Perspectives for Geniuses

Many publications about gifted people focus on children. On the one hand, child prodigies pose a well-studied subject of research; on the other, there are also reports about underachievers who don't do well at school despite their intellect. But what has been neglected so far is the lives of gifted adults. What do gifted children do when they reach the official age of maturity? In what professions do they work? How do they earn their livings?

My subjective view: Gifted people, especially those with a genius-level IQ (140 or higher), are definitely a fringe group. They are heterogenous but have some characteristics in common, such as being quick on the uptake and being able to think logically. I used to believe that academia would be the domain of geniuses. As a matter of fact, some notable child prodigies such as Norbert Wiener and Terence Tao became university professors. But these are exceptions: In reality, as Michael Wells Ferguson wrote in his legendary essay "The Inappropriately Excluded", chances to become a university professor seem to peak at an IQ of 135. By 140, they have already sunken by two thirds, according to Ferguson. My late friend and mentor Dr. Uwe Rohr also kept saying that universities aren't interested in hiring the highly gifted, except in a few subjects such as mathematics. So a lot of geniuses don't make a career in academia.

For some time, the IT industry has served as an alternative employer of geniuses. People with highly developed reasoning abilities were sought for as software engineers. But this has recently started to change because of the enormous progress artificial intelligence has made. Average minds can now use vibe coding to craft software.

So what do we really need geniuses for? Apparently for nothing particular. High intellectual ability seems to be more of something to be enjoyed in private than something that helps you make a career.

I was an excellent student, but disliked rote memorization. I often felt understimulated at school and longed for being confronted with concepts more difficult to grasp, rather than extra material to be memorized. In fact theoretical computer science was the only subject I really enjoyed studying.

Actually I think my knowledge of theoretical computer science would be good enough to teach others about it at university. But I'm not sure if I'd be an equally good researcher in this subject.

The fact that I'm working in the private sector as a software engineer shows that academia hasn't been interested in employing me. However, I do enjoy my job, and it's well-paid. So there isn't really much to regret, especially considering that Austrian universities employ personnel only on basis of temporary contracts while I have a permanent contract in the private sector. Personally, I'm well-off - but that doesn't go for all geniuses.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A note about Mensa

The page about Mensa on German Wikipedia ( https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mensa_in_Deutschland ) contains an interesting passage: The criterion for membership in Mensa is an intelligence quotient that is higher than that of 98% of the population. In the intelligence tests commonly used in Germany (mean 100, standard deviation 15), this corresponds to a score of 130 or higher. Mensa offers its own intelligence test for this purpose, which is evaluated by a psychologist. This test is approved for persons aged fourteen and older. External assessments, e.g. from registered psychologists, can also be accepted; for children under the age of fourteen, this is the only option. Almost half of new members submit external assessments. High IQ scores are often first achieved in tests independent of Mensa, which then draws attention to the topic of giftedness and Mensa. That means that almost half of the Mensa members have probably practiced dozens of intelligence tests until they once reached a sc...
Read more

Beyond IQ: Why We Should Measure the Intelligence of Expression

Abstract Traditional intelligence testing focuses almost exclusively on internal cognitive processing. Yet in real intellectual life—science, philosophy, leadership, and increasingly artificial intelligence—what ultimately matters is not merely having understanding, but expressing it. This article argues that intelligence assessment systematically neglects output quality and proposes a new complementary construct: the Externalization Quotient (EOQ) . 1. The Hidden Assumption Behind IQ Tests Modern intelligence tests are built on an implicit assumption: Intelligence is something that happens inside the mind. Input (perception, memory) and processing (reasoning, abstraction) are carefully operationalized and measured. Output—language, explanation, communication—is treated as a contaminant variable rather than an object of study. This design choice made sense historically. Psychometrics aimed to be: language-minimal culture-fair objectively scorable Expression, by...
Read more

The Technological Republic

In April 2026, the media reported about a manifesto which Alex Karp, one of the founders of the software company Palantir, had posted to X. Many of these reports were negative and considered the manifesto a threat. When I learned that the manifesto was essentially a summary of a book published a year ago, The Technological Republic, I decided to get hold of the book to learn the message Karp wants to spread.   The central message of this book is that the software industry should support the state and be closely aligned with the government to combine "a pursuit of innovation with the objectives of the nation". The authors speak of a "national plan" to which every citizen should be committed, which should involve research and development in space travel, medicine, and military. The military is especially important. The adversaries of the West, most notably China and Russia, will invest in upgrading their military with artificial intelligence, the authors are su...
Read more