5 ms·

As far as I know, Kim Peek has never made any scientific discoveries, or had any wisdom to tell the world, in spite of being able to remember ~12k books. It's

As far as I know, Kim Peek has never made any scientific discoveries, or had any wisdom to tell the world, in spite of being able to remember ~12k books. It's a good reminder that knowledge does not equal intelligence or wisdom.

unkulunkulu 7y ago
Did he understand those books? Was he able to present the premises, propositions and arguments from those books or just to recite them? The latter does not constitute even knowledge, just memory.
- jcutrell 7y ago
  For most (not Peek), memory and knowledge are necessarily linked since memory tends to work better when there is a previously existing connection to attach a new piece of information to. So, we don't tend to remember facts for the sake of facts. This obviously isn't always true, but for vast amounts of information, it would be very difficult to remember single "nodes" of information without having some connection to other information. Memory contestants use this to their advantage, by creating some sense of story and/or place to attach the otherwise arbitrary information, like digits or cards, to.
vinceguidry 7y ago
Scientific discovery may have been in the realm of individual accomplishment 200 years ago, now it requires organization. I wouldn't let this fact color your judgment. I'm sure he could have done a PhD like anyone else.
kiba 7y ago
Well, scientific discoveries required creativity and innovation, not just intelligence. At least, some of them probably do.
- MagnumPIG 7y ago
  In Kuhn's main book (scientific revolutions), he mentions creativity as vital to discoveries, multiple times. Not sure if intelligence is ever mentionned, but I doubt it because it can't be defined in a useful way.
itronitron 7y ago
Or if he did, he never bothered to tell anyone.
dahart 7y ago
This is a natural reaction and it’s common for people to remark on his high memory yet low cognition, but nonetheless this comment somewhat bothers me. This is my issue, not yours, and I may be misinterpreting, but here’s my thinking... Why is scientific discoveries even something he’s compared against? What does that have to do with the post? Do all people with excessive talents of some kind have to make scientific discoveries to prove it? How would you even presume to have any idea whether Kim had wisdom to share? Wisdom is very different from scientific discoveries, and why would anyone know that except himself or his family? How hard did you try to find whether he had wisdom to share? What if he had lots of wisdom that the rest of us couldn’t understand? Are you suggesting that someone doesn’t have wisdom unless they publish it? Let me ask this way: do you consider yourself smart & wise? What scientific discoveries have you made, what wisdom have you told the world? We should not draw broad conclusions about the way knowledge and intelligence work based on one person who’s in an extremely abnormal situation. In most normal people, knowledge and intelligence and wisdom are closely related, it takes knowledge (experience) to gain wisdom, it takes intelligence to formulate wisdom, and it takes wisdom to seek the kind of knowledge that can lead to intelligence. For most people, having a lot of knowledge would precipitate some wisdom automatically. Normal people spot patterns. You can’t normally have a lot of one without the others. Kim Peek is a stark outlier compared to how normal brains work. Your comment also hints at a cultural narrative that is common but not true, where people tend to see someone with extraordinary talents and “remind” everyone that it also means there must be some extraordinary deficiencies there too, because balance. There are some people that have extreme memory and are still smarter and more accomplished than the average person. Marilu Henner is a good example of that. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marilu_Henner https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marilu_Henner
- kiba 7y ago
  Your comment also hints at a cultural narrative that is common but not true, where people tend to see someone with extraordinary talents and “remind” everyone that it also means there must be some extraordinary deficiencies there too, because balance. It's not about balance. It's about what you can do with it or did with it.
narrator 7y ago
Another interesting savant with an IQ of 210: https://www.storypick.com/kim-ung-yong/ https://www.storypick.com/kim-ung-yong/ The guy actually had a productive career as a civil engineer and had a decent publication record after being exploited as a grunt differential equation solver at NASA for 10 years while a teenager.

unkulunkulu 7y ago

Did he understand those books? Was he able to present the premises, propositions and arguments from those books or just to recite them? The latter does not constitute even knowledge, just memory.

jcutrell 7y ago
For most (not Peek), memory and knowledge are necessarily linked since memory tends to work better when there is a previously existing connection to attach a new piece of information to. So, we don't tend to remember facts for the sake of facts. This obviously isn't always true, but for vast amounts of information, it would be very difficult to remember single "nodes" of information without having some connection to other information. Memory contestants use this to their advantage, by creating some sense of story and/or place to attach the otherwise arbitrary information, like digits or cards, to.

vinceguidry 7y ago

Scientific discovery may have been in the realm of individual accomplishment 200 years ago, now it requires organization. I wouldn't let this fact color your judgment. I'm sure he could have done a PhD like anyone else.

kiba 7y ago

Well, scientific discoveries required creativity and innovation, not just intelligence. At least, some of them probably do.

MagnumPIG 7y ago
In Kuhn's main book (scientific revolutions), he mentions creativity as vital to discoveries, multiple times. Not sure if intelligence is ever mentionned, but I doubt it because it can't be defined in a useful way.

itronitron 7y ago

Or if he did, he never bothered to tell anyone.

dahart 7y ago

This is a natural reaction and it’s common for people to remark on his high memory yet low cognition, but nonetheless this comment somewhat bothers me. This is my issue, not yours, and I may be misinterpreting, but here’s my thinking... Why is scientific discoveries even something he’s compared against? What does that have to do with the post? Do all people with excessive talents of some kind have to make scientific discoveries to prove it? How would you even presume to have any idea whether Kim had wisdom to share? Wisdom is very different from scientific discoveries, and why would anyone know that except himself or his family? How hard did you try to find whether he had wisdom to share? What if he had lots of wisdom that the rest of us couldn’t understand? Are you suggesting that someone doesn’t have wisdom unless they publish it? Let me ask this way: do you consider yourself smart & wise? What scientific discoveries have you made, what wisdom have you told the world? We should not draw broad conclusions about the way knowledge and intelligence work based on one person who’s in an extremely abnormal situation. In most normal people, knowledge and intelligence and wisdom are closely related, it takes knowledge (experience) to gain wisdom, it takes intelligence to formulate wisdom, and it takes wisdom to seek the kind of knowledge that can lead to intelligence. For most people, having a lot of knowledge would precipitate some wisdom automatically. Normal people spot patterns. You can’t normally have a lot of one without the others. Kim Peek is a stark outlier compared to how normal brains work. Your comment also hints at a cultural narrative that is common but not true, where people tend to see someone with extraordinary talents and “remind” everyone that it also means there must be some extraordinary deficiencies there too, because balance. There are some people that have extreme memory and are still smarter and more accomplished than the average person. Marilu Henner is a good example of that. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marilu_Henner https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marilu_Henner

kiba 7y ago
Your comment also hints at a cultural narrative that is common but not true, where people tend to see someone with extraordinary talents and “remind” everyone that it also means there must be some extraordinary deficiencies there too, because balance. It's not about balance. It's about what you can do with it or did with it.

narrator 7y ago

Another interesting savant with an IQ of 210: https://www.storypick.com/kim-ung-yong/ https://www.storypick.com/kim-ung-yong/ The guy actually had a productive career as a civil engineer and had a decent publication record after being exploited as a grunt differential equation solver at NASA for 10 years while a teenager.