"Does Enormously High IQ Always Point to Greatness?"

No.

Wasn't it Einstein who said he'd rather have imagination than intelligence?

Well, he had a lot of both. A highly creative man and independent thinker.

Einstein never took an IQ test but some have rated him as being within the 160 to 190 range. Creatives tend not to have measurably high IQs, averaging in the 120s. Yet their impact on society can be considered great, if not phenomenal.

How smart is Steve Jobs? Smart enough to hire a lot of great talent. More creative than Bill Gates. Do these men have high IQs?

Years ago I read up on some of Terman's smart young people. They weren't, as you stated, "engineered to be great." They were smart kids who tested in the gifted range (above 135) who tended to be well-adjusted and, for the most part, in loving families and were available for Terman and his research associates to follow up on. They didn't fit the stereotype of being weak and unable to run or throw a ball; they were in fact mostly physically adept at sports. And they grew up to be smart old people with careers and families. Don't remember if greatness was something any of them sought or got.

But here's a quote from an online article:

"Terman pledged not to release their names, and most never publicly declared their participation. Nonetheless, about 30 names have come out over the years -- including several Termites whose involvement was announced only in their obituaries. The group included some prominent figures, like physiologist Ancel Keys, who discovered the link between cholesterol and heart disease; physicist Norris Bradbury, former director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory; Life journalist Shelley Smith Mydans, '36; and Hollywood big shots Edward Dmytryk and Jess Oppenheimer (see sidebar). We also know that two children who were tested but didn't make the cut -- William Shockley and Luis Alvarez -- went on to win the Nobel Prize in Physics. According to Hastorf, none of the Terman kids ever won a Nobel or Pulitzer."

Source: www.stanfordalumni.org/news/m...an.html

That is a great question, Moon...

It seems to revisit the 'nature or nurture' debate, in terms of which contributes more to future success; innate genius or an enriched environment at some crucial early stage.

Personally, I don't think that success is the inevitable perquisite of genius in art or politics.

Ability to focus, hard work and devotion, and cultivating a belief in oneself and one's cause, are still in order.

I console myself (somewhat) with thoughts like the following, from George Bernard Shaw;

"There is nothing more mischievous than the notion that my works are the mere play of a delightfully clever and whimsical hero of the salons; they are the result of perfectly straightforward drudgery, beginning in the ineptest novel-writing juvenility, and persevered in every day for years. Anybody can get my skill for thee same price; and a good many people could probably get it cheaper."

My first test was taken at 15 my second was at 27. I score above 135 (I'm not giving my score) and I feel that I have not even come close to greatness.

The nature vs. nurture point is very valid. My parents and my Godfather died when I was 8 and I was left with my bio mother who neglected me then gave me to the state. This left me with none of the opportunities my parents would have provided me. The original plan was home school (when I went into kindergarten, they asked me to count to 100, I did and then asked if they wanted me to do any addition, subtraction, multiplication or division. I had been doing long division as a game with my fathers friend. They didn‘t know what to do with me, so they ignored me), private instruction, maybe private school then Vassar then Yale. My father used to get me into anything he could to encourage my "mind Olympic training" as he called it. It didn't happen because they all died in a plane crash.

So, and it's not meant to be a sob story, here I am living in Portland, practicing massage, writing poetry, producing and promoting music events and philosophizing with my friends over coffee and drinks. A far cry from the vision of a surgeon from the Ivy League...

My cousin on the other hand, is another story. He read the dictionary by 3 1/2, the Encyclopedia Britannica by 4 and was composing music by 5. He was raised by my aunt and uncle to be Zen Buddhist and vegetarian. Was never skipped ahead and instead was the teacher's assistant for all the advanced classes through school. He got all his credits by teaching. I remember when I was a Junior in HS, he rambled off all the planets and the atmospheric make up of Neptune and Venus and then compared the two, he was 9. An amazing genius! He just had his 5th symphony performed by the University Wisconsin Madison Student Orchestra for their final. It was the first time they performed a students piece.

I can truly say it is a nature vs. nurture issue and that no, IQ does not always lead to greatness but it almost always leads to madness sooner or later.