The top 100 living geniuses

Who are the greatest living geniuses of today? Creators Synectics asked and answered this question. They did so by asking 4,000 Britons to list up to 10 living people they considered geniuses. They received just 1,100 nominations in reply (which would seem to suggest that many Britons are not interested enough in genius to answer a question about them). Only 60 per cent of these nominees were actually alive at the time - the dead ones being discounted owing to their poor health.

Now, I would like you to guess (without looking at the list below to cheat), which country had the most geniuses per head of population, on Earth (according to this survey)?

The answer was Britain. One Briton out of every 2.5 million is considered a living genius, by the respondents. For America, only one in every 6.9 million Americans was considered a genius.

If this survey is accurate, it would seem to suggest that something in the British culture and education system is more conducive to giving rise to genius than the American system. It may be, for instance, that the American system is insufficiently intellectually challenging in High School (and perhaps at Bachelor's degree level) to bring out the best in its students. Whatever the reason, it is something to be concerned about, for it suggests that America's intellectual pre-eminence in the world is not to be an enduring one. To make the comparison more clear, if these proportions for genius hold true, then Britain has 23 living geniuses and America, just 43. Thus, though America is far vaster in size, it does not have a comparable intellectual weight.

One reason for this could be that the people asked for their opinion were Britons. That might hold true in a world where information was not transmitted so readily. In the modern world, fame extends around the world. American geniuses are just as familiar to Britons as British ones - so too the geniuses from elsewhere in the world. So, I doubt that that is the explanation. The Britons would know of American geniuses (and those from elsewhere) and would therefore be able to vote for them.

Nor can we say that they were excluding Americans in preference for Britons, because they had up to 10 votes each: there was room for many a nationality there.

We have to consider, therefore, that this is a real difference and that American ingenuity is not, comparatively, what one would have thought. Perhaps they need to become more attractive to British immigrants.

A note: when this list was compiled, Bobby Fischer was still alive.

Other curiosities: J K Rowling is on the list. I am not sure that she is really a genius, for her work does appear to be rather derivative - yet she got the popular vote. Damien Hirst, too, has often been accused of plagiarism, by other artists - so his place, too, is questionable.

The funniest thing about the list is Richard Branson's description as a "publicist". In a way, that is exactly what he is, for he has built his Virgin empire on generating media coverage for himself.

The numbers after each listing are the score for the genius in terms of five factors that were used to rank them. The factors are: paradigm shifting; popular acclaim; intellectual power; achievement and cultural importance. It is notable that some geniuses secured a very low score. This means that though they were voted in by the people, the judges did not think them to have great power as geniuses. Quentin Tarantino best exemplifies this, on the bottom of the list with a score of 2. He, too, is known to be derivative in the extreme (a big chunk of Reservoir Dogs echoes Ringo Lam's City of Fire, very closely). Again, therefore, he shouldn't really be on the list at all.

Interestingly, the joint first place goes to two scientists: Albert Hoffman, the chemist who invented LSD - and Tim Berners-Lee who invented that other hallucinogenic distraction, the world wide web.

Please take a look at this list and give me your views, if you wish, as to whether these people should be on it, in the first place. Are they geniuses? Are they good enough to be in the top 100? Who is NOT on the list that you think should be? Is Britain truly producing more geniuses than any other country on Earth, per head of population?

I originally encountered this list on the Daily Telegraph website, from the UK.



1= Albert Hoffman (Swiss) Chemist 27
1= Tim Berners-Lee (British) Computer Scientist 27
3 George Soros (American) Investor & Philanthropist 25
4 Matt Groening (American) Satirist & Animator 24
5= Nelson Mandela (South African) Politician & Diplomat 23
5= Frederick Sanger (British) Chemist 23
7= Dario Fo (Italian) Writer & Dramatist 22
7= Steven Hawking (British) Physicist 22
9= Oscar Niemeyer (Brazilian) Architect 21
9= Philip Glass (American) Composer 21
9= Grigory Perelman (Russian) Mathematician 21
12= Andrew Wiles (British) Mathematician 20
12= Li Hongzhi (Chinese) Spiritual Leader 20
12= Ali Javan (Iranian) Engineer 20
15= Brian Eno (British) Composer 19
15= Damien Hirst (British) Artist 19
15= Daniel Tammet (British) Savant & Linguist 19
18 Nicholson Baker (American) Writer 18
19 Daniel Barenboim (N/A) Musician 17
20= Robert Crumb (American) Artist 16
20= Richard Dawkins (British) Biologist and philosopher 16
20= Larry Page & Sergey Brin (American) Publishers 16
20= Rupert Murdoch (American) Publisher 16
20= Geoffrey Hill (British) Poet 16
25 Garry Kasparov (Russian) Chess Player 15
26= The Dalai Lama (Tibetan) Spiritual Leader 14
26= Steven Spielberg (American) Film maker 14
26= Hiroshi Ishiguro (Japanese) Roboticist 14
26= Robert Edwards (British) Pioneer of IVF treatment 14
26= Seamus Heaney (Irish) Poet 14
31 Harold Pinter (British) Writer & Dramatist 13
32= Flossie Wong-Staal (Chinese) Bio-technologist 12
32= Bobby Fischer (American) Chess Player 12
32= Prince (American) Musician 12
32= Henrik Gorecki (Polish) Composer 12
32= Avram Noam Chomski (American) Philosopher & linguist 12
32= Sebastian Thrun (German) Probabilistic roboticist 12
32= Nima Arkani Hamed (Canadian) Physicist 12
32= Margaret Turnbull (American) Astrobiologist 12
40= Elaine Pagels (American) Historian 11
40= Enrique Ostrea (Philippino) Pediatrics & neonatology 11
40= Gary Becker (American) Economist 11
43= Mohammed Ali (American) Boxer 10
43= Osama Bin Laden (Saudi) Islamicist 10
43= Bill Gates (American) Businessman 10
43= Philip Roth (American) Writer 10
43= James West (American) Invented the foil electrical microphone 10
43= Tuan Vo-Dinh (Vietnamese) Bio-Medical Scientist 10
49= Brian Wilson (American) Musician 9
49= Stevie Wonder (American) Singer songwriter 9
49= Vint Cerf (American) Computer scientist 9
49= Henry Kissinger (American) Diplomat and politician 9
49= Richard Branson (British) Publicist 9
49= Pardis Sabeti (Iranian) Biological anthropologist 9
49= Jon de Mol (Dutch) Television producer 9
49= Meryl Streep (American) Actress 9
49= Margaret Attwood (Canadian) Writer 9
58= Placido Domingo (Spanish) Singer 8
58= John Lasseter (American) Digital Animator 8
58= Shunpei Yamazaki (Japanese) Computer scientist & physicist 8
58= Jane Goodall (British) Ethologist & Anthropologist 8
58= Kirti Narayan Chaudhuri (Indian) Historian 8
58= John Goto (British) Photographer 8
58= Paul McCartney (British) Musician 8
58= Stephen King (American) Writer 8
58= Leonard Cohen (American) Poet & musician 8
67= Aretha Franklin (American) Musician 7
67= David Bowie (British) Musician 7
67= Emily Oster (American) Economist 7
67= Steve Wozniak (American) Engineer and co-founder of Apple Computers 7
67= Martin Cooper (American) Inventor of the cell phone 7
72= George Lucas (American) Film maker 6
72= Niles Rogers (American) Musician 6
72= Hans Zimmer (German) Composer 6
72= John Williams (American) Composer 6
72= Annette Baier (New Zealander) Philosopher 6
72= Dorothy Rowe (British) Psychologist 6
72= Ivan Marchuk (Ukrainian) Artist & sculptor 6
72= Robin Escovado (American) Composer 6
72= Mark Dean (American) Inventor & computer scientist 6
72= Rick Rubin (American) Musician & producer 6
72= Stan Lee (American) Publisher 6
83= David Warren (Australian) Engineer 5
83= Jon Fosse (Norwegian) Writer & dramatist
83= Gjertrud Schnackenberg (American) Poet 5
83= Graham Linehan (Irish) Writer & dramatist 5
83= JK Rowling (British) Writer 5
83= Ken Russell (British) Film maker 5
83= Mikhail Timofeyevich Kalashnikov (Russian) Small arms designer 5
83= Erich Jarvis (American) Neurobiologist 5
91=. Chad Varah (British) Founder of Samaritans 4
91= Nicolas Hayek (Swiss) Businessman and founder of Swatch 4
91= Alastair Hannay (British) Philosopher 4
94= Patricia Bath (American) Ophthalmologist
94= Thomas A. Jackson (American) Aerospace engineer 3
94= Dolly Parton (American) Singer 3
94= Morissey (British) Singer 3
94= Michael Eavis (British) Organiser of Glastonbury 3
94= Ranulph Fiennes (British) Adventurer 3
100=. Quentin Tarantino (American) Filmmaker 2

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and four months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, four years and nine months, and Tiarnan, twenty-six months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind, niño, gênio criança, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks.)

Determining giftedness: the meaning of tests.

Yesterday someone arrived on my blog with an interesting search. They had written: "Child referred for giftedness, but average IQ result: why?" I have an answer.

IQ tests usually measure verbal and mathematical/logical skills. Some measure spatial skills as well. Therefore the test subject has to be good in all areas in order to score well. The problem with this, of course, is that some subjects are not. Many children are what I call "spikey". They have high skill in one area accompanied by more modest, or sometimes even low skill in another. A great artist, for instance, may have good spatial skills, but be lacking in the other areas. The same applies to a mathematician: their maths skills may be stunning, but they may be poor in verbal or spatial tasks. So too, a young writer, may shine in verbal areas but be unremarkable in the other domains. This presents us with a problem.

A child may be referred for giftedness because they are showing clear strengths in some observable domain. Everyone may be convinced they are "gifted" - but on a measure of IQ they may not achieve the 130 threshold traditionally regarded as defining of gifted. The question is: are these children still gifted? By the definition traditionally used, they are not. However, in a very real sense they are. To have a talent in any one area is enough to have a real world effect on their ability to do something special. Thus, one could definitely consider them gifted.

There are examples of one sided minds in history: Picasso, for one. He showed great spatial gifts, but apparently was unremarkable in other areas. A modern psychologist might say he wasn't gifted - but this is clearly absurd. He was a genius of art.

So, if your child seems to be gifted, is very strong at something, but the IQ tests show otherwise I would suggest looking more closely at the test results. Is there a spike in one area? Is the spike high enough to reach into the gifted territory? If so, your child could very well be gifted, in the true sense of the word.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and four months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, four years and nine months, and Tiarnan, twenty-six months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind, niño, gênio criança, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks.)

How to live a long time: be a parent.

I am aware that the title above might surprise people. Parents are an exhausted breed, always running around after little ones so much more energetic than themselves. Surely, this takes a toll on one's health? Surely, parents live shorter lives than lifelong singletons?

Well, the surprising answer, for some, is no. Being a parent is good for you. In a paper, Fertility and Life Span - Late Children Enhance Female Longevity, authors, Hans-Georg Müller (a), Jeng-Min Chiou (c), James R. Carey (b) and Jane-Ling Wang (a) discussed their findings as to the correlations between fertility and life span.

(a Departments of Statistics, University of California, Davis
b Departments of Entomology, University of California, Davis
c Division of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, National Health Research Institutes, Taipei, Taiwan)

They studied the life records of 1,635 French-Canadian women of the 17th and 18th centuries, paying particular heed to survival past the age of 50. Unexpectedly, they discovered that greater fertility meant greater postreproductive survival. In other words, the more kids you had, the older you got. This goes against the age old wisdom of women being worn out by incessant child birth - if anything it seems to show that women are sustained by the reproductive act.

They derived a mathematical relationship to determine the lifespan advantage. For every ten fold decrease in the age of your youngest child, at the age of 50, there is a 3.93 year longevity advantage. This is quite substantial. For instance, a 50 year old woman with a 2 year old child, is going to live 3.93 years longer than a similar 50 year old with a 20 year old child, typically.

Another paper further enlightens us as to what is happening. Does Having Children Extend Life Span? A Genealogical Study of Parity and Longevity in the Amish by Patrick F. McArdle, Toni I. Pollin, Jeffrey R. O'Connell, John D. Sorkin, Richa Agarwala, Alejandro A. Schäffer, Elizabeth A. Streeten, Terri M. King, Alan R. Shuldiner and Braxton D. Mitchell.

This paper studied 2015 Amish parents from 1749 to 1912 who survived to 50 years or more.

The correlation between number of children and longevity is striking - and it applies to both men and women. For men, each child fathered resulted in an average increase of 0.23 years of life, this was linear and applied to every child fathered. For mothers, there was an increase of 0.32 years per child up to 14. Beyond 14, there were health issues which negatively affected the life expectancy of the mother. Further analysis concluded that, for mothers, the key factor was the age of last child birth - this accounting for all the apparent benefit.

So, what are we to make of this? Many a bachelor or spinster, that I have encountered, has seemed quite pleased with themselves not to be "burdened" with children. They account themselves wise to have no such worries. They tend to believe that they will also live longer without the "stress" of parenthood. Yet, all is not as it seems. Parents live longer than those who never become so. The difference rises linearly with the number of children. Thus the more fertile you are, the longer you tend to live. (Or another way of putting it, the older you are, the more fertile you tend to have been.)

Having children gives you many joys that life does not otherwise offer. It also teaches you much more about life than being a bachelor or spinster ever could. To see a child grow up is the best education there is. It delights me to be able to write that being a parent is also a longevity indicator of sorts. So, not only do children fill your hours with unexpected joys - they give you more hours to fill, too.

It sounds like quite a bargain.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and four months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, four years and nine months, and Tiarnan, twenty-six months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind, niño, gênio criança, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks.)

What is said and what is done.

There is a difference between what is said and what is done. This is perhaps most noticeable, in some societies, in the utterances and actions of politicians.

A recent example were the parting words of Tharman Shanmugaratnam, the departing Minister of Education, in Singapore. He said: "Treat the brightest kids as the country's precious resources. Groom them, but more importantly, instil humility in them by making them aware of their weaknesses." and "You don't need a whole load of individuals in any society to do something exceptional but we need more of them in Singapore - people who want to break barriers essentially."

I found his words particularly interesting set against what we have seen of the actions and inactions (more to the point) of the education system with regards to our son, Ainan, who shows great scientific gift and promise. Despite his promise, however, it has been hard to secure what we have needed for him, here, in Singapore. If the State's actions were actually consonant with Tharman's words, it would have been easy to get his needs met. Over the past year and a half we found the Gifted Education branch ineffective at best, obstructive at worst. They did not seem to have Ainan's education at heart at all. We were left wondering why they even existed. That is why we gave up on them in the end.

Long-term readers will also know of our difficulties in securing homeschooling permission (still not given). In all, the state response to Ainan has been poor. There is, however, a promising development which I cannot speak of just yet - but it has taken too long to arrange: it should have taken a week, not a year and a half.

I would say, therefore, that Singapore's Ministers say the appropriate things with regards to gifted children - but I would say, from personal experience, that Singapore is not actually doing those things. It talks, but it doesn't act. The result, sadly, for Singapore, is that gifted children leave Singapore because they are unable to find a suitable education here. That is the reality which Tharman's fine words obscures.

If Singapore's inactions costs them a single genius, that is worth more than ten thousand imported scholars from China, in terms of what that one person could really do, given the chance to develop properly. As I have posted, in the past, though, the real focus does not seem to be on grooming local talent - but more on recruiting overseas talent to compensate for the outflow of frustrated local talent, who cannot get what they need here.

I hope that the incoming Education Minister listens to what Tharman has said, and actually makes a system that is truly supportive of the aspirations of its most gifted students. They could start by allowing us to homeschool Ainan.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and four months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, four years and nine months, and Tiarnan, twenty-six months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind, niño, gênio criança, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks.)

Signs of a child artist.

All parents wonder what their children are going to grow up to be. We can only watch and wonder. However, if we watch closely enough, we can often discern signs of the growing personality and type of gift of each of our children.

Tiarnan shows himself to be responsive to many things in his environment in an acute way. About ten days ago, he decided to play with the cards in his mother's wallet. He took them all out one by one - and then he did something very interesting, from the perspective of what it says about him. He arranged the cards into a humanoid shape, with two arms, two legs, a body and a head and declared his creation: "Robot".

It did, indeed, look like a robot - being an all plastic humanoid.

What I found interesting about this is that he didn't see what most people see in a set of plastic cards: nothing much. He saw the potential to make a visual statement with them.

Perhaps, he will one day be an artist, like his mother. It would be good to think so, for I think art is one of the most valuable of human endeavours (though it happens to be under-appreciated in Singapore, where we live).

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and four months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, four years and nine months, and Tiarnan, twenty-six months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind, niño, gênio criança, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks.)

Homeschooling in Singapore and the USA: a comparison

Without knowing how common homeschooling is, elsewhere, it is not possible to assess the Singaporean situation, fully. So, how common is homeschooling in the United States?

Well, Dr. Patricia Lines wrote a paper, found on the Discovery Institute site, that estimates that, in 2001-2002 there were up to 1,320,000 homeschooled children in America. The growth rate for the years 1995 to 1998 was noted to be 11 per cent, year on year - so there could be many more such children by now. Even at these figures, however, we can see how rare homeschooling is in Singapore, with its 280 homeschooled children.

As a ratio of population, the homeschooled children in America in 2001 to 2002 constituted about 1 in 227 or so. In Singapore, that figure is 1 in 16,428.

Apparently, 2 to 3 per cent of American children are homeschooled. Virtually none are, in Singapore. From the figures above, one can see that homeschooling is more than 72 times more common in America, than in Singapore.

Singapore has a long way to go before it can honestly speak of a homeschooling trend. If one were to look at the situation, impartially, with a global perspective, one could say, without doubt that there is almost no homeschooling at all happening in Singapore. The freedoms that would make it possible for homeschooling to be common, are not readily given. Until they are, homeschooling will remain a rare, mostly expatriate phenomenon in Singapore.

One big step towards making homeschool more likely for Singapore's children would be changing the name of the government department responsible for it from "Compulsory Education Unit" to virtually anything else. How about "The homeschooling unit" or "The Alternative Education Unit". Such names would inspire greater confidence in the positive intentions of the unit in question. As it is, the very name of the unit says you haven't got much hope of being allowed to homeschool.

I haven't got any figures to hand at this moment, but I would be very surprised if anywhere else in the world could challenge Singapore for the rarity of homeschooling. Singapore is probably "no.1" in not allowing children to homeschool. However, I don't think this is a "no.1" to be proud of. Parental choice is always a good idea in such important matters. You see, the parent is much more likely to know what is best for their children than the state. That appears to have been overlooked along the way.

If any of you are thinking of homeschooling your children in Singapore, I wish you luck. It is not an easy path to get permission. A year and a half into seeking it, we are still being fobbed off.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and four months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, four years and nine months, and Tiarnan, twenty-six months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind, niño, gênio criança, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks.)