Is high intellectual achievement only possible for the wealthy?

>>8840544
Define "wealthy." Certainly most scientists of the 20th century didn't come from the families of millionaires. They mostly came from middle-class backgrounds.

>>8840550
Yes perhaps wealthy was a poor choice.

I really meant middle-class, but the classical definition of middle class as in engineers, lawyers, doctors, and various professionals. The term Bourgeoisie captures my meaning more accurately.

Basically people who aren't necessarily wealthy, but have surpassed income being a barrier to most things in life.

Yep. Even a world-class IQ won't save you if you don't have the wealth, connections, resources, etc., to maximize your potential. See Chris Langan, Rick Rosner, Chris Hirata, etc.

>>8840573
I don't see how anyone, regardless of their ability, would be able to asymptote to their personal peak quickly enough (say, before age 30) to make a meaningful contribution unless money wasn't an issue. Obviously there are exceptions, but poorfags are pretty fucked from the get-go, because they have to compete with a shitload of equally bright people who do have wealth.

The fact that poor people can't do STEM is one of the few reasons I went into it, even though my IQ is <120. Being able to hire tutors and shit gives me a crazy-huge leg up.

Is this a feel good thread for underachievers who happen to be poor?
Seems to me that you need to be in the right place at the right time, and getting there comes at a price. Some people don't even know where 'there' is.

>>8840544
The wealthy certainly have more opportunity to spend time on intellectual pursuits

>>8840544
no, that's bullshit, it's true wealthy start with an advantage, but in the long run all geniuses have the same potential

>>8840660
My dad ran out on my mom and I when I was less than a year old. She never remarried, and never made more than $16/hour raising me single-handedly with no child support. I am an electrical engineer. I had a lot more obstacles to overcome during my education and I was often jealous of wealthy people, but fortunately I am smarter than most and have a crazy work ethic. Most poor people do not, which is why they stay poor.

>>8840756
>this is how deluded egalitarians are

I miss being naive.

>>8840790
You could well have been a research scientist at a prestigious school if your parents hadn't been selfish cunts. I hope you remember that every time you come over for Thanksgiving.

>>8840722
In order of importance, these are the resources wealth brings those seeking to make an intellectual contribution to the world:

1. Mentors/connections
2. Time/flexibility
3. Startup capital for projects
4. Access to sex/women/intimacy (not even joking, this is hugely important for mental focus and stability for most men)

Not having usurious debt is also incredibly important, but I'm not sure how to rank that. In the end, though, connections make or break aspiring intellectuals. Every institution ossifies into an old boy's club sooner or later. That's the nature of institutions. You need to have inside access to get past the gatekeepers if you want to make a mark.

>>8840544
Look at Chris Langan. IQ 6 SDs from the norm and he's a fucking ranch hand. Poverty is brutal for brainiacs.

>>8840816
If that's the lifestyle I wanted, that's the avenue I would have pursued. My goal has been to become an entrepreneur, never a researcher. But I often wonder if my kids will regress to the mean or take after my industriousness, and use the benefits of a stable, wealthy family wisely.

Maybe in america, but not irl