NationStates Jolt Archive

Let's say that a girl is born into this world with enhanced mental capabilities and excels at mathematics, comprehension of literature, and all fields of sciences. She also finds these things to be extremely easy for her to do and can figure out things nobody else can. Do you think she would owe it to the world to do something great? Does anyone owe the world anything at all? If a scientist creates a cure for cancer but doesn't tell anyone would that be wrong or totally acceptable?

There's a little something called 'free will....'

I don't think she owes anything to the world; that decision is up to her. However, if you squander that talent and use it for nothing you are a total failiure and should be treated as utterly worthless, because you wasted what was given you and silenced the hope of everyone who could have benefitted from your work. It's the ultimate example of selfishness.

I DON'T OWE YOU GUYS ANYTHING!

Seriously though, it's her choice.

.....If a scientist creates a cure for cancer but doesn't tell anyone would that be wrong or totally acceptable?

That is totally wrong.not only because telling the world about it would save lives,but it's the duty of scientists to publish any discovery they make so others can make use of what they have learned.
Let's say that a girl is born into this world with enhanced mental capabilities and excels.......... Do you think she would owe it to the world to do something great?
if the girl in question were religious she would surely owe it to god(or whatever deity she was raised to worship) to do something great with her gifts,as in her mind they would come from him(or who/whatever)

Personally i think she would owe it to herself not to waste her gifts.why would she,after years of improving them,let them go to waste?

I would also agree that the decision would be hers, however if I were as intelligent as her I would feel 100% obligated to share my knoweledge and findings with the world. What would be the use of keeping all that to yourself?

I would also agree that the decision would be hers, however if I were as intelligent as her I would feel 100% obligated to share my knoweledge and findings with the world. What would be the use of keeping all that to yourself?
Well yeah I'd do it too....for the money of course.

I don't think she owes anything to the world; that decision is up to her. However, if you squander that talent and use it for nothing you are a total failiure and should be treated as utterly worthless, because you wasted what was given you and silenced the hope of everyone who could have benefitted from your work. It's the ultimate example of selfishness.I would largely agree with this. If she were to invent a cure for cancer, though, I would say she ought to share it with the world - that's an immense discovery that would benefit everyone (sadly, the vast majority of us at least know someone who's been afflicted with this terrible illness).

However, whether or not she motivates herself to actually find it in the first place is a different issue; she does not owe the world the actual use of her intelligence per se (although as Vetalia says, it would be a shame to waste it). But if she has already used the intelligence initially (for whatever reason), and as a result discovered or created something of this magnitude, it would surely be irresponsible not to reveal it.

(Edit - rereading that, it sounds a bit incoherent :( I hope I've made my distinction clear somehow!)

Well yeah I'd do it too....for the money of course.

Me too, cause Brad don't work for free! ;)

*sings the New Jack City theme song*

Let's say that a girl is born into this world with enhanced mental capabilities and excels at mathematics, comprehension of literature, and all fields of sciences. She also finds these things to be extremely easy for her to do and can figure out things nobody else can. Do you think she would owe it to the world to do something great?

No.

Imagine that this hypothetical girl has all the talents you named, but doesn't happen to like math, literature, or science. What she likes is cooking, and she's merely passable at it. Would anyone argue that she should be barred from getting a low-paying job as a cook (which would make her happy, but accomplish nothing much for society) and should instead be obligated to head a medical research team?

No.

Imagine that this hypothetical girl has all the talents you named, but doesn't happen to like math, literature, or science. What she likes is cooking, and she's merely passable at it. Would anyone argue that she should be barred from getting a low-paying job as a cook (which would make her happy, but accomplish nothing much for society) and should instead be obligated to head a medical research team?

That is an important aspect of this. If she doesn't particularly enjoy those things she shouldn't have to do them, but if she KNOWS she can do things nobody else can, and she KNOWS she could potentially save lives by doing what she can do, she should at least attempt to do something with those abilities. If she doesn't I wouldn't judge her, because it wouldn't be her fault for being born with her abilities, but if you have them use them! If I knew I could save lives with my knoweledge I'd do it right away without second thoughts, even if I didn't enjoy the process.

No.

Imagine that this hypothetical girl has all the talents you named, but doesn't happen to like math, literature, or science. What she likes is cooking, and she's merely passable at it. Would anyone argue that she should be barred from getting a low-paying job as a cook (which would make her happy, but accomplish nothing much for society) and should instead be obligated to head a medical research team?


well he said that she exceled at them,i took that to mean she worked at them and did very well.if she didnt like math,science,etc then she'd surely be intelligent enough to fail some tests on purpose so she wouldn't be pressured into a job she hates.

I don't think she owes anything to the world; that decision is up to her. However, if you squander that talent and use it for nothing you are a total failiure and should be treated as utterly worthless, because you wasted what was given you and silenced the hope of everyone who could have benefitted from your work. It's the ultimate example of selfishness.
(Exactly what Vetalia said above.) Also, if she doesn't use her gifts to better society, she doesn't better her own life either. She's not going to get paid much for scrapping her brilliance to work at a fast food joint. :rolleyes:

I don't see the incentive to pass up the Nobel in this hypothetical situation.

If someone is born with uber intelligence do they owe the world something great?

I am working on it. Give me time.

well he said that she exceled at them,i took that to mean she worked at them and did very well.if she didnt like math,science,etc then she'd surely be intelligent enough to fail some tests on purpose so she wouldn't be pressured into a job she hates.

Well, I suppose I have an oddball perspective on the question, since as a child, I was somewhat of a crazy prodigy, quite like the girl described above. In general, math, science, and literature have never been things I have to work at at all. I won national competitions without studying and teachers made up entirely new grading scales for my sake. Do I think I'm better than anyone else because of this? Heck no. Do I think I "owe" the world something because of this? Heck no again. When I got to college, did I deliberately major in a subject unrelated to the pursuits I was ridiculously talented in because I was utterly sick of being the best student in the class by a landslide? Yup. Was I happier that way? Oh yes.

Given this, I rather overwhelmingly feel that people should not be expected to live up to others' expectations based on talents beyond their control. It's not to my credit or my fault that I could do those things, so why should anyone expect anything of me because of it?

Oh, and there is practically no worse feeling in the world than the one you get after deliberately sabotaging your own grades. I did it a few times in elementary school in a vain attempt to keep the other kids from beating the crap out of me, and in some ways it felt worse than the beatings themselves.

Making someone do anything just because they're capable is a bad idea. Let's say a dentist is great at what he does, but he also hates whatever you are. Do you really want this guy to be forced to work on your teeth? Are you really going to feel good about buying a car from someone who didn't want to sell it to you? How about eating at a restaurant where the chef has a grudge against you?

The best that society can do is to proportionately reward people for following the paths that are most beneficial to society as a whole. If you paid the hypothetical gal $18.5 million per year for her work, I seriously doubt she could pass it up. If she's worth that much to society for her mathematic or whatever contributions, then everybody wins. If she still doesn't want to do it, I go back to my original argument--if someone is so opposed to doing a type of work that they would turn down an easy $18.5 million per year, do you really want to deal with the consequences of trying to make them?

Now, if you're just talking about whether she SHOULD work in the field of science or math or whatever, I believe that Spiderman's Uncle Ben said it best: with much power comes much responsibility. She shouldn't be made to do the work, but she is responsible for consequences of her decisions.

Let's say that a girl is born into this world with enhanced mental capabilities and excels at mathematics, comprehension of literature, and all fields of sciences. She also finds these things to be extremely easy for her to do and can figure out things nobody else can. Do you think she would owe it to the world to do something great? Does anyone owe the world anything at all? If a scientist creates a cure for cancer but doesn't tell anyone would that be wrong or totally acceptable?

Cancer cure aside, she owes the world absolutely nothing. It isn't that she owes the world a cure for cancer, either; but once one is found, it is sadistic to not release it.

I agree with the posters who bring up the subject's happiness and fulfillment. I don't think anybody's moral duty should require that they be miserable, aside from the most extreme circumstances, like a French resistance fighter during the Nazi occupation or something.

On the other hand, I think particularly slow people have an obligation to not interfere with human progress. If you need to read the instructions on PopTarts, you should avoid leadership roles.

Let's say that a girl is born into this world with enhanced mental capabilities and excels at mathematics, comprehension of literature, and all fields of sciences. She also finds these things to be extremely easy for her to do and can figure out things nobody else can. Do you think she would owe it to the world to do something great? Does anyone owe the world anything at all? If a scientist creates a cure for cancer but doesn't tell anyone would that be wrong or totally acceptable?
well, as a general matter, if you want to go live on an island or whatever it's up to you. But nobody will discover the cure for cancer without working with others and building on the years and years of research that went before, so in that case they owe it to the world to publish it.

Well, if she discovered a cure for cancer, she must have been doing it for a purpose! For most scientists that purpose is to publish it, no?

Well, if she discovered a cure for cancer, she must have been doing it for a purpose! For most scientists that purpose is to publish it, no?

Or make money. Lots and lots of it. If someone discovered a cure for cancer with a 100% success ratio, you can bet your last dollar that an arm and a leg would be charged for it.

Or if it was published with no copyright whatsoever, the pharmaceutical industry will make all sorts of claims that it doesn't work or its dangerous to drown you out. Sad, but it happens.

A great deal of my work has revolved around this question, so my answer could get quite long. You all will just have to buy a ticket, providing I can get you a chance ;)

I tend to come down on the side of no. I us Lunatic Goofballs as my example, but I don't want to drag him into another one of these.

But an interesting question has been raised with the cancer cure-what if someone did discover a cure as a personal challenge, and was egotistical enough and felt that the world was undeserving or whatever reason and just decided-Fuck you all. S/he demonstrates it works and then throws up the finger, "You all don't deserve it. I'm keeping it to myself." Destroys everything.

How would the world react? Certainly someone would try to go backwards on the process to figure out how it was done. Someone would try and steal it (assuming s/he kept some notes or something that wasn't destroyed.) Would there be a legal option? Perhaps if s/he worked with a grant, likely. It's interesting....

A great deal of my work has revolved around this question, so my answer could get quite long. You all will just have to buy a ticket, providing I can get you a chance ;)

I tend to come down on the side of no. I us Lunatic Goofballs as my example, but I don't want to drag him into another one of these.

But an interesting question has been raised with the cancer cure-what if someone did discover a cure as a personal challenge, and was egotistical enough and felt that the world was undeserving or whatever reason and just decided-Fuck you all. S/he demonstrates it works and then throws up the finger, "You all don't deserve it. I'm keeping it to myself." Destroys everything.

How would the world react? Certainly someone would try to go backwards on the process to figure out how it was done. Someone would try and steal it (assuming s/he kept some notes or something that wasn't destroyed.) Would there be a legal option? Perhaps if s/he worked with a grant, likely. It's interesting....


Well, if something like that happened, it wouldn't belong to one person. The facilities and funds needed for something like that are outside of the reach of the wealthiest person, so the corporation (or, more likely, corporations) that funded the research would own it.

Here is the Parable of Talents from the Bible:

Jesus tells the following parable in the Gospel of Matthew,

"For it is just like a man about to go on a journey who called his own slaves, and entrusted his possessions to them. And to one he gave five talents, to another, two, and to another, one, each according to his own ability; and he went on his journey.

"Immediately the one who had received the five talents went and traded with them, and gained five more talents. In the same manner the one who had received the two talents gained two more. But he who received the one talent went away and dug in the ground, and hid his master’s money.

"Now after a long time the master of these slaves came and settled accounts with them. And the one who had received the five talents came up and brought five more talents, saying, ‘Master, you entrusted five talents to me; see, I have gained five more talents.’ His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful slave; you were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things, enter into the joy of your master.’

"The one also who had received the two talents came up and said, ‘Master, you entrusted to me two talents, see, I have gained two more talents.’ His master said to him, ‘Well done good and faithful slave, you were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.’

"And the one also who had received the one talent came up and said, ‘Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you scattered no seed. And I was afraid, and went away and hid your talent in the ground; see, you have what is yours.’ But his master answered and said to him, ‘You wicked lazy slave, you knew that I reap where I did not sow, and gather where I scattered no seed. Then you ought to have put my money in the bank, and on my arrival I would have received my money back with interest. Therefore take away the talent from him, and give it to the one who has the ten talents.’ For to everyone who has shall more be given, and he shall have an abundance; but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away. And cast out the worthless slave into the outer darkness; in that place there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." (Matt 25:14-30).

Also quoting Spiderman: "With great powers come great responsabilities"

Or make money. Lots and lots of it. If someone discovered a cure for cancer with a 100% success ratio, you can bet your last dollar that an arm and a leg would be charged for it.

Or if it was published with no copyright whatsoever, the pharmaceutical industry will make all sorts of claims that it doesn't work or its dangerous to drown you out. Sad, but it happens.

And in order to make money she has to publish it, which means she can't keep it for herself.

Here is the Parable of Talents from the Bible:

Jesus tells the following parable in the Gospel of Matthew,

"For it is just like a man about to go on a journey who called his own slaves, and entrusted his possessions to them. And to one he gave five talents, to another, two, and to another, one, each according to his own ability; and he went on his journey.

"Immediately the one who had received the five talents went and traded with them, and gained five more talents. In the same manner the one who had received the two talents gained two more. But he who received the one talent went away and dug in the ground, and hid his master’s money.

"Now after a long time the master of these slaves came and settled accounts with them. And the one who had received the five talents came up and brought five more talents, saying, ‘Master, you entrusted five talents to me; see, I have gained five more talents.’ His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful slave; you were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things, enter into the joy of your master.’

"The one also who had received the two talents came up and said, ‘Master, you entrusted to me two talents, see, I have gained two more talents.’ His master said to him, ‘Well done good and faithful slave, you were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.’

"And the one also who had received the one talent came up and said, ‘Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you scattered no seed. And I was afraid, and went away and hid your talent in the ground; see, you have what is yours.’ But his master answered and said to him, ‘You wicked lazy slave, you knew that I reap where I did not sow, and gather where I scattered no seed. Then you ought to have put my money in the bank, and on my arrival I would have received my money back with interest. Therefore take away the talent from him, and give it to the one who has the ten talents.’ For to everyone who has shall more be given, and he shall have an abundance; but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away. And cast out the worthless slave into the outer darkness; in that place there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." (Matt 25:14-30).

Also quoting Spiderman: "With great powers come great responsabilities"
Pff. Well sure-but it doesn't say what kinda talents-

I mean, the cat with one might have been something like "Can bend his knees backward" or "Sense Percipitation"....Meanwhile the guy with five gets ones like "Natural Camera Presence, media savvy," and "109 mph Fastball." Knowing he couldn't get crap except 'gross' or 'hunghhh. Look at that.' and was facing a bitchslap from his master should he lose this dumbass talent he went and buried.

You know, all this time the masters' had it out for the third slave anyway-nothins' ever good enough. You know what? Fuck the master-he can take that talent and shove it up his four ball jugglin' ass. Third slave doesn't have to take this crap, ever hear of a thing called the Emancipation Proclemation? Third slave is fuckin' out of here...




Yeah, I know.

Let's say that a girl is born into this world with enhanced mental capabilities and excels at mathematics, comprehension of literature, and all fields of sciences. She also finds these things to be extremely easy for her to do and can figure out things nobody else can. Do you think she would owe it to the world to do something great?<snip>



ummm... a person with all of the above would certainly be of interest to one or more Government agencies... taken away for further studies... in the interest of national security.
... if you are THAT good, better keep it quiet.

And no, he/she doesn't owe the world a thing. It's a genetic lottery.

Well, Im not what I would consider "uberly intelligent", but I have been tested at genuis level IQ, long ago.
While Im probably not likely to invent the better lightbulb, or cure any diseases, growing up, my teachers and school administrators decided frequently that more should be expected of me.

however, I was born with a rebellious streak, and dont like being told what to do by anyone.

So the harder they pushed...the more I let them know that I wasnt going to be pushed around.

People dont like to be put in thier place by a kid, regardless of wether hes right or not.

Eh...eventually, you just learn to play the game.

If she has a reason not to release the cure for cancer... what if it is dangerous or can have any really negative side effects or what if the technology could easily be used for things, she considers immoral? In that case, it is her decision.

A human being cannot prove her superior intellect until after she has done great things which usually benefit the human condition. Therefore the question is meaningless. Anyone who claims superiority without first demonstrating it is just another delusional nut.

A human being cannot prove her superior intellect until after she has done great things which usually benefit the human condition. Therefore the question is meaningless. Anyone who claims superiority without first demonstrating it is just another delusional nut.I don't think that the question is whether or not she is claiming her superior intellect, but rather that she does have a superior intellect. It is quite possible to have a superior intellect without claiming that you do.

As to the question, the amount the girl would owe the world for her intelligence is proportional to the resources that the world spent to create and/or foster that intelligence.

I don't think she owes anything to the world; that decision is up to her. However, if you squander that talent and use it for nothing you are a total failiure and should be treated as utterly worthless, because you wasted what was given you and silenced the hope of everyone who could have benefitted from your work. It's the ultimate example of selfishness.

Wow... she's a "total failure" who "should be treated as utterly worthless" just because she doesn't live up to your moral and ethical standards of what should or should not be done.

I don't think that the question is whether or not she is claiming her superior intellect, but rather that she does have a superior intellect.

Pardon, but Jello my kind colleague, you have misunderstood my point. It is impossible for the person, or for the authorities in charge, to know that she has superior intellect until she demonstrates it by achieving some superior effort. My point is that this question is irrelevant until such proof is achieved. Even then, free will produces better results than social obligation.

Do you think she would owe it to the world to do something great? Does anyone owe the world anything at all?
Nope. If she decides to share, consider yourself lucky. But what makes you suppose anyone would pay attention to her in the first place, or that a gang of stupid money-men wouldn't try perverting and degrading whatever she had on offer in any event?

Pardon, but Jello my kind colleague, you have misunderstood my point. It is impossible for the person, or for the authorities in charge, to know that she has superior intellect until she demonstrates it by achieving some superior effort. My point is that this question is irrelevant until such proof is achieved. Even then, free will produces better results than social obligation.Ah, I see. I did misunderstand your point. I thought you were implying that she didn't have superior intellect until the discovered the cure for cancer, or somesuch, and not simply from getting good grades in school. Since the original poster implied she had gotten good grades in school, I assumed that she had demonstrated her superior intellect. I suppose it was a misunderstanding. Sorry. :)