I neglected to mention conscientiousness, which would be the other half of the puzzle. There are plenty of geniuses who will nonetheless never put themselves to

I neglected to mention conscientiousness, which would be the other half of the puzzle. There are plenty of geniuses who will nonetheless never put themselves to work. Intelligence can't make you productive all alone. Which is why I said it the way I did, because otherwise I would imply that they are mathematicians because they are intelligent, where I was trying to say that in order to advance mathematics, you essentially have to be very intelligent. That said... > Counterargument: anyone who advances mathematics will be considered of exceptionally high intelligence. I'm referring to the psychometric g factor type of intelligence. Not the "I know a real smart gal" type. g is shockingly consistent, measurable, and clearly an important part of many human behaviours. Intelligence is a very specific thing, people can be exceptionally good at things without being exceptionally intelligent, but people can not be exceptionally intelligent merely by being exceptional at something.