I can't remember where I learnt the definition Kirk.

There have been various classification systems for IQ.

Terman's classification was


140 and over: Genius or near genius
120-140: Very superior intelligence
110-120: Superior intelligence
90-110: Normal or average intelligence
80-90: Dullness
70-80: Borderline deficiency
Below 70: Definite feeble-mindedness

Terman wrote the Stanford Binet test which has a SD of 16.

Wechsler then thought that it would be more legitimate to base his classifications on the Probable Error (PE) so his classification was

Classification IQ Limits Percent Included
Very Superior 128 and over 2.2
Superior 120-127 6.7
Bright Normal 111-119 16.1
Average 91-110 50.0
Dull Normal 80-90 16.1
Borderline 66-79 6.7
Defective 65 and below 2.2

Mental deficiency used to be classified using the following technical terms that later slipped into common parlance
IQ Range Classification
70-80 Borderline deficiency
50-69 Moron
20-49 Imbecile
below 20 Idiot

What about the Theory Of Multiple Intelligences? I am probably going to let on my lack of genius by trying to explain it and doing it wrongly, but I will try anyway. Remember, I learned this theory years ago so please forgive goofs.

First, I can't remember who first came up with the idea but basically rather than just one area of intellegence based on IQ score I think he listed 7 but who knows there maybe more. Aside from cognitive intelligence, there was social intelligence, physical intelligence, and so on. The point is all humans are better in some areas than others. So while Michael Jordan may or may not have been good in school, he certainly is high in phsyical intelligence. No one can say he wasn't extremely gifted in that area or even a genius.

Many schools accept and have adapted this theory when teaching children. They look for the childs areas of strength and will use different modalities to teach to utilize these strengths. All kids learn differently and have different areas of intelligence.

I definitely believe there is more to genius than IQ score, though that is the original definition, I think it is flawed.

Renee

Found it, Here is a link. It is Howard Gardner.

http://www.ed.psu.edu/insys/ESD/gardner/MItheory.html

and another. THis one is better it looks like.

http://www.edwebproject.org/edref.mi.intro.html

You'll like the second one kirk. If you go to the link for MI theory it says that there are more intelligences proposed including existential intelligence

I think that just about all aspis are genius in their own areas, An aspi puts more hours into their interest then an NT could.

Tiffany for example, i bet you know far more about cars and most aspects about them then most and I would bet you have alot of origional ideas on them too.

MR X has prooved on many occasions to be an inovator, he is constantly attempting to come up with solutions to problems.

I invent every day, I reduced an hour job down to 12 minutes thirty seconds, and each time I time the process and attempt to see what is taking so much time and how can I make it faster and more efficient.

Given a challenge I would enjoy I can excell at most skills.

I do not think there is any aspi that is not the best in their area of interest or skill.

Kirk.

Here's my tale of Aspi genius .

When I was about 12 I entered a competition on a kids TV show, to make a lego technic model and send in a photo. Well I was very much into lego back then and my parents entered me, and I qualified for the finals - which was a huge suprise, as I didn't have much lego to work with compared with a lot of kids.

Now 1st prize: a trip to Legoland in Denmark and $500 of lego, this was not a small beans competition.
(2nd prize: $1000 of lego, 3rd prize: $500 of lego, those are NZ$ - about half as much as US$, still a huge amount of lego for a 12 year old)

Anyway, at the finals I had to compete with the 2 other kids in my age group, we were given 2 hours to make a model of a vehicle, and each put before more lego than I'd ever seen before. Now we had an evening before the competition to mingle with the other competitors and I'd become friends with one of the other contestants, lets call him Mitch (yay for my memory for names, but it might be right). I knew he was used to working with a lot of lego, the model he entered for the first stage was HUGE and complex, I knew for sure I couldn't beat him by making a bigger, better model, but I decided I'd like to win anyway (I'd dismissed contestant #3 as a non-threat).
Now something I'm VERY good at is strategy, lego was my special interest, strategy is my area of true genius.
If I can't win the game, I'll win the meta-game instead; I decided to flirt with the rules and make 3 seperate models that worked together, each individual model within the size bounds that I was used to, and together being complex & demonstrate enough technical skill for me to win. I risked being disqualified, but otherwise I was guaranteed to not win - a fair tradeoff!

In astounding time managment skills I completed the truck/trailer/buggy right at "Times Up!" (you can probably guess I had a pretty good mental image of what I was building), the judges and my mum came over as I connected the truck and trailer, lowered the ramp and loaded the buggy onto the trailer. My Mum later said she thought "what the heck?!!" when she saw what I'd built, but it made sense when I put it all together. Mitch had built a HUGE and awe-inspiring car, I knew I'd have lost for sure if I'd stuck with a single model. Contestant #3 had built a small, relatively unimpressive truck.

The judges deliberated for HOURS, I talked to Mitch and wondered if I'd come first or third.
I won .

I got on the TV show with the 2 winners from the other age groups, my 15 minutes of fame.

Legoland was great, the only bit I didn't like was that I didn't get to spend enough time playing with lego!

WOW, we have a star amongst us!

Congratulations

Congratulations, Unending!

The funny thing is I was naturally a minor celebrity at my school for a while, and the teachers tolerated me bringing lego models to school for a few weeks. I was even pretty confident, but then some kids started trying to be friends with me because I was popular, and a teacher (and umm, he was the headmaster too, and my main antagonist at school, since he thought I was a gifted but really lazy student) said that I should stop expecting to be treated differently because I was a minor celebrity (can't remember what words he used, a bit more subtle than that, but I don't have a problem understanding subtley), that peeved me because I wasn't expecting any special treatment I was just more confident. Well I went back to my old sullen and reserved self. If only those authority figures knew the power of suggestion they wielded .

Anyway it sure was a lot of fun while it lasted, and I think I'll get some of the memorabilia from my parents home, to remind me of how cool it is to live my special interest(s) .

That remembrance of incidents suppressed is what makes this Board so therapeutic to some of us. The more we see what others have experienced, the more we feel free to be ourselves, and this allows us to feel more relaxed and whole. You may find that you will recall more and more suppressed 'things' from your past, and I hope you feel free to share them.

I loved your lego adventure, but also value your addition of the headmaster's foolishness.

Dad's a mechanical genius, though he tells me he feels he doesn't really know what he's doing and is repairing things through pure luck (it's not luck). I had a perfect score on my verbal SATs as well. I'm supposed to be brilliant in philosophy, and to be very talented in art and writing. Like my dad, however, I often feel that my schoolwork has perhaps gotten good grades by accident, or perhaps aroused a sense of pity in my teachers. (I know that's not it, but it still feels like it.)