Submitted by hcrx t3_ze3qsp in dataisbeautiful
Comments
aruexperienced t1_iz4jggy wrote
If you speak one language you’re normal. Two you are bi-lingual. 5 you are polyliguist.
You don’t have to speak every one of the 7000 languages there are said to be just to be one. One guy (Mesic) apparently reported to understand 73. And another guy (Fazah) claimed 53.
Knowledge is a vast, vast domain and some people become competent or masters of one domain in a matter of several years.
EspritFort t1_iz4pgf3 wrote
>If you speak one language you’re normal. Two you are bi-lingual. 5 you are polyliguist. >You don’t have to speak every one of the 7000 languages there are said to be just to be one. One guy (Mesic) apparently reported to understand 73. And another guy (Fazah) claimed 53.
"Polymath" is not a neologism. It has an already established, very specific meaning. You do not need to derive its individual components. It's very decidedly not a synonym to "person who is very very good within this very narrow subject area" (that would be an "expert") - quite the contrary! That's why "polymath of economics" or similar is a contradiction.
> Knowledge is a vast, vast domain and some people become competent or masters of one domain in a matter of several years.
Sure? But the natural conclusion from that is that it is simply no longer possible for a human to become a polymath, since it is no longer possible to keep up with the entire sea of human knowledge. Being a polymath is, at best, a 19th-century thing. Changing the meaning of "polymath" in order to be able to use the word in a contemporary context again, which is what the source article seems to be doing, seems a bit silly to me.
szachin t1_iz4jri1 wrote
The OP's genius 'continent' distribution:
Europe 382
North America 97
Other 28
Russia 17
India 6
Rome 3
China 3
Kralizec_81 t1_iz4cit1 wrote
The label on the x axis is missing, presumably centuries ?
hcrx OP t1_iz4dgma wrote
Yes centuries, sorry about that!
DrMike27 t1_iz4cnrc wrote
Already terrible source material for calling Elon Musk a genius.
bergercreek t1_iz50i4x wrote
Unless he is. Your like or dislike for someone doesn't change their IQ.
Busy_Ad2931 t1_iz66so3 wrote
His IQ is the same as dishwater temperature after you left it to soak into the shit that was burned into the stainless pans overnight.
IgneousMiraCole t1_iz6gh3o wrote
Musk Derangement Syndrome reaching critical mass on Reddit these days.
[deleted] t1_iz6jik7 wrote
[removed]
bergercreek t1_iz6f8th wrote
So...his IQ is 155, reportedly. Pretty definitively a genius by the metric used to measure intelligence. You can love or hate the guy, but he's a genius either way.
Busy_Ad2931 t1_iz6jptd wrote
That's nice. Mine's reportedly 2167. Who reported it? I did, just now.
But sure, go on riding the racist billionaire's flaccid dick.
bergercreek t1_iz6vqgs wrote
You can dislike someone and they'd still be a genius. You know that, right? Like, your dislike for someone doesn't change their IQ. He could be a huge racist misogynist homophobe xenophobe blah blah blah and it wouldn't change the fact that he's also a literal genius. I've never even stated any opinion for or against the man himself, only the fact that he has a genius IQ.
EngineeringBulky5363 t1_iz8kuvj wrote
reddit idiots don't care. I don't like musk and I'll admit he's a smart guy for what he's done. like you're telling me an idiot is running some of the biggest companies in the world?
[deleted] t1_izgfjt7 wrote
[removed]
-Doctor-Nick- t1_ize6ei1 wrote
An idiot can definitely run some of the biggest companies in the world if they have the right people supporting them.
Busy_Ad2931 t1_izgfd6o wrote
Or, in Musk's case, if they have enough dickriders and market manipulators to spike his stock price to the point where none of his businesses actually have to turn a profit because he can simply continue securing loan after loan like every other rich asshole, kiting these loans around.
The ignorance of the truth is fucking astounding.
[deleted] t1_iz6vo0f wrote
[deleted]
Extra_Intro_Version t1_iz51y72 wrote
This seems so heavily subjective
aaronmichels t1_iz4fp7q wrote
How does this track with population growth? That might be more interesting
[deleted] t1_iz4coqw wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iz4csm5 wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iz4lkuh wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iz52adj wrote
[removed]
shmerham t1_iz5d871 wrote
Is the y-axis 600 BC to 1900 AD?
[deleted] t1_iz5hcg6 wrote
[removed]
AristarcusRex t1_iz8602n wrote
I remember it as 'If you speak one language you're Trilingual, if two, Bilingual, if one, American.' :)
OG-Bluntman t1_iz906mh wrote
So what does that make you?
AristarcusRex t1_izatpxu wrote
Well it was a joke told to me by a European friend who was commenting on how Americans don't feel the need to learn additional languages when he and his peers all did. But to answer you - a trilingual American. :)
[deleted] t1_iz8lxdy wrote
[removed]
EspritFort t1_iz4dwdk wrote
I really can't get behind the terminology here. I mean, surely either you excel at everything - and, accordingly, are a polymath - or not? Why would there be specific categories of "polymath"? That seems totally oxymoronic.