Genius or brainlet?
smart guy but used his intellect for fucking nothing. not that I mind, it was his life
>>8860510
>Fuller was the second World President of Mensa from 1974 to 1983.[2]
>He had trouble with geometry, being unable to understand the abstraction that a chalk dot on the blackboard represented a mathematical point, or that an imperfectly drawn line with an arrow on the end was meant to stretch off to infinity.
What the fuck? How can someone with mensa-level intellect struggle with basic geometry?
3 to 4 standard deviations is a reasonable guess. Clearly bright and creative, but not preternaturally so. A lot of productive generalists are in this range.
>>8860530
3 to 4 SDs means an IQ in the 150s, which is pretty impressive IMO.
>>8860527
Sounds like legit autism desu
>>8860527
He probably was *quirky* i.e. pretentious but with no meaningful results in mathematics or physics.
looking at the wiki page, the part about Fuller having trouble with geometry comes right after this:
>He attended Froebelian Kindergarten.[citation needed]
so keep that in perspective
>>8860643
It's about average for eminent physicists, according to the Anne Roe study. But the variation is quite large. Witten, Gell-Mann, and Tao are likely more 4 standard devs, and that's with insane amounts of dedication.
>>8861184
>I don't think you can argue that Fuller never did meaningful work
Because he made good looking domes?
That's what all his legacy is about.
He is the epitome of the brainlet who tries hard.
>>8860527
Odds are he was one of those special "le philosophy of math" kids who thought it was ebinly cool to suggest true geometry can't be drawn.
>>8860527
It's quite common for autists to have trouble with abstractions.