Two Definitions of the Word Genius

I am getting sick and tired of morons conflating the definitions of genius.

Listen up idiots! Listen real close. You need to listen closely because your brains work very slowly, but I still think I can understand if I work this response at your 5th grade reading level.

Ok look. Believe it or not, words have more than one definition! I know most Normie dumbasses say words have only one definition. This is one of the most trying things about dealing with your average idiot Normie – most Normies actually believe that words have only one definition! They don’t. Words often have more than one definition. In fact there are words that have up to 50 definitions in the best dictionaries.

The truth is that the word genius has at least two good definitions.

Definition 1: The first is simply a range on an IQ scale. Genius is generally classed as a score of 140+ on an IQ test. Sometimes the range is upped to 145+ or even 150+, but 140+ is the normal starting point for the range. Now, according to this definition, geniuses (or people with genius IQ’s) are so common that their existence is often better seen as mundane and trivial.

Geniuses are everywhere. They’ve probably been all around you most of your life. That is because in the US, 1% of the population are geniuses or have genius IQ’s. So in my small city of 50,000 people, there may well be up to 500 geniuses just in this little city. Walking around town you would find it very hard to believe that there are 500 geniuses in this place, or even 50, or even five for that matter, but that’s what the data tells us. On the other hand, my city’s collective IQ is probably below the 100 average for the US, so on that basis, there could well be less than 500 geniuses here.

But for a large city, it is probably accurate. The large city of Fresno is near me. It has 420,000 people, so there are 4,200 geniuses in that large city, which is an incredibly large number of people.

If you have a genius IQ, it is probably better to say that you have a genius IQ rather than saying you are a genius. It’s a bit presumptuous to say you are a genius anyway, and if you are only referring to IQ, you are probably being a bit disingenuous. This subject makes people angry enough as it is, so it’s best not to imply that your 140 IQ means you are the same as Einstein because that will just make them even angrier.

Definition 2: The other definition of genius is the one that even most Normies understand. You don’t have to be very smart to understand this definition, as seen by the fact that even most Normie idiots can figure it out.

This common definition of genius refers to people with truly spectacular abilities and achievements. One thinks of Einstein, Beethoven and people like that. There are also artistic geniuses, literary geniuses, musical geniuses, etc. Clearly most people with genius IQ’s are not qualified to be judged as true geniuses by the second definition.

The craziness comes because most idiots either have no idea that Definition 1 even exists, or they reject it outright as a definition of genius. Obviously it makes no sense to ever insist that a definition of a word is illegitimate. Clearly words mean whatever the damned dictionary says they mean, at the very least. I studied Semantics a bit, and one of the ruling tents of Semantics is that words mean whatever (large numbers of people) are using them to mean.

So every time you refer to Definition 1 as in, “I have a genius IQ,” a lot of Normie dumbasses start getting all upset and carrying on. They’re response is, “You are not a genius because genius means Definition 2 and you are not definition 2.” Trying to reason the Normie out of this retarded opinion of theirs is as hopeless as most conversations with retards is.

What is so trying is that every time I write about genius IQ’s (140+ IQ), a lot of moron commenters start getting upset and yelling that I am saying that anyone with an IQ over 140 is like Beethoven or Einstein. Of course I am not saying that at all, but try convincing a Normie of that.

An pinhead named Santoculto (now banned) was notorious for insisting that I was saying that everyone in definition 1 was actually qualified as Definition 2. I tried explaining this to him many times, but it never sunk in. I suppose people who live in favelas have some limits on their intelligence.

5 Comments

Filed under Intelligence, Psychology, Regional, USA

5 responses to “Two Definitions of the Word Genius

  1. Jason Y

    Always the question is, “A genius in what?” For instance, Eric Clapton was a guitar genius. Bruce Lee a martial arts one. How they fare in other subjects might be average or below.

    • However, a perfectly acceptable definition of “genius” is “IQ 140+”. Are you able to comprehend that that definition makes sense. Really you could call everyone with an IQ of 140+ a genius and it would make sense according to that definition anyway. Thing is when you do that, geniuses end up being about as common as dandelions.

      Why do you have a hard time understanding that one definition of genius is “IQ 140+.” Is there something about that definition that is hard to understand?

  2. Erksme

    Re-examine the figures in this article. 1% of 50000 = ….50? No, 500. So on, so forth.

    • I don’t understand what you’re trying to say, he did say 500. He just gave other estimates dividing by 10 in the case of an error concerning the IQ of his town

      I’m unsure on the usefulness of that method, but he did say 500.

  3. matt

    The word genius has an overblown aura in the contemporary Anglophone world, so I think many people don’t like it being used to describe someone who–as they see it–merely got a certain score on a test one morning. That being said, I notice that most people with high IQs also tend to be special or interesting in one way or another, often in ways that are quite surprising. So maybe the almost mystical connotations of the word are not totally off here, even though obviously not everyone with a 140+ IQ is Leonardo da Vinci. At the very least, they probably know why you don’t call him “da Vinci,” a la lowbrow novelist Dan Brown lol.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s