” Many people who do not do well in school can be broadly divided into two types:(CLICK HERE AND CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER)
People who really try but just can’t do well.People who can’t be bothered (for one reason or another).
I presume you were referring to the 2nd type since people with high IQ typically fall into the 2nd category.
I am speaking from my own experience and what I write here may not reflect the situation for others. I am a Mensa member so that may put me in a better position to answer this question. Well, intelligent people just do not like doing things they don’t like and they are very stubborn about it. Take Einstein for example, he excelled in all math-related subjects but fared much worse in others. If you were to read his biography
His Life And Times: Philipp Frank: Amazon.com: Books
Even for subjects that he liked, he didn’t always agree with the way it was being taught. That led to conflicts with his teachers and that explains why he did not succeed in getting a postgraduate research position back in his university since no professor wanted to take him in. His results were not particularly stellar anyway. He eventually gave up and became a patent clerk. But being the genius that he was, he taught himself advanced physics and engaged in his own research into the “laws of the universe”. Intelligent people will shine if left on their own to discover what they really like and engage themselves in it. If you force them to go through public schooling (like everyone else), the potential creative genius within them will most likely be buried.
Therefore, it isn’t surprising intelligent people might do badly in school. Good results has more to do with hard work than with a high IQ. Of course, a certain level of IQ is needed to do well but certainly not of the level of Einstein’s.”
Combining three images taken about 30 seconds apart as the moon moves produces a slight but noticeable camera artefact on the right side of the Moon. Because the moon has moved in relation to the Earth between the time the first (red) and last (green) exposures were made, a thin green offset appears on the right side of the moon when the three exposures are combined. This natural lunar movement also produces a slight red and blue offset on the left side of the moon in these unaltered images.
Marie Curie: The Courage of Knowledge review – sex and science in turn-of-the-century Europe
Academic affair … Karolina Gruszka as Marie Curie and Arieh Worthalter as Paul Langevin. Photograph: Swipe Films
Director Marie Noelle’s biopic about Marie Curie, the Polish-born chemist who was the first woman to win the Nobel prize, is something of a tacky treat. Roughly 35% science talk and 65% soap opera, it has adulterous shenanigans and a strong-willed heroine (Polish actor Karolina Gruszka) defying sexism, xenophobia and antisemitism (even though she isn’t Jewish) to make it in a male profession.
The first part unfolds in a non-toxic soft-focus haze, all sun dapples and smiles, as Marie and her beloved hubby Pierre (Charles Berling) bask in acclaim after their crucial research on radiation is recognised by the Nobel committee.
Pierre Mown Down
But when Pierre is tragically mown down by a carriage in the street. Marie must fight albeit in a dignified, ladylike way to maintain her position within academic circles. Even when her affair with colleague Paul Langevin (Arieh Worthalter) becomes public knowledge she must fight. At one point, someone observes that Marie “glows like the radium she studies”, and her flirtation with Piotr Glowacki’s young Albert Einstein is rib-tickling froth. Nevertheless, this is no worse than many other schedule-filling docudramas. Curie deserves the recognition and there’s an honourable attempt to colour in the historical context with references to the Dreyfus affair and the political state of play in turn-of-the-century Europe.
- “knowledge: definition of knowledge in Oxford dictionary (American English) (US)”. oxforddictionaries.com. Archived from the original on 2010-07-14.
- Paul Boghossian (2007), Fear of Knowledge: Against relativism and constructivism, Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press, Chapter 7, pp. 95–101.
- Dekel, Gil. “Methodology”. Retrieved 3 July 2006.
- Stanley Cavell, “Knowing and Acknowledging”, Must We Mean What We Say?(Cambridge University Press, 2002), 238–66.
- In Plato’s Theaetetus, Socrates and Theaetetus discuss three definitions of knowledge: knowledge as nothing but perception, knowledge as true judgment, and, finally, knowledge as a true judgment with an account. Each of these definitions is shown to be unsatisfactory.