Nmherman on 9 Mar 2001 05:22:14 -0000 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Nettime-bold] Fwd: [Genius2000Conference2000] WE ARE VERY SORRY |
- To: <Genius2000Conference2000@yahoogroups.com>
- Subject: Re: [Genius2000Conference2000] WE ARE VERY SORRY
- From: "Nicholas Hermann" <NHerman@hga.com>
- Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 10:23:43 -0600
- List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:Genius2000Conference2000-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
- Mailing-List: list Genius2000Conference2000@yahoogroups.com; contact Genius2000Conference2000-owner@yahoogroups.com
- Reply-To: Genius2000Conference2000@yahoogroups.com
>>> LettersToNarcissus@nabou.com 03/07/01 11:36PM >>> --------------------------------------------- True art is communicative, not elitist! ++ I was just discussing with my supervisor the role of IQ in creativity. For example, did Van Gogh have a high IQ? My own personal IQ is fairly high I think, but that may be due to my education as a youngster. Creativity is a little different. I think Keats may have had a rather low IQ, and maybe Einstein as well. Obviously Genius 2000 does not say that you have to have a high IQ to fulfill your genius. In fact, Genius 2000 is fairly opposed to the individual IQ philosophy of genius. You might even say they are ideological opposites. This takes a lot of pressure off the individual creative person if their goal is to enhance all human genius in an egalitarian, democratic fashion. Many people call such a view outdated Enlightenmentism, but I'm not sure I agree. I believe there are oppressive concepts, conventions, and systems whose chief effect is to degrade human genius in general and thus make people more governable. But I'm concerned, you might say, about Narcissus' webpage. It may be that she or he is trying to demystify something that I'm still unable or unwilling to approach with direct responses. How many people on the list think maybe Max Herman's main obstacle to high productivity is his own over-emphasis on his own abilities and weaknesses? I would confirm that when I set those types of considerations aside I am more creative; I see things more freshly and make connections among disparate phenomena more freely. I don't feel as burdened, responsible, driven. Put another way, one of the worst things for human cognitive abilities and their full development is enforced convention. When you discard convention you can do a lot more. Genius 2000 must, it seems, favor such an independent method. And I'm hoping it can be argued convincingly that the method doesn't sacrifice quality or "the Good," like the elitists say it will. How should Genius 2000 deal with elitism? Is it simply too squeamish to accept its own elite status, or does it propose a serious alternative? Maybe elitism is something we just have to fly by and trust to luck. _____________________________________________________________ Get premier, free, fast, 6Mb web-based email at ---> http://www.nabou.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: Genius2000Conference2000-unsubscribe@egroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: Genius2000Conference2000-unsubscribe@egroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/