these as facts and throw away the stereotype, we need to have statistical data as proof. Indeed this has been done by Professor Dean Simonton who researched that statistically geniuses are not nerds at all for the most part, actually far from it.

In search of the answer, I have done some self-reflecting

Society tends to hold that geniuses are nerdy and socially inept, but is this stereotype reality based? Actually this has been proven to be statistically false and not just by a little bit, in fact a nerdy genius is the exception to the rule. Very few geniuses are clumsy, nerdy or non-attractive.

How can this stereotype be so wrong? Well, perhaps this has been perpetuated by Hollywood because movie goers fell insecure about their intelligence levels and like to watch smart people portrayed in a negative light? This is my opinion of what has occurred and perhaps why this myth persists.

It would make sense that if the genes are doing their job then a genius would be good looking by human standards. Symmetrical people are generally chosen as pleasant looking or good looking, by choice. The more achieved people get to choose who they marry and thus pick more symmetrical mates? Seems like such an obvious thing (natural selection), that I cannot attribute too much discussion to this fact. This is my opinion on the issues.

I believe that common sense should prevail and such a theory passes the smell test, Occam's Razor and evolutionary study of mammals on the surface of Earth. But for anyone including myself to accept these as facts and throw away the stereotype, we need to have statistical data as proof. Indeed this has been done by Professor Dean Simonton who researched that statistically geniuses are not nerds at all for the most part, actually far from it.

In search of the answer, I have done some self-reflecting

this stereotype be so wrong? Well, perhaps this has been perpetuated by Hollywood because movie goers fell insecure about their intelligence levels and like to watch smart people portrayed in a negative light? This is my opinion of what has occurred and perhaps why this myth persists.

It would make sense that if the genes are doing their job then a genius would be good looking by human standards. Symmetrical people are generally chosen as pleasant looking or good looking, by choice. The more achieved people get to choose who they marry and thus pick more symmetrical mates? Seems like such an obvious thing (natural selection), that I cannot attribute too much discussion to this fact. This is my opinion on the issues.

I believe that common sense should prevail and such a theory passes the smell test, Occam's Razor and evolutionary study of mammals on the surface of Earth. But for anyone including myself to accept these as facts and throw away the stereotype, we need to have statistical data as proof. Indeed this has been done by Professor Dean Simonton who researched that statistically geniuses are not nerds at all for the most part, actually far from it.

In search of the answer, I have done some self-reflecting

that if the genes are doing their job then a genius would be good looking by human standards. Symmetrical people are generally chosen as pleasant looking or good looking, by choice. The more achieved people get to choose who they marry and thus pick more symmetrical mates? Seems like such an obvious thing (natural selection), that I cannot attribute too much discussion to this fact. This is my opinion on the issues.

I believe that common sense should prevail and such a theory passes the smell test, Occam's Razor and evolutionary study of mammals on the surface of Earth. But for anyone including myself to accept these as facts and throw away the stereotype, we need to have statistical data as proof. Indeed this has been done by Professor Dean Simonton who researched that statistically geniuses are not nerds at all for the most part, actually far from it.

In search of the answer, I have done some self-reflecting

ral selection), that I cannot attribute too much discussion to this fact. This is my opinion on the issues.

I believe that common sense should prevail and such a theory passes the smell test, Occam's Razor and evolutionary study of mammals on the surface of Earth. But for anyone including myself to accept these as facts and throw away the stereotype, we need to have statistical data as proof. Indeed this has been done by Professor Dean Simonton who researched that statistically geniuses are not nerds at all for the most part, actually far from it.

In search of the answer, I have done some self-reflecting

these as facts and throw away the stereotype, we need to have statistical data as proof. Indeed this has been done by Professor Dean Simonton who researched that statistically geniuses are not nerds at all for the most part, actually far from it.

In search of the answer, I have done some self-reflecting on this issue. Interestingly enough I have been called a genius enough times in my career and so, let's look at a hypothetical in that case; let's say for instance that I am a "genius" or borderline one? Whatever the definition is?

Well, judging from myself, I am extremely social (when I choose to be), a great conversationalist, above average looks, not by much, but enough to fit (symmetrical, patrician), and a super athlete in multiple sports. So, indeed I would have to conclude that what society calls geniuses or notables it has miss-labeled and stereotyped incorrectly.

But, go ahead and do your own study and see if any of this meets your own observational smell test and see if you agree with the psychological experts on this subject? I certainly hope this article is of interest and that is has propelled thought. The goal is simple; to help you in your quest to be the best in 2007. I thank you for reading my many articles on diverse subjects, which interest you.