Q&A: The Decline of the Generations
The Decline of the Generations
Question
I wrote this title jokingly… but it’s not completely detached from reality.
A question: I’ve often heard that studies say a person reaches the peak of his intellect at age 24–30, and from there his intellectual abilities gradually decline like a weakening spring. a0
I wanted to ask the Rabbi, as a genius who has passed 60 (and it seems that you’re not weakening intellectually with the years)…
Does the Rabbi feel that at age 24, for example, he was sharper than he is today? (Because one could say that in terms of flashes of brilliance there has been some decline, but at the right ages the Rabbi poured broad patterns of thought into his mind, and today everything is simply [like review, or an analogy to a familiar principle]).
I hope I phrased myself properly; in any case, I think the direction of the question is understandable.
Have a good and blessed night.
Answer
This is a bit embarrassing, but I’ll answer anyway.
First, I’m not a genius. In my life I’ve met a few geniuses (very few), and their smallest finger is thicker than my waist. Anyone who has met a genius knows what I’m talking about. It’s something different from mere talent. I’ll add that this really isn’t a matter of modesty. Unfortunately, I’m not overly afflicted with that virtue, and I’m also fairly clear-eyed.
I think that most of my skills in analysis and thinking come from experience. I’ve made extensive use of the tools of logic and analysis across many fields, I’ve engaged critically with quite a few areas (and it doesn’t hurt to have a bit of fearlessness when entering different topics and fields, along with giving up on perfectionism). Over the years, you accumulate information and arguments, and each one finds its place in the overall picture (especially if it matters to you to build an overall picture, and you work at it). Over time, every argument and every piece of information falls into place and integrates with more things, and so the picture becomes clearer, more stable, and more complete.
I would add that people tend to assign far too much weight to talent, but skill and experience are no less important, and perhaps more so. I’ve met geniuses who failed quite a bit in analysis and argument because of lack of skill. Sometimes they said something correct but didn’t formulate it precisely.
Second, regarding the thesis of decline with age, this is mainly said about mathematics, where it is commonly accepted that a person reaches the height of his achievements in his twenties. But even there, it’s a myth that is far from accurate. Even if sharpness declines (and I’m not sure even about that), I think sharpness is not the sole criterion. There is also maturity and ripeness of thought, which come with experience and age. By the way, this is also why there are quite a few very young geniuses in mathematics, but far fewer in physics, or in literature and philosophy. Mathematics is a formal language, and the achievements there are mainly due to intellectual brilliance. In the other fields, maturity and ripeness are required, and sheer intellectual talent is not enough. This is of course much too rough a description, but there is something to it.
At a young age, there is more willingness to examine things from angles different from what you’re used to. But that’s something one can work on, and one need not fear changing positions or becoming fixed in the place where one is. Changing positions at an older age looks childish and unserious to people, but in my view the opposite is true. There is a complex interplay between the consolidation of your views over the years and the willingness to keep changing and improving them. And that brings me to the last point.
And beyond all that, one must remember that youth has an inherent advantage: it comes before old age. Therefore, once you discovered something at a certain stage, later on you obviously won’t discover it again. It’s like records in sports that keep improving. And the reason for that is logical: people keep trying until the next record is reached. And of course it always comes after the previous one.
Discussion on Answer
If I may ask—who are those few geniuses the Rabbi met?
I won’t get into names here.
A very beautiful answer,
It’s sad to meet a genius who has it bad, and I know two such people—one, according to him, on the physical side, and one on the psychological side.
Hello, honorable Rabbi,
Some claim that Netanyahu is among the smartest people in the world. (Business Insider even defined him as one of the 18 smartest people in the world).
Source:
https://www.globes.co.il/news/article.aspx?did=1000637027
Over Netanyahu’s years in office, one can see his influence in many fields. It is also evident that he saw the full picture (which you mentioned above) even before many people saw it over the years, and they wondered what exactly he intended to do.
As a result, we’re talking about the creation of a free-market economy at the beginning of his tenure (when he was Finance Minister), and even reaching diplomatic achievements with Arab states—which completely changed the prevailing paradigm among his critics.
Does the Rabbi think Netanyahu improves with age?
To Moshe Israeli,
With all due respect to those articles about Netanyahu (and there isn’t much respect), Business Insider has no great value in matters of wisdom—if that term even means anything here, which it really doesn’t. The proper terms are talent and intelligence, and certainly not genius. That ranking is simply ridiculous. Talented people don’t go into politics. They go into physics, mathematics, philosophy, music (composition), certain branches of art (painting, literature, poetry), or chess. These IQ rankings (which those dim-witted writers presumably rely on) don’t represent very much. They are more indicative of various mental skills. But talent and creativity are much more than that. I doubt that on any measure of intelligence (which, as noted, is hard to characterize at all—it’s an amorphous measure), Netanyahu is even in the top percentile of human beings (perhaps not even in the top decile).
And since genius was mentioned: there’s a saying that what a talented person can do, a genius must do. A genius is someone who has a different spirit within him. He has explosive creativity. Depth. A perpetual fire burns within him. He possesses a lofty soul. That’s why he also appears to the masses as half-crazy (and over time geniuses also tend to go completely crazy). In relation to his field of expertise, he is possessed, and he accords it supreme honor, while tending to neglect (wrongly) everything outside his field. Also, genius is universal. It isn’t really focused on just one field. There’s no such thing as being a genius in one field and not in another. Someone who is a genius is simply a genius, that’s all. Naturally, his genius will express itself mainly in the field he chose, but in principle, in any field he turns his hand to, his genius will show itself. That is also, characteristically, true of intelligence—but in genius it is expressed far more intensely.
Small correction: the top decile today is something between 700 million and 800 million people. Netanyahu is certainly in it. And based on that, he is probably also included in the top percentile. But in the top thousandth he probably isn’t, and certainly not among the 18 most talented people in the world. That’s just ridiculous.
Immanuel, a bit late, but thank you for the amazing description of genius.
"Also, genius is universal. It isn’t really focused on just one field. There’s no such thing as being a genius in one field and not in another. Someone who is a genius is simply a genius, that’s all."
I’m a bit doubtful about what you said here (and even more doubtful that you’ll see this comment at all), since a genius in painting and art usually does not tend to be a genius (or even especially ‘talented’) in fields like mathematics and physics.
But it is true that a ‘genius’ in professions like physics and mathematics will usually also be a genius in various analytical fields (although, somewhat like what I said above, the reverse is probably not true—he likely will not be a genius in painting and art).
Really, really, huge thanks to the Rabbi!
An exceptionally detailed answer, truly down to earth.