When kids do linear algebra or they rise to the level of GM in chess within the first two decades of their lives, such people are obviously geniuses. Their intelligence is undeniable.

But it’s like moral/spiritual geniuses aren’t recognized in the same way, if at all. How come their intuitive expertise isn’t recognized so easily ?

  • ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    7 months ago

    Kant? St. Augustine? Siddhartha Budda? Epictetus? Plato? Hobbes?

    Ethical philosophy has had plenty of geniuses.

  • MrJameGumb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    7 months ago

    WTF is a “moral/spiritual genius”? That doesn’t even make sense. It sounds like a title someone just made up for themselves to feel important.

      • MrJameGumb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        7 months ago

        If I really think about it, someone who is considered to be an “expert” on morality would be either a philosopher or a religious leader and I doubt either of them would willing to call the other a “genius” since what is considered “morally right” can vary widely between cultures or even between individuals in the same culture as it’s a pretty personal thing.

        “Spirituality” is such a nebulous term that it could mean almost literally anything and thus is not really quantifiable even in the broadest terms

        Quite frankly if I met someone who claimed to be a “moral/spiritual genius” I would stay well away from them, because they’re either trying to sell you something or trick you into agreeing to something you wouldn’t otherwise agree to

  • TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    7 months ago

    Aren’t those subjective things? It’s easier to measure something like chess skill or whether or not someone can do complex math, but harder to quantify someone’s morality.

      • EdgeOfToday@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Mozart was a child prodigy. He started playing piano at age 4, and at age 5 he started composing piano pieces that are still played today. He wrote a symphony at age 8 and an opera at 14. There is a legend that as a child, he heard a choir sing an Allegri piece and went home and transcribed the entire thing from memory.

      • tobogganablaze@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I think with art it’s not so much the result but the process that make a genius. For example there is this guy that just has to look at some landscape for a minute … and then he can paint it from memory in increadible detail. That’s objectivly something that most humans just can’t do, that’s why it’s impressive.

  • Bridger@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Anyone operating at that level of morality wants nothing to do with humanity. It’s not that there aren’t any, it’s that you’ll never hear of them.

  • Bezier@suppo.fi
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    moral/spiritual genius

    Can you define these? I’m certainly having a hard time trying to.

    Morality is a subjective set of views. How can one be better at it than another? With “spiritual” intelligence, I guess we have to define the term itself before even thinking about how to measure it.

    Since you wrote this post, you probably have some idea of what a moral genius is supposed to be. Can you describe what makes a person a moral genius and maybe give an example?

    But yeah, if someone came to me and called themselves a moral or spiritual genius, I’d think they’re either full of it, or insane.

      • Deway@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Still, there are widely recognized universal moral values

        Not really

        like don’t kill other people.

        So culture have the death penalty. Many would consider killing in time of war as okay. What about self-defense? Or defense of others? Is it morality wrong? What about euthenasia? Does it only applies to human? Moral is subjective.

        .

  • db2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Joel Osteen thinks he’s what you describe. In reality he’s a disgusting narcissistic sociopath.

  • tobogganablaze@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Morals are ultimately subjective so it’s very easy to dismiss a complex moral argument by simply reject the premise.

    Imagine chess … but everyone get’s to modify the rules as they please. If chess was like that, there probably wouldn’t be any GM in it either.

  • Xantar@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Moral is dependent on the time and the place. What was morally justified yesterday might be offensive tomorrow.

    For example: Adolf Hitler could have been a moral genius in regards to eugenics whereas Martin Luther King would have been a moral idiot.

  • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    Being able to operate at expert level in one area of endeavor doesn’t guarantee that you will be at that same level in all things you do.