neumann is almost like another species.
Von Neumann's contemporaries agreed, which is why he and other Ashkenazi Jews from Hungary were nicknamed Martians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Martians_(scientists) . Societal and genetic pressures over centuries produced unusually high IQs (and some associated genetic problems).
Personally I don't feel inadequate when reading about someone like von Neumann, as I'm not really tempted to compare myself to him in the first place. Colleagues are peers, people I graduated with are peers, but von Neumann is almost like another species.
Perhaps I am more prone to egoism than you! I had a "promising" start to my career and a lot of ambition. I've fallen off that track and had time to reflect on what matters, but I still feel twinges of ego-driven ambition.
You can work as much as you like, you're still going to be nowhere near as smart as von Neumann. Why should that be motivating? I'm not convinced there's an upside to feeling inadequate by comparison.
Thank you for sharing your perspective on this. I think other people probably feel similarly.
I am old enough now that I accept my limitations, and have decided to apply my talents to areas that I find interesting and valuable.
Just because I will never be a Leibnitz, I’m still confident that I can help teach people what I know and help them on their own paths to reach their individual potential.
But still, I marvel at geniuses like Feynman who made things seem so effortless.
As a counter, I absolutely love reading about these extraordinary individuals. To be sure their intellectual standing and productivity is almost overwhelming, such that I have to study hard just to appreciate the foothills of the mountains they sprang among like heavenly goats, but their humanity, their joi-de-vivre, and most especially their historical context is hugely worthwhile knowing.
Reading of the achievements of others doesn't make me feel inadequate, rather it fills me with hope and real joy.
Yes, Mathematics is greater than mathematicians, but never forget our mathematics is still profoundly and inescapably human, and none the worse for it. Read more Mathematics!
You think if he was raised in a third-world country without access to education he would have achieved just as much?
He was raised in the intellectual hothouse of turn of the century Hungary, which also produced many other eminent mathematicians.
His parents were wealthy nobility, who could afford the best education for their children, and believed strongly in its value.
"When they were young, governesses taught von Neumann, his brothers and his cousins. Max believed that knowledge of languages in addition to Hungarian was essential, so the
children were tutored in English, French, German and Italian."
He attended "one of the best schools in Budapest and was part of a brilliant education system designed for the elite."
"The Hungarian school system produced a generation noted for intellectual achievement, which included Theodore von Kármán
(born 1881), George de Hevesy (born 1885), Michael Polanyi (born 1891), Leó Szilárd (born 1898), Dennis Gabor (born 1900), Eugene Wigner (born 1902), Edward Teller (born
1908), and Paul Erdős (born 1913)."
"At the age of 15, he began to study advanced calculus under the renowned analyst Gábor Szegő... He then went to the University of Göttingen on a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation to study mathematics under David Hilbert."
Most people don't get opportunities to study at one of the most elite educational institutions in the world, with world-class academics.
That is not genetics, that's opportunity.
"Look how hard parents push their kids these days, yet few even come close to his genius."
Maybe they're "pushing" in the wrong way. And is pushing what needs to be done?
What was von Neumann's parents' approach exactly? How did they interact with him and what values about learning did they instill in him when he was young?
Most people don't get opportunities to study at one of the most elite educational institutions in the world, with world-class academics
Most don't. Many do. And Vom Neumann was still massively ahead of them, and the rest of the world.
Trying to write off his raw brain power as mostly a consequence of his socio-economic standing and upbringing is intellectually bankrupt but populist-pandering poppycock.
Then again you need all three for genius, confluence of raw material of talent, opportunity to train under great teachers and means to follow through with it.
Where the latter two are available, it is easier to find genius, which is why it often occurs in clusters.
The mathematics itself is greater than the mathematician, who himself craps on the toilet like anyone else. Focus on the math, not the mathematician. It will make you happier.
The mathematician reveals the math. The math won't reveal itself
The mathematics itself is greater than the mathematician, who himself craps on the toilet like anyone else. Focus on the math, not the mathematician. It will make you happier.
To each his own I guess, but personally I don’t want to waste my time on something I’m not good at nor do I have the capability to be good at.
Comments
Great people are warranted discussion, but as someone who was once in the academic math world, I had to quit reading after a few sentences.
Genius is a very real thing, but I don't need to read adulation after adulation in a series of anecdotes and quotes that will only make me feel inadequate.
The mathematics itself is greater than the mathematician, who himself craps on the toilet like anyone else. Focus on the math, not the mathematician. It will make you happier.
Personally I don't feel inadequate when reading about someone like von Neumann, as I'm not really tempted to compare myself to him in the first place. Colleagues are peers, people I graduated with are peers, but von Neumann is almost like another species.
I forget who it was who pointed out that Silicon Valley billionaires tend to dress like 'normal people', in sharp contrast to aristocrats. People don't tend to feel poor for comparing themselves against the Queen, as they perceive too much distance to make a personal comparison.
Von Neumann's contemporaries agreed, which is why he and other Ashkenazi Jews from Hungary were nicknamed Martians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Martians_(scientists) . Societal and genetic pressures over centuries produced unusually high IQs (and some associated genetic problems).
Perhaps I am more prone to egoism than you! I had a "promising" start to my career and a lot of ambition. I've fallen off that track and had time to reflect on what matters, but I still feel twinges of ego-driven ambition.
The queen does not have much personal money anyway. it belongs to the family.
I think it is understandable to feel inadequate. that is motivation to be better.
I don't see the sense in this. No amount of work would turn the average mind into the next von Neumann.
being better does mean being a copy of the guy
You can work as much as you like, you're still going to be nowhere near as smart as von Neumann. Why should that be motivating? I'm not convinced there's an upside to feeling inadequate by comparison.
Thank you for sharing your perspective on this. I think other people probably feel similarly.
I am old enough now that I accept my limitations, and have decided to apply my talents to areas that I find interesting and valuable.
Just because I will never be a Leibnitz, I’m still confident that I can help teach people what I know and help them on their own paths to reach their individual potential.
But still, I marvel at geniuses like Feynman who made things seem so effortless.
As a counter, I absolutely love reading about these extraordinary individuals. To be sure their intellectual standing and productivity is almost overwhelming, such that I have to study hard just to appreciate the foothills of the mountains they sprang among like heavenly goats, but their humanity, their joi-de-vivre, and most especially their historical context is hugely worthwhile knowing.
Reading of the achievements of others doesn't make me feel inadequate, rather it fills me with hope and real joy.
Yes, Mathematics is greater than mathematicians, but never forget our mathematics is still profoundly and inescapably human, and none the worse for it. Read more Mathematics!
"Focus on the math, not the mathematician."
Do you think von Neumann's education might have had anything to do with what he was able to achieve?
How about how he was raised by his parents?
Or how about his work ethic, motivation, and attitude towards discovery?
How about the people that he admired and that influenced him?
Learning these things might help us to raise future extraordinary achievers, or might even help us with our own lives/work.
You will not find any of these things in his mathematics, but you might learn about them by studying his life.
99.9% genes in his case. Look how hard parents push their kids these days, yet few even come close to his genius.
"99.9% genes in his case"
You think if he was raised in a third-world country without access to education he would have achieved just as much?
He was raised in the intellectual hothouse of turn of the century Hungary, which also produced many other eminent mathematicians.
His parents were wealthy nobility, who could afford the best education for their children, and believed strongly in its value.
"When they were young, governesses taught von Neumann, his brothers and his cousins. Max believed that knowledge of languages in addition to Hungarian was essential, so the children were tutored in English, French, German and Italian."
He attended "one of the best schools in Budapest and was part of a brilliant education system designed for the elite."
"The Hungarian school system produced a generation noted for intellectual achievement, which included Theodore von Kármán (born 1881), George de Hevesy (born 1885), Michael Polanyi (born 1891), Leó Szilárd (born 1898), Dennis Gabor (born 1900), Eugene Wigner (born 1902), Edward Teller (born 1908), and Paul Erdős (born 1913)."
"At the age of 15, he began to study advanced calculus under the renowned analyst Gábor Szegő... He then went to the University of Göttingen on a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation to study mathematics under David Hilbert."
Most people don't get opportunities to study at one of the most elite educational institutions in the world, with world-class academics.
That is not genetics, that's opportunity.
"Look how hard parents push their kids these days, yet few even come close to his genius."
Maybe they're "pushing" in the wrong way. And is pushing what needs to be done?
What was von Neumann's parents' approach exactly? How did they interact with him and what values about learning did they instill in him when he was young?
These questions are important to answer.
Most don't. Many do. And Vom Neumann was still massively ahead of them, and the rest of the world.
Trying to write off his raw brain power as mostly a consequence of his socio-economic standing and upbringing is intellectually bankrupt but populist-pandering poppycock.
Then again you need all three for genius, confluence of raw material of talent, opportunity to train under great teachers and means to follow through with it.
Where the latter two are available, it is easier to find genius, which is why it often occurs in clusters.
Of course some of it genetics, twin studies show significant correlations.
We should not discard the importance of pedagogy and mentorship.
Polgar chess prodigies is an interesting experiment on upbringing and crystallizing genius abilities in gifted children though.
The mathematician reveals the math. The math won't reveal itself
To each his own I guess, but personally I don’t want to waste my time on something I’m not good at nor do I have the capability to be good at.