Could you be a genius?
Why you should take the question much more seriously than you think, and what to do about it today
In this issue
Why IQ is overrated and how Einstein, da Vinci, and Feynman actually worked those brains of theirs
The curiosity loops and detours that make genius possible, and what you should do today, this Monday
REVIEWERS WANTED: Always wanted to read a book? Now you can, or at least chapters of mine as they go into review. Scroll to the bottom for more.
Two more weeks to refer a friend - most referrals get a pack of Neuro Gum, hand-blessed by the founders on my upcoming podcast.
There have to be some geniuses here on this Substack.
Pure statistics guarantees at least four of you now that we’ve hit 200 readers during our stealth launch from a few months ago, at least if you accept the Mensa definition, which uses the top 2% cutoff for IQ.
I’ll push the lower bound even higher since many of you are current or past students of mine, and if the classes we’ve shared haven’t already transformed you into an absolute unit of intellectual performance, then I clearly owe you a refund.
Jokes aside, it’s worth sitting with the question even if it might seem equal parts naive and embarrassing, especially if you’d never subject yourself to the gentle self-burn of taking an IQ test just to get into a club that validates your brainpower like I did. We’ll put that one in the “daddy issues” file and leave it for the therapist.
You see, genius doesn’t follow from IQ. On the contrary, it flows directly from the work Émile Zola is speaking in his timeless quote below.
Start thinking in terms of Effective IQ, not raw horsepower
As I wrote in my recent entirely unexpected runaway-hit Psychology Today piece, raw IQ isn’t the lever we think it is. What matters more is what I called “effective IQ” and how much of your existing capacity you can bring to bear on the problems that matter to you.
Shortly after this goes live (the editors that be so willing), the companion article will be up over there as well, and in it I dive deeper into why Einstein wasn’t a genius because of what was in his head.
If that feels wrong, let’s sit on the feeling for a moment. You’re not wrong to think that Einstein must have been smart. Surely he was. But try thinking about it this way as well:
Like most measurable features about humans, intelligence sits on a spectrum. The normal distribution ensures about as many people sit on the far right as they do on the far left. By definition, plenty of people have enough raw capacity to qualify as “genius” on paper, and yet we see very few Einsteins or da Vincis emerge even over millennia. Something else must be going on than raw IQ.
If you, like me not too long ago, have silently accepted the idea of drawing arbitrary lines on the bell curve of IQ and saying “aha—these are the geniuses,” you are missing the point entirely just as I was.
Yes, brainpower can help. But in most cases, feats of high IQ are neither necessary nor sufficient for what we associate with genius. What makes the difference is something far more boring, and that is the work Zola is referring to.
Why “just work harder” also misses the point
I won’t insult you with the LinkedIn-ism that if you “just work hard enough” you’ll solve quantum mechanics. You won’t. But neither did Einstein. That’s one of the rare areas where even he got it wrong, and he got to be as wrong as he was only after decades of putting in the work.
And it’s the question of what kind of work was he putting in that we should be obsessed with, because it’s the only part of genius we can reliably reverse-engineer. The more I research IQ and lives of Polymaths and geniuses, the more I think the unique ways they worked their brains is the only reason we even speak of them.
Today, there are dozens, maybe hundreds, of Einstein-level brains walking around with no hope of accomplishing more than tying their shoelaces. I’ve seen enough Mensa board meetings to tell you that the powder doesn’t always stay dry. What would help ignite them isn’t a spark of genius you’re born with, but habits that actually make your brain, however humbly endowed, more formidable at what it does best.
And simply sitting in class or staring at textbooks is not going to cut it.
Einstein had his Olympia Academy, late-night, wine-fueled discussions with friends in a cramped apartment, tearing through books across philosophy, physics, literature. In these gatherings, that he initiated by putting out an ad no less, he encountered many of the ideas that would germinate into what we rightfully celebrate of monumental moments of brilliance later on.
Da Vinci had Verrocchio’s workshop, part sculpture studio, part science lab, part chaotic garage, where starting one project and abandoning it for another was practically a house rule. Pope Leo once sighed: “Alas, this man will never finish a thing.” Michelangelo openly mocked him, being the little hater of a painter that he was. Yet those constant pivots between disciplines were exactly what fertilized da Vinci’s breakthroughs.
Feynman had bongos, lock-picking, and doodling equations on strip-club napkins. Turing had chess-playing machines and cryptographic puzzles. The list could go on, while this Substack must end.
What all of these geniuses shared was not a clean career ladder or a classroom focused on a single educational outcome. They all bucked orthodoxy and wandered widely. They got distracted, profusely and productively. And yes, sometimes they paid the price for it.
And yet, they all teased something out of their brains that no other ‘genius’ with the same levels of IQ had.
How we kill genius before it starts
Almost everything around us tells us to do the exact opposite. Sit down, follow the syllabus, stick to the track and don’t deviate lest your career path becomes a career trench.
And in doing so, we kill whatever chance your mind had to flourish into its best version. Not because the world is allergic to brilliance, no, we celebrate it still. But because the path to brilliance is inherently inconvenient. Corporations want cogs, not tinkerers just like bureaucracies want compliance, not curiosity. And you, perhaps you want convenience, instead of paying the price of even the Pope looking at you and giving up.
If you want to see how far your own genius could go, you’ll need to build your own loops of experimentation, your own wide reading lists, your own playful side projects that make no sense on a résumé.
Even then, you won’t get there if you think genius is something you are rather than something you attain. It’s not a static trait as much as it is a steady accumulation of experiments, failures, and pivots that we gather over years.
The amount of work you need depends on where you’re starting, what tools you have, and how you use them. And remember, it’s not a competition. Nobody’s keeping a leaderboard of how long it took you to get where you ended up. But many, including me, will be proud of you when you land there.
So today, this Monday, I invite you to aim just a bit further than you otherwise would have. Read one thing wildly outside your field. Try a project you have no practical reason to start. Pick up the thread of an abandoned curiosity.
Who knows, maybe you’ll make a genius out of yourself yet.
A book to read
Few books have been as burned, figuratively and literally. Which is exactly why it’s worth reading yourself. Don’t inherit opinions wholesale; see what’s actually on the page, decide what’s signal, what’s noise, and what you take away from it.
A thing to do
Build genius-style feedback loops
Like Einstein’s late-night debates or da Vinci’s restless workshop, explore widely, reflect honestly, iterate relentlessly. The broader your inputs, the sharper your outputs.
A thought to have
IQ isn’t all that, effective IQ is where it’s at
Raw horsepower is fine, but effective IQ, how much of your mind you can bring to bear, is what moves the needle. And wouldn’t you know it, once you take on this mindset shift, you’re suddenly in charge of your own genius again.
A product to love
Raven’s Progressive Matrices
Skip the $300 official IQ test. Grab a booklet off Amazon, work through the puzzles, and send me your results. I’ll validate you for exactly who you are, no Mensa card required.
Recent writings on Forbes and beyond
Latest: Born Smart or Built Smart? The Truth About Intelligence and Effort (Psychology Today)
We Have Six Months Until AI Breaks Reality, This Tool May Buy Us Time (Forbes)
Branding Is Leadership: What Modern CEOs Must Understand About Global Brands (Forbes)
Luxury Real Estate Isn’t Slowing Down, It’s Scaling Up (Forbes)
Why Your Neighbor’s New Car Feels Like a Personal Attack (Psychology Today)
Why This AI Entrepreneur Paid Six Figures For A Lunch With Benioff (Forbes)
The Power of "No": How Rejection Builds a Life Worth Having (Psychology Today)
What’s Holding Back Sustainable Business? The Challenges That Matter Most (Forbes)
What’s Next For Beverages In 2025? CEOs Predict The Path Forward (Forbes)
Why This Nasdaq Listed CEO Changed His Mind About AI, And What It Took (Forbes)
From Serendipity To Startup: Meeting Venus Williams And Other Lucky Strikes (Forbes)
What’s Next In Philanthropy? Decentralized Models And Smarter Giving (Forbes)
Declining Birthrates Are Breaking The Economy. Can We Fix It In Time? (Forbes)
In Defense of Intuition: Why Gut Feelings Deserve Respect (Psychology Today)
Your Brain Hates Your Cubicle—Here’s How to Thrive Anyway (Psychology Today)
Arvind Jain: The Humble Builder Behind Glean And The Future Of Agentic AI (Forbes)
The Outsider Advantage: How Naïveté Fuels Billion-Dollar Startups (Forbes)
Never Make a Bad Choice Again by Embracing Self-Nudging (Psychology Today)
The Psychology Of Better Choices: How Startups Are Rewiring Our Habits (Forbes)
Staying Curious Is the Most Dangerous Thing You Can Do (Psychology Today)
After Arkansas: The Future Of FEMA And U.S. Disaster Relief (Forbes)
Ryan Gellert on Building a Future Where Sustainability Is Not Optional (Forbes)
Why Struggling (the Right Way) Helps You Learn (Psychology Today)
Want to Make Better Decisions? Copy the Slime Mold (Psychology Today)
Your Brain Was Built to Forget—Make It Work For You (Psychology Today)
Where and how to get involved this August
AI for MBAs is official in review now. I’m looking for bold research subjects who are willing to read a chapter, like The MBA’s History of AI and the AI Family Tree, or the Ironclad Business Model. 6000-8000 words for you, a few comments and thoughts for me. Email to get involved!
I am currently conducting a study on range and how it impacts people’s career trajectories. Ten questions and a name will get you on the hall of fame as we pump up the n on the study. Link below - thanks for considering it!
You’ve reached the end - thanks for scrolling all the way down.
Curiosity is best when enjoyed in great company.
Refer this issue and grab a chance to get a tester package of Neuro blessed by the founders themselves (randomly selected from all referrals made). I’m connecting with the duo for a longer chat, recorded for the upcoming Curiosity Code podcast, and will be grilling them on their curious path to setting up the company. If you want your question included in the mix, hit me up via the Substack chat or email.
I'll answer your opening question first. No, highly unlikely that I could be a genius.
But I have some habits.... That align. 😂