Top 10 Geniuses
Published on October 6, 2007 - 113 Comments
First off, you may be surprised to find that Albert Einstein is not included on this list. The reason is that I have used a table of IQ estimates for historical geniuses to determine the members and order of this list, and Einstein’s IQ (around 160) did not make the grade. Despite that, he is still the first person to pop in to most people’s minds when thinking of a genius. Having said that, here is a list of the ten greatest geniuses in history.
10. Madame De Stael IQ: 180Wikipedia
In full - Anne-Louise-Germaine Necker, Baronne (baroness) de Staël-Holstein, byname Madame de Staël. Madame de Stael was a French-Swiss woman of letters, political propagandist, and conversationalist, who epitomized the European culture of her time, bridging the history of ideas from Neoclassicism to Romanticism. She also gained fame by maintaining a salon for leading intellectuals. Her writings include novels, plays, moral and political essays, literary criticism, history, autobiographical memoirs, and even a number of poems. Her most important literary contribution was as a theorist of Romanticism. Madame de Stael is on an equal level with René Descartes but I chose to include her rather than him in order to put at least one woman on this list.
9. Galileo Galilei IQ: 185Wikipedia
Galileo was Italian natural philosopher, astronomer, and mathematician who made fundamental contributions to the sciences of motion, astronomy, and strength of materials and to the development of the scientific method. His formulation of (circular) inertia, the law of falling bodies, and parabolic trajectories marked the beginning of a fundamental change in the study of motion. His insistence that the book of nature was written in the language of mathematics changed natural philosophy from a verbal, qualitative account to a mathematical one in which experimentation became a recognized method for discovering the facts of nature. Finally, his discoveries with the telescope revolutionized astronomy and paved the way for the acceptance of the Copernican heliocentric system, but his advocacy of that system in support of his view that the Bible contained errors, eventually resulted in an Inquisition process against him.
8. Bobby Fischer IQ: 187Wikipedia
Bobby is the byname of Robert James Fischer, an American chess master who became the youngest grandmaster in history when he received the title in 1958. His youthful intemperance and brilliant playing drew the attention of the American public to the game of chess, particularly when he won the world championship in 1972. Fischer learned the moves of chess at age 6 and at 16 dropped out of high school to devote himself fully to the game. In 1958 he won the first of many American championships. In world championship candidate matches during 1970–71, Fischer won 20 consecutive games before losing once and drawing three times to former world champion Tigran Petrosyan of the Soviet Union in a final match won by Fischer. In 1972 Fischer became the first native-born American to hold the title of world champion when he defeated Boris Spassky of the Soviet Union in a highly publicized match held in Reykjavík, Iceland. In doing so, Fischer won the $156,000 victor’s share of the $250,000 purse.
7. Ludwig Wittgenstein IQ: 190Wikipedia
in full - Ludwig Josef Johann Wittgenstein was an Austrian-born English philosopher, regarded by many as the greatest philosopher of the 20th century. Wittgenstein’s two major works, Logisch-philosophische Abhandlung (1921; Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, 1922) and Philosophische Untersuchungen (published posthumously in 1953; Philosophical Investigations), have inspired a vast secondary literature and have done much to shape subsequent developments in philosophy, especially within the analytic tradition. His charismatic personality has, in addition, exerted a powerful fascination upon artists, playwrights, poets, novelists, musicians, and even filmmakers, so that his fame has spread far beyond the confines of academic life.
6. Blaise Pascal IQ: 195Wikipedia
Blaise Pascal was a French mathematician, physicist, religious philosopher, and master of prose. He laid the foundation for the modern theory of probabilities, formulated what came to be known as Pascal’s law of pressure, and propagated a religious doctrine that taught the experience of God through the heart rather than through reason. The establishment of his principle of intuitionism had an impact on such later philosophers as Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Henri Bergson and also on the Existentialists.
5. John Stuart Mill IQ: 200Wikipedia
John Stuart Mill was an English philosopher, economist, and exponent of Utilitarianism. He was prominent as a publicist in the reforming age of the 19th century, and remains of lasting interest as a logician and an ethical theorist. Mill was a man of extreme simplicity in his mode of life. The influence that his works exercised upon contemporary English thought can scarcely be overestimated, nor can there be any doubt about the value of the liberal and inquiring spirit with which he handled the great questions of his time. Beyond that, however, there has been considerable difference of opinion about the enduring merits of his philosophy.
4. Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz IQ: 205Wikipedia
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (also Leibnitz or von Leibniz (July 1 (June 21 Old Style) 1646 – November 14, 1716) was a German philosopher of Sorbian origin who wrote primarily in Latin and French. Educated in law and philosophy, and serving as factotum to two major German noble houses (one becoming the British royal family while he served it), Leibniz played a major role in the European politics and diplomacy of his day. He occupies an equally large place in both the history of philosophy and the history of mathematics. He discovered calculus independently of Newton, and his notation is the one in general use since. He also discovered the binary system, foundation of virtually all modern computer architectures. In philosophy, he is most remembered for optimism, i.e., his conclusion that our universe is, in a restricted sense, the best possible one God could have made.
3. Emanuel Swedenborg IQ: 205Wikipedia
Emanuel Swedenborg was a Swedish scientist, Christian mystic, philosopher, and theologian who wrote voluminously in interpreting the Scriptures as the immediate word of God. Soon after his death, devoted followers created Swedenborgian societies dedicated to the study of his thought. These societies formed the nucleus of the Church of the New Jerusalem, or New Church, also called the Swedenborgians.
2. Leonardo Da Vinci IQ: 205Wikipedia
Leonardo Da Vinci, Italian painter, draftsman, sculptor, architect, and engineer whose genius, perhaps more than that of any other figure, epitomized the Renaissance humanist ideal. His Last Supper (1495–98) and Mona Lisa (c. 1503–06) are among the most widely popular and influential paintings of the Renaissance. His notebooks reveal a spirit of scientific inquiry and a mechanical inventiveness that were centuries ahead of their time. The unique fame that Leonardo enjoyed in his lifetime and that, filtered by historical criticism, has remained undimmed to the present day rests largely on his unlimited desire for knowledge, which guided all his thinking and behaviour.
1. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe IQ: 210Wikipedia
Goethe, German poet, playwright, novelist, scientist, statesman, theatre director, critic, and amateur artist, is considered the greatest German literary figure of the modern era. Goethe is the only German literary figure whose range and international standing equal those of Germany’s supreme philosophers (who have often drawn on his works and ideas) and composers (who have often set his works to music). In the literary culture of the German-speaking countries, he has had so dominant a position that, since the end of the 18th century, his writings have been described as “classical.” In a European perspective he appears as the central and unsurpassed representative of the Romantic movement, broadly understood.
Sources: Genius IQ Estimates, Encyclopaedia Britannica, Wikipedia
Technorati Tags: people, genius
Related ListsTop 10 Best Bug Movies |
SubscriptionsLike this article? Subscribe to the RSS feed to keep 'em coming, or subscribe via email: |
If you find this site helpful, please leave a donation so you can enjoy the spirit of giving too.
Email This Post












1. inanytime - October 6th, 2007 at 5:11 am
good list
2. JT - October 6th, 2007 at 5:11 am
Great list, although what about Marilyn Vos Savant? She is regarded as the person with highest current IQ (over 185) and is a woman of all things!
Also, interesting fact about Wittgenstein, he was in the same elementary school class as Adolf Hitler! Here is a school photo of them:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi.....leCrop.jpg
It’s weird how a small, elementary school in the back end of Austria could spawn two such influential people. I wonder if they advertise the latter one…
3. jfrater - October 6th, 2007 at 5:19 am
inanytime: thanks - it was very interesting learning about some of these people.
4. JT - October 6th, 2007 at 5:52 am
Interesting fact: Wittgenstein and Adolf Hitler were in the same class at elementary school, they’re even together in a school photo!
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi.....leCrop.jpg
It’s weird that two such influential people went to the same small school in a small town in Austria. I wonder if they advertise the latter student…
5. Cyn - October 6th, 2007 at 5:58 am
btw…checking out the source helps to put this into context. LOL..but then it usually does. (i’m so glad you always note sources too)
great list!
6. Sam - October 6th, 2007 at 5:59 am
come ON… please!! where’s Isaac Newton??!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton
7. jfrater - October 6th, 2007 at 6:43 am
JT: That is amazing! I had no idea they went to school together - very eerie.
Sam: I didn’t determine the names on the list - I just put the information and pics together. Check out the source article.
8. Kyle Andersen - October 6th, 2007 at 7:07 am
Look in their eyes… “Knowledge is pain” is an expression I’ve heard many times. I find it interesting how sad they all look.
9. JT - October 6th, 2007 at 7:08 am
Hmmm, I dont know why I posted twice. My message didnt appear when I posted the first time.
10. TimeTraveller - October 6th, 2007 at 7:11 am
all European? No oriental geniuses, no african, semitic geniuses.
well at least you got a woman on the list
11. jfrater - October 6th, 2007 at 7:23 am
Kyle: interesting observation - I hadn’t noticed until you pointed that out.
JT: Sometimes if you get an error, the comment still posts.
TimeTraveller: I just went on the original source
12. Ocir - October 6th, 2007 at 7:50 am
I can’t believe that Sir Issac Newton was not included…
Nor were any of the great composers, Garry Kasparov, or modern mathematicians.
and the list is very Eurocentric
13. Cat Skyfire - October 6th, 2007 at 8:24 am
In jfrater’s defense, it’s also a challenge to define ‘genius’ and have the sources to back it up. Composers are often a genius when it comes to music, but often nothing else. (Mozart’s own life was a shambles in so many ways.) And documentation for non-Europeans is very limited. Can TimeTraveller offer up some Asian, African, or semetic geniuses for us to examine?
And while Marilyn Vos Savant may have a high IQ, she’s not known for much else. No great intellectual salons, no major challenges to the world of thought.
another woman might have been Marie Curie.
14. Volkan - October 6th, 2007 at 8:29 am
Swedenborg??? Come on! He was influential in his time, but today? What did he do? What did he invent? He shouldn’t be in this list.
15. Zoot - October 6th, 2007 at 9:21 am
IQ tests are culturally biased, so of course the list will be eurocentric.
16. JT - October 6th, 2007 at 9:36 am
To be perfectly honest, Europe has always been the ground for progressive thinking and cultural advancement. No other continent comes close to what Europe achieved between the Renaissance and now.
And Fischer is Jewish-American if that helps.
17. hideki yukawa - October 6th, 2007 at 9:39 am
how did you get iq scores for these people? the iq test hadn’t even been developed at that time i thought.
like someone said, marilyn vos savant has the highest measured iq of any living person, why isn’t she here?
perhaps iq tests are gibberish and this list is unmeaningful.
18. Jack - October 6th, 2007 at 9:47 am
hideki, if you read the opening paragraph you would see this:
“I have used a table of IQ estimates for historical geniuses”
19. ben - October 6th, 2007 at 11:00 am
AHEM…
20. Cyn - October 6th, 2007 at 11:03 am
tell ya what…this is one place it pays to read the fine print. /snarky remark
21. Henry - October 6th, 2007 at 11:30 am
I think you should change this list name to “top 10 people with the highest IQ”. You can have a really high IQ and be really stupid.
22. jfrater - October 6th, 2007 at 11:42 am
Henry: that is true - you can - but none of these people were. They had the highest IQs and were also great contributors to humanity.
23. Edley - October 6th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
where’s stephen hawkins?!!!!!!!!
24. Elmer - October 6th, 2007 at 1:31 pm
well you left Ibn Sina and his semitic precursors: when europe was killing itself in a spiral of feudal tribalism…
25. Mathilda - October 6th, 2007 at 1:32 pm
The reason that this list consists mainly of European men is that most of these are historical figures. The psychologists who estimated the IQ’s would have had no way and probably not much inclination to try to estimate the intelligence of relatively unknown people. Basically this list is a ranking of most intelligent well-known people. There may well have been an African woman or Asian man with a higher IQ than anyone on this list, but if they did not leave a body of work to be examined and no one outside of their village or town ever heard of them, they would not make this list.
26. Jen - October 6th, 2007 at 2:27 pm
I’m sure you already knew this, but I just want to point out that there is a lot of controversy today over using IQ tests to measure intelligence. Yes, people with IQs are usually very intelligent, but there are many, many, types of intelligence that cannot be evaluated by a standard IQ test. And as was said earlier, it can also be culturally biased.
27. Ender - October 6th, 2007 at 3:45 pm
Wheres Nikola Tesla? you should do top inventors of all time if you haven’t already
28. Sean - October 6th, 2007 at 7:37 pm
Great addition, Tesla would definitely be on my list.
29. Roger - October 6th, 2007 at 8:32 pm
What about Leonhard Euler?
“Euler is considered to be the preeminent mathematician of the 18th century and one of the greatest of all time. He is also one of the most prolific; his collected works fill 60–80 quarto volumes.A statement attributed to Pierre-Simon Laplace expresses Euler’s influence on mathematics: “Read Euler, read Euler, he is the teacher (master) of us all”.
30. amir - October 7th, 2007 at 8:44 am
how can u give test from died persons?
As I know IQ tests are not very old
31. jfrater - October 7th, 2007 at 9:25 am
amir: see the source article - it is based upon estimates.
32. #delphi - October 7th, 2007 at 10:39 am
jf,
Are you WraithX?
33. jfrater - October 7th, 2007 at 10:46 am
#delphi - odd question, but yes - I am
34. Mano - October 7th, 2007 at 1:35 pm
Although I have great respect for these 10 for their achievements, but the method for selecting them has not been explained. I don’t think there are any reliable objective one, and your clearly suffers from the fact that you are confusing the WORLD with mostly western European and USA!
35. Mano - October 7th, 2007 at 1:37 pm
Although I have great respect for these 10 for their achievements, but the method for selecting them has not been explained. I don’t think there are any reliable objective ones, and yours clearly suffer from the fact that you are confusing the WORLD with mostly western Europeans and the USA!
36. jfrater - October 7th, 2007 at 1:38 pm
Mano: I appreciate what you are saying, but I am not from Europe or the USA - so believe me, there is not a bias on my part in that direction. And I did say at the top that the list was based upon estimates - I will rewrite the heading tomorrow to make that clearer though. Thanks for commenting even if we don’t agree
37. Cyn - October 7th, 2007 at 2:52 pm
The reason is that I have used a table of IQ estimates for historical geniuses to determine the members and order of this list,
Sources: Genius IQ Estimates, Encyclopaedia Britannica, Wikipedia
1st from the leading paragraph and 2nd from the source cited at the end
so if there is bias..check w/ the source. also the eurocentric slant is something that has already be made mention of in various earlier comments.
38. dadudemon - October 7th, 2007 at 3:09 pm
I have been tested 5 times by 3 different psychologists. My IQ was listed as technically immeasurable because I have ADHD and could not focus long enough to get an accurate measurement. Even then, they each estimated my IQ as off the scale because it would be over 170 and said that I would have to take a test designed specially for really high IQs…but I haven’t ever seen one of those tests.
Genius IQs seems to be a trait of my family.
Just because my IQ is almost double what the average person’s IQ is, doesn’t mean I am that much better at life or really anything for that matter. Because my IQ is so high, I suffer in other areas related to the brain. I suspect ADHD is a symptom of having a high IQ. Other problems I have are forgetting very simple things like where I put my keys and what strawberries are called.
All my high IQ does for me is allows me to learn and solve things faster than those around me…really that is the only advantage I have observed. People put too much emphasis on an IQ.
Also, the IQs of those people are relative to their contemporaries.
39. Diogenes - October 7th, 2007 at 3:37 pm
To Dadudemon, “By learning and solving things faster” What exactly are these things? Do you visualize or compile a full problem with mutiple parts simultaneously? Do you have something like photographic memory? What does the ADHD affect? Is there a connection to autism here? I’m just wondering.
40. The Dum Guy - October 7th, 2007 at 7:39 pm
I realize the irony of me commenting on this, but isn’t “genius” relatively hard to quantify? I mean, you could be a genius at sports like M. Jordan, or at film ala Bergman, and yet not have a very high IQ.
I don’t have anything really to add, other than to suggest it would be more apt to list geniuses in specific fields.
41. Dani - October 7th, 2007 at 7:54 pm
At first glance an interesting list, but on second thought subjective, biased and Eurocentric as others have commented. My two points of concern relate to the absence of literary giants and the exlusion of oriental figures. For the former there is the example of Shakespeare whose prolific influence and thought patterns have bewildered and propelled many modern thinkers of other disciplines. For the latter, I am concerned with Chinese, Indian and Persian ancient and medieval thinkers, philosophers, and discoverers among others. Where are Avicenna, Razi, and Rumi as obvious examples from Persia? These people fascinated the likes of Goethe and Pascal, in your list, and functioned next to the Greeks and Romans as the fathers of European Renaissance. By the way, where are Greek giants Aristotle and Plato? I am interested to know their IQs if there is a way to estimate theirs through their hugely influential extant work. Even if an objective list would be densely competitive, I would suggest a more cross-cultural list of geniuses.
42. Dani - October 7th, 2007 at 8:09 pm
As for Fisher, I am an amateur chess player, and as much as he is my favourite player, I do not put him next to the Cuban Capablanca when it comes to genius. The latter was more of a true genius from the go. By the way, how do you assess IQ based on chess moves? Calculation? Innovation in moves or variations? Wins? Ratings? Opponent strength? Or nationality? (I am asking this one because Russia has had the greatest number of chess champions and the only American world champion makes it into your list?) As an example of one of a kind, Alekhine was the only player in history to announce a mate-in-10 against a player of grandmaster strength at the board, and Kasparov is considered by many to be the strongest player of all times (only to bear in mind that he has had such extensive advantages of pre-match preparation and technology at his disposal which the earlier generation players obviously did not enjoy).
43. JT - October 8th, 2007 at 9:09 am
For Fischer, I remember watching a documentary on him, which stated that he took an IQ test when he was in his prime and it came out as 187.
44. 2overpar - October 8th, 2007 at 12:30 pm
2
most profound leap in history - e=mc
also, google “edward witten”
45. Sean the pyro - October 8th, 2007 at 1:06 pm
I took your advise and looked up Witten. I would have to leave him off just for having been mentioned in an episode of Angel.
46. Kelsi - October 8th, 2007 at 2:50 pm
JT said…
“and is a woman of all things!”
I am EXTREMELY offended by this remark. Please choose your words more carefully.
As for the list itself, I think everything else that I was going to say about it has already beensaid…Many other cultures or women are not on the list because their achievements and brilliance may not have been noticed or rewarded, especially in the lower classes.
47. Bender - October 8th, 2007 at 11:18 pm
What a terrible list. I cannot possibly understand how you can even rank geniuses. How does one compare scientific genius, musical genius, artistic genius, philosophical genius, etc. Are some greater than the other?
48. jfrater - October 8th, 2007 at 11:58 pm
Bender: read the cited source article - it has more information on the whole IQ thing.
49. 2overpar - October 16th, 2007 at 1:11 pm
sean - witten has a field’s medal, einstein’s job and is at the forefront of string theory research.
50. dadudemon - November 10th, 2007 at 12:53 pm
For Diogenes,
By “learning and solving things faster”, I mean that when presented with material to study and be tested on, I would learn the material much faster than my peers. By solving things, I mean I could see the answer and learn new concepts much faster than my peers. (This generally applies to math and physics.)
I do not visualize and complete problems with multiple parts simultaneously; I solve problems with multiple variables simultaneously. (I can only focus on one thing at a time…even if that one thing at a time changes at a blistering pace…trust me, ADHD isn’t fun when you are supposed to pay attention in an important meeting.) I amazed my highschool Algebra teacher by solving “Systems of Equations” in my head. My limit was 4 variables. (I can’t solve a system of equations with more than 4 variables in my head…I think most people would use matrices for anything over 3 variables.)
In chemistry, I never had to use conversion factors no matter how complex the question. I could immediately see the desired end result and perform the math to get there. My chemistry professors told me that it was impossible to do chemistry without conversation factors and they were shocked and amazed when I showed them that I could do it without.
I do not have a photographic memory, per se, I have what I have come to call a ‘virtually photographic memory” because it isn’t the same as other photographic memories I have read about. Some details about that: I cannot pick and chose what my brain decides to take pictures of and it is very random. My dreams are so realistic that I sometimes confuse what has happened in reality with things that happened in my dreams. (That is horrible when you have a vivid memory of something someone did that that didn’t actually do.) Sometimes, when I am recalling an event that actually happened, I can play back the event in my head like a movie and I can even go back over details by “zooming”(by zooming, I mean just that; it is like I can make something in the “playback” come closer to my “eyes”) in on things that I didn’t notice before. (Like remembering the name of a name tag that I saw only from peripheral vision or remembering the nutrition facts off of a food package that I saw with my peripheral vision.) With the afore mentioned ability, I can actually learn something new that I didn’t know before by simply playing back things in my head and focusing on different things.
ADHD affects my ability to appropriately interact with people. It affects my short term memory. It also allows me to be very good at sports and videogames that are fast paced. I often forget very simple words that everyone takes for granted everyday. (I forgot the word “put” before. I recently had an episode where I became very frustrated because I forgot the word “inexorable”.)
I do not know if autism is connected to ADHD but I do know autism and “genius” are sometimes two parts of the same pie.
51. Gigaknight - November 24th, 2007 at 2:10 pm
Marilyn Vos Savant— no relevant contributions. As wikipedia explains, she really messed up on femat’s last theorem. She was critical of the supposed solution, but “in making her case, Marilyn was accused of misunderstanding mathematical induction, proof by contradiction, and imaginary numbers”, which is really standard stuff, as far as I know and have seen in class.
The three (supposed) greatest minds ever were Archimedes, Newton and Gauss. I Heard this on my school, the science department of my university. (study physics). Gauss thought that Eisenstein should be included too.
I would personally include those three, and maybe other physicists.
dadudemon, can you concentrate long enough to write a very large post? seems like it.
52. Arleen - November 29th, 2007 at 2:29 pm
How can you rank these? and how are these tested? Many of these people around long before IQ was considered quantitative or was even a term used for intelligence. So what makes you say that some had higher IQs than others.
53. swampsnake - December 1st, 2007 at 11:52 pm
i would say all were more leaning to savant as most exceled in only one thing
54. Alexandra - December 3rd, 2007 at 12:30 am
What about that Rainman guy? I have had a complete mental blank and can’t remember his name, but he had such an amazing photographic memory that it took him something like 8 seconds looking at a two pages in a book at a time and he knew them for the rest of his life. I think that is incredible.
Other than that, I love this list. This website is where I learn all of my little facts, :D.
I do have to say that I disagree with IQ tests though. If you’re good at an IQ test it doesn’t mean you are smart (it doesn’t mean you aren’t either) it just means you are good at IQ tests.
What they actually did is far more fascinating than their IQ scores.
55. Jerry - December 13th, 2007 at 12:36 am
When I clicked on the list I was expecting to see Albert Einstein as No. 1.
56. mphila - December 17th, 2007 at 9:46 pm
scrap the i.q. they were never measured during the renaissance period.
57. Stephanie - December 22nd, 2007 at 12:46 am
How did you rank these geniuses exactly? I am glad you included lesser known people, but am perplexed that you didn’t list the obvious ones (Newton, Einstein). If you had more time, maybe you can create some lists ranked according to mathematical, musical, artistic genius (and so on), and maybe a list for the people who were a jack at all trades (Da Vinci).
58. Stephanie - December 22nd, 2007 at 12:50 am
Let’s not forget Srinivasa Ramanujan.
59. Sarah - December 28th, 2007 at 8:32 am
only one female? how could nine out of ten top geniuses be male? a male made this list.
60. Crimanon - December 30th, 2007 at 5:12 am
Marilyn Vos Savant, has anyone done a Real search on her and if so why haven’t you realized that no matter how smart you are sometimes you have to do something stupid… Like Become a SCIENTOLOGIST. I used to read her articles all the time till I found out that she was Blind to Idiocy.
61. Crimanon - December 30th, 2007 at 5:39 am
Related to About comment, she was on “Identity” as the Scientologist. my jaw dropped when I found out. Good luck on the search…
62. kiriel - January 12th, 2008 at 8:22 pm
No mention of William James Sidis? (IQ 250-300)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_James_Sidis
I have been considered exceptional and gifted in some sense as I can learn new skills very fast and can virtualize and represent problems in multiple modalities and models in my minds eye as a visual structure that I then can play with at once. A good parallel would be to imagine you having a kind of 3D graphics software in your mind that you can play around with to represent information that is programmable into any other software upon need and conscious usage.
But I suspect that since I went cold turkey on caffeine-based drinks my skills are not what they used to be. It is as if long time caffeine usage made my mental system depend upon it to some degree. Taking the caffeine out of the equation is like running an engine made for gasoline on ethanol (which has a lesser relative energy content than gasoline in general). The systems efficiency is no longer what it used to be, it is not as fast and I feel no longer really motivated to apply my mind to any activities. I feel like there are no purposeful directions left. Like having this great machinery but do not find any meaningful use for it.
The worst thing is to realize how many what-if and what-if-not deductions there are possible in language.
I guess having high IQ is a great thing to have when you do not have it, but it is not worth having if having it comes with a feeling of meaninglessness. I would rather have normal IQ if that brought a feeling that life is purposeful and imbued with meaning.
Thanks,
Kiriel
63. Abe Mantell - January 18th, 2008 at 8:44 am
What about William James Sidis???
Estimated IQ between 250 and 300!!!
Isaac Newton (190)?
Kim Ung-yong (verified IQ of 210)
Christopher Michael Langan (verified IQ of 195)
Garry Kasparov (190)?
Author Marilyn Vos Savant (verified IQ of 186)
64. deathtoall - January 18th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
I would think alan turing deserved a spot on this list.. but i couldnt find anything on his iq.
65. qoph - January 18th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
genius rarely ever rears its head to the general public. it usually hides under rocks and is exploited by opportunists in the general vacinity. once in awhile it gets exposed to the masses. it’s rare, though. most of the time, mediocrity has the last word. do you really have to look that far for examples?
66. smart-ass - January 18th, 2008 at 11:10 pm
U guys are stupid as hell if you think these people were this smart. “estimated iq test.” aaaa shat up!
67. star&crescent - January 29th, 2008 at 1:59 am
where is ATATURK??????
68. crescent&star - January 29th, 2008 at 2:03 am
where is ATATURK?????? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M.....at%C3%BCrk
69. Kid Joe - February 1st, 2008 at 10:45 pm
www.kids-iq-tests.com/famous-people.html has a long list of famous IQs….
70. dadudemon - February 2nd, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Gigaknight:
LOL!!! I thought that that conclusion might be drawn and I originally typed up something about why the post was so long but later deleted it because the post was already too long. I wrote that post up while at work off and on.
Also, I can play video games for 2 or 3 hours at a time so its not like I have the attention span of a goldfish.
This site is awesome.
71. Diogenes - February 2nd, 2008 at 5:45 pm
Tools and the minds at the time of their invention.
Having problems arise within a particuliar period in which they can be solved. Thats one thing, but those individuals that we think are ahead of their time or those with brilliance that serves them.
It’s connected someway to beliefs in fate.
or DNA continuance, but if it runs in the family. How far back does it go. The origin of the branch from one family tree to the next?
It becomes indecipherable(sp?) throughout the milelage of time.
but some can decode or untangle the strand and are called genius, while the others that do the same (but are perhaps are overwhelmed) are considered insane.
72. Amber - February 7th, 2008 at 9:13 am
Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz looks like Amy Winehouse.
73. Polly Odyssey - February 8th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Some of these people are personal heroes of mine. I love Bobby Fischer, even though I don’t play Chess.
74. avi - February 11th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
the first ppl to come in to mind when i think of geniuses: from 1 to 10, newton, einstein, da vinci, nikola tesla, edison, galileo, stephen hawking, mozart, ben franklin, darwin.
75. John Stavrakakis - February 12th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
I would say a genius is someone who came to a problem they didnt know about and managed to solve it without using approaches they already know of. Lots of those listed actually had invested alot of time into something that actually proved significant to society, no wonder they are labelled geniuses.
76. mike - March 9th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
I didn’t think IQ went beyond 200. Doesn’t 200 mean that for 100% of the population there is only one person for that IQ? What does 205 mean, then?
77. Nabila - March 26th, 2008 at 7:56 am
You might want to check out Toussaint Louverture if you want to add some diversity to your list - however I’m not sure he’s considered an all around genius, but I know he’s considered a military genius.
78. SmartAlec - April 1st, 2008 at 4:53 am
What about Stephen Hawking? And Da Vinci should be number 1
79. avi - April 4th, 2008 at 3:19 am
IQ and intelligence are two different things. it’s not how high youre IQ is, its what you do with it (in that case, i don’t know about #8) vos sant i dont know much about. you don t have to be an all-round genius to make the list. but the all-round geniuses would rank higher.and for the what you do with your IQ thing, how about someone like einstein, or edison? and da vinci should be number 1.
80. EXE - April 6th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
avi: good point.
I disagree, however, with your assertion that da Vinci would be #1. Pretty much all of the machinery he designed was fanciful and would never work. It was well-drawn but conceptually not genius. It is just that he would be most well-known for his art because that ’s the only place he really had any impact. People point out that he first conceptualized the flying machine, but remember that that’s probably not true; his fame in art makes him more known than others who probably had similar and equally fanciful ideas, none of which would work.
I think that people like Yeats, Joyce and Shakespeare should be up here. Certainly I think that writers are more important than people like #2 and 10. I’m sorry #10; I love that you represent ladies (like myself) but perhaps there is a reason why I’ve never heard of you before now.
Did anyone else notice that most of these people German?
Dani: yes, totally! Plato! Aristotle! Socrates!
What about Homer?
81. EXE - April 6th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
avi: I forgot the musical geniuses!
Jacqueline du Pre was a cellist who broke the mold. Cellists were supposed to be dainty and delicate; watch a youtube video of her performing Elgar’s Cello Concerto; watch her move as she feels the music. She did not care what people thought of this spectacle; she loved music and wanted it to be part of her instead of being its puppet. She died at 45 of MS.
What about Mozart? Bach? Beethoven, first to express a concept through music with his piece ‘L’Orage’ (I think that was the title; anyway it evoked a storm).
82. Crimanon - April 6th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
EXE: A simple search will give you more than enough info on the Intelligence of da Vinci. Most of his sketches and blue prints that have being evaluated have been built. Including the First Robot. For anyone who doubts his theories on flight, the ornithopter has been built and is used by the US military.
83. avi - April 7th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
comment #74 does not apply anymore,sorry.
84. avi - April 15th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
“and is a woman of all things” no
85. marty - April 23rd, 2008 at 10:39 am
Thomas Jefferson?
86. ted - April 27th, 2008 at 12:12 am
Whoever voted for Johann von Goethe to be considered more of a genius than Leonardo Da Vinci must have had a biased opinion to make such an insanely transparent error, or is doing a great job angering enough people to add to this blog by doing so. If this was voted for without such deception, whoever wrote the above ‘bio’ for Da Vinci not only omitted several capabilities and studies that Da Vinci mastered but also exaggerated some of Goethe’s “ingenious accomplishments”. If anyone rational looked up all of the accomplishments of Da Vinci and put their own nationality, heritage, personal passions, personal interests, hobbies and current careers aside, they would clearly see that Da Vinci’s capabilities outweighed Goethe’s to deserve the entitlement of the word ‘genius’ degraded by this error.
To start, let’s show a little more integrity and state everything that Da Vinci studied and applied in lieu of a mere ‘5′ of them above:
-anatomy
-drawing / sculpting / painting
-engineering e.g. bridges
-inventions: flying machines, land vehicles, diving gear, water crafts, tanks, cranes, clocks, printing press, parachute, robot, lifting jack textiles, water pumps, canals, drills, etc.
-draftsman / cartography / writing
-architecture / mathematics
-biology / botany / geology / science
-natural history / Italian polymath
-music / musician
-philosophy, and even the telling of fables
…etc.
Second, let’s look once again at Goethe’s studies and accomplishments:
-poet
-playwright
-novelist
-theatre director
-statesman / lawyer
-critic
-amateur artist
-scientist
Review:
1)Notice that all of Goethe’s accomplishments -except for ‘being a scientist’- are limited to the capabilities of reading, creative or analytical writing and rhetoric. Anyone involved in rhetoric is leaving the room only involved with absolute truths and entering a room of manipulation. Manipulation is a matter of having the character to defend falsities, not genius. My own dog goes out to fake like he’s peeing just so he’ll get a pat on the head. With pride aside, let’s at least utilize a little candor and admit something about literary fields of work. As Henry David Thoreau once said, “To say things that you will not hear, to write things that you will not read, that is to do rare things.” His point being the same as even Goethe’s: “All truly wise thoughts have already been thought thousands of times.” Anyone who considers them self an adamant reader knows that this is true.
2)Goethe was a ‘critic’? Do we seriously have to deny the fact that literally anyone can criticize anything?
3)Goethe was an ‘amateur’ artist?
4) Most importantly, Da Vinci achieved far more capabilities than Goethe to constitute evidence for deserving the ‘genius’ title. People forget that everything is in opinion, e.g. Faust or Da Vinci’s infamous paintings. The only thing left that points towards ‘genius’ is one’s capabilities and innovation. The inventions, and the numerous fields of study that Da Vinci mastered and pioneered truly outnumber Goethe’s, Shakespeare’s and Mozart’s. We have to put our personal passions and interests aside and admit the obvious.
87. Rokket Doktor - April 27th, 2008 at 6:05 am
where’s tesla???
88. TookForeverToRead - May 6th, 2008 at 2:52 am
there should be a rule that says “before you respond/complain, you should read the whole page”. i’ve seen so many people either say the same thing as a bunch of people before them, or wonder how the I.Q. points were awarded, when not only does the author of the page explain that (where to find out, atleast), but it was also explained a bunch of times during the additional comments.
89. pinklady - May 11th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
what happened to sr. isaac newton or einstein?
90. jajdude - May 17th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Maybe Aristotle could be up there too?
91. jajdude - May 17th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
maybe Shakespeare too
92. jim - May 19th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
i cant belive that all of you people are such nerds. who does this suff. iam here for school. GET A LIFE….and end it
93. nerd - May 20th, 2008 at 11:38 am
i can’t believe that someone who considers “talk of great minds and thier accomplishments” to be a “nerd” thing to do, is actually ON this website.. don’t respond just to insult people. i mean you wouldn’t like it if i told you to “go back to jock-straps-r-us, now would you? how could anyone consider conversation about great minds to be a what makes you ask “who does this suff”? obviously, people who are curious about the minds of mankind, heh.
94. Ryan Sklenar - May 20th, 2008 at 11:42 am
I say, “learning about a genius mind of the past, promotes inspirational thinking for the minds of the future.” -Ryan Sklenar
95. jack h - May 21st, 2008 at 12:21 pm
I think jim needs to learn to appreciate the minds that made his priveledged life possible. It is only through the accomplishements of great men like these that he has anything technologicaly advanced. Next time he is siiting on the crapper he should think of how these men helped get him a working toilet.
96. jim - May 21st, 2008 at 12:24 pm
hey guys i am really sorry about what i said earlier. you guys are right.i should really learn to appriciate the work of our forefathers. i mean withour benjamin franklin where would we be, and sir issac newton? they were amazing contributers to the new era of physics and electricity.what i’m saying is that i feel really bad about slamming all you nerds out there,which i am now one of… so if all you would forgive me i would be more than happy to contribute my input on some of the greatest geniuses ever, such as ben franklin and galileo. so please, i am begging all of you, giveth me thus another chance.
97. jimmy - May 21st, 2008 at 12:30 pm
You guys are should not be allowed to waste your time on this. You have no lives. You need to leave your house every once in while. The world has more to offer than geniuses. Maybe you should go to some sort of public event. I know it would be way out of your small little shell, but thats O.K. Now go et a life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
98. nerd-hater-girl - May 22nd, 2008 at 4:43 pm
i know as a female on this website the main readers and writers of these aforementioned comments will be quite unused to conversing with me. i assure you while i am a girl, i am only scary if you mess with me. now, listen to me little nerd boys. Do not be afraid to come out into the light friends! do not sit alone in your well-equiped basements playing dungeons and dragons any more!! your acne and your mother will thank you for some fresh air into your sweaty pores. i’m sure you all have your reasons for staying alone on friday nights: homework, this website, and possibly even some video game forum. but please. before you venture into the beautiful world i am a part of…do us all a favor. take a shower. buy some good acne products. i recommend a visit to your dermotologist. and maybe toss the old shirts proclaiming your nerdhood into a trash compactor. then maybe you could get a high five from a fat chick. its all you’ve got to hope for. and no, you will not dominate the earth and take over the more attrative people that mocked you. you will end up living in your moms basement until she dies…and maybe for a few weeks after. so good luck or in your speak ” may the force be with you!!”
-to nerds everywhere. we are sick of seeing you in your current condition. beautify the earth! and wash your face!
99. SpeedReader - May 24th, 2008 at 11:11 am
visiting this site takes but a few minutes, and if you get really caught up in something interesting, then maybe an hour or 2. either way, it’s far from ANYONE’S whole life, just a nice little perk, an extra bit of interesting info to add to a day filled with many things OTHER than this website.
100. avi - May 27th, 2008 at 3:21 am
there’s lots more geniuses, why not list all of them
101. nerd -hater- boy - May 28th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
Nerd hater girl what are you doing. You are inviting nerds into the world of the living, us, the beautiful people. Dont encourage them to break free from their basement bondage, and breed with other nerds. You are playing with a dangerous thing, think of the consequences for human life.
102. Crimanon - May 28th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Nerd-hater-boy and girl: Shouldn’t you two be on the beach dying of skin cancer?
103. shuja - June 4th, 2008 at 11:57 pm
where is Albert Einestien ,he was a real genius , have you forgot him or left intentionally
104. sensible guy - June 16th, 2008 at 4:01 am
This list is ridiculous. The idea of genius needs to be related to achievement. Its just insane that someone like Einstein isn’t on there. He single-handedly came up with, what is often regarded as, the greatest physics theory of all time, General Relativity. This theory and others have revolutionised the way we consider the universe. If some of these other guys are so smart, why don’t they come up with something as grand and profound themselves. The reason they don’t is because they can’t.
And don’t even get me started on Newton’s amazing achievements or Shakespeare’s.
Someone who actually understands genius realises it so important to look at what they have achieved, not whether they can solve a few trivial little IQ puzzles.
105. Captain Obvious - June 17th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
although a great accomplishment is a good indicator of a high IQ, i still believe that just because you have a high IQ doesn’t mean you will achieve great things, and just because you achieved great things, doesn’t mean you have a higher IQ than someone who Didn’t achieve those same things, unless both parties have had identical lives up until the point that the “great things” were achieved, and they each wanted to accomplish the same “great things”. many things, such as a lack of drive or ambition, depression, or just being pre-occupied with things other than “great things” your whole life, could explain why genius “a” did less “great things” than genius “b”, but that doesn’t mean genius “a” has any less of an IQ then genius “b”. perhaps “a” had no desire to do what the judges (you, the masses, whoever) considered to be “great things”. Unless you’ve seen them fail (and even then, they’d have to fail repeatedly to convince me), i don’t think you could say they Couldn’t do it, just that they Didn’t do it. also, i agree about the trivial little IQ tests, especially the geographically biased ones, not being a 100% accurate measurment of an IQ, unless you know EVERYTHING that the subject has and hasn’t been exposed to.
106. 123 - June 20th, 2008 at 11:38 pm
Racists!
Europeans are supposed to be the smart ones?
Puhleeze…
Asian fart sounds better than your biased statements…
Research more on thos people who live in the biggest continent. cause that’s most likely where you are going to find the smartest people.
Whit supremacists!
107. Joe - June 21st, 2008 at 9:36 pm
Wheres Ronald McDonald?
108. Crimanon - June 21st, 2008 at 9:41 pm
I tell, you were getting some Real geniuses in here!
109. rushfan - June 21st, 2008 at 9:56 pm
duh, at the Ronald McDonald house.
110. poetryman103 - June 24th, 2008 at 7:50 am
what about bohr one of the only guys to make Einstein to look at the uncernity princple and realise it was true and create the Copenhagen view of quantum mechanics from einstein own thought expreiment.
111. UGK - June 29th, 2008 at 4:49 pm
What?
Where the hell is William J. Sidis? Pretty shocked not seeing him in the first place…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_James_Sidis
112. Mark - June 30th, 2008 at 10:21 am
My IQ is around 183. No joke.