The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
This interview transcript sums up xoxohth
Poast new message in this thread
Date: May 28th, 2006 3:17 AM Author: Exhilarant Wine National Laser Beams Or at least significant portions of it. The interviewee reminded me of some of the folks here *cough*pensive*cough*. Enjoy.
http://www.counselingthegifted.com/articles/underachieve.html
|
 |
Date: May 28th, 2006 3:22 AM Author: concupiscible snowy theater that kid must not be very gifted if his first quarter grades sucked and he's going to georgia tech and why does the therapist keep going back to feelings of inadequacy; I'm pretty sure that it's grades not feelings of inadequacy that matter in college admission (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=424076&forum_id=2#5868337) |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 3:25 AM Author: Exhilarant Wine National Laser Beams It's an article on underachieving. I posted this elsewhere, but it's probably worth re-posting:
"I know someone like this too. I think it's simplistic, though, to reduce every case to laziness; the problem can attributed to many factors:
1) Boredom--some very bright kids even find it demeaning or insulting to work on repetitive or rote tasks.
2) Contempt--tied into the boredom problem, students may eventually develop contempt for the academic system, feeling that it is a worthless rat race and not worthy of their time.
3) Fear of failure--shattering the illusion of being brilliant by actually challenging oneself.
4) Fear of success--students may fear that if they perform to their potential on one assignment, they may be expected to maintain sustained, possibly even unrealistic, improvement.
5) Contributing psychological/environmental factors--being bright doesn't mean you have the ideal conditions to foster that intelligence; a broken home, drug abuse, psychological problems, and other
6) Temperment--studies show that certain types of intelligence (particularly people in creative fields such as music, painting, or literature) have an increased risk for bipolar disorder, for example. This can mean oscillations in both quality and quantity of output.
7) Self-education--it would be naive to assume everyone gets the same educational quality from a school. Many gifted students, however, find self-education to be a more useful investment of time. As a result, the student continues to learn, even though schoolwork is neglected."
http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419113&forum_id=1#5813134 |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 3:31 AM Author: concupiscible snowy theater the assumption here is that he is underachieving. it's equally plausible that those grades reflect his intelligence and he just feels bad about them because he, or his parents who are paying for the "underachieving gifted kids" therapist, wishes he was smarter
|
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 3:34 AM Author: Exhilarant Wine National Laser Beams He doesn't exactly come across as retarded in the transcript. A little histronic and melodramatic, but that's typical for adolescents. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=424076&forum_id=2#5868381) |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 3:40 AM Author: charismatic business firm Thank you for posting that interview transcript.
I notice similarities between myself and C. I was tagged as gifted (IQ in the 99.99th percentile) at an early age, and as a youngster I was an incredible overachiever. As I got older, though, I became more and more of an underachiever, and reading through this transcript helped me to understand some things about myself.
I am often bored, frequently lazy, ingenious at procastinating, have an intense fear of success/failure/rejection, and I've had significant events in my life that made it extremely difficult for me to concentrate on academics (death of family members, periods of poverty, victim of bullying/abuse as a teenager).
I learned to control my "symptoms" better than C, though. I estimate that I perform at 75% of my full capacity. It doesn't matter how difficult a school I attend, or how intense competition is at work: I manage to perfectly achieve the same level everywhere (generally doing work that receives an A- overall), regardless of the differences in environment. |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 3:46 AM Author: comical misunderstood stage i never did well grade-wise in high school except for physics. it was brand new stuff to each student in the class and hw was in effect optional. i never missed a homework assignment and devoted my every free moment to solving problems posed for bonus points. i think 1 and 2 applied there. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=424076&forum_id=2#5868409) |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 3:24 AM Author: vivacious mewling church rigpig i only read part of it, but i dont get it. the kid has good sat scores, but shitty grades, and knows the grades will keep him out of stanford. the interviewer doesn't seem to get it, this is how the admissions game works. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=424076&forum_id=2#5868348) |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 3:27 AM Author: Exhilarant Wine National Laser Beams The interviewer is a psychotherapist, trying to help him resolve the underlying issues of which those grades are only symptomatic. Anyway, read on through the kid's defense posture--pensive-worthy, really. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=424076&forum_id=2#5868363) |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 3:35 AM Author: sooty lettuce "The issue of grades has become crystallized in the client's defense posture. He has used his defense of grades for so long that he is convinced there is no other rationale or contributor to his struggles. "
in terms of college admissions, grades are pretty damn critical. |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 3:37 AM Author: Exhilarant Wine National Laser Beams Right, but he appeals to the personal exceptionalism defense by using the Einstein argument: "I'm too smart for these petty mortals and their rat races, etc., etc., etc."
Which only works, of course, if you are an Einstein. |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 4:36 AM Author: Histrionic Underhanded Senate Karate Or a Gates, or an Ellison, Hemingway, etc. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=424076&forum_id=2#5868474) |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 7:34 PM Author: Soul-stirring hyperventilating really tough guy seems quite possible to me that gates and ellison were just lucky. smart also, sure, but not freak fringe genius smart.
as an analogy, we'd think it's a pretty dumb move to drop out of school to play the lottery. it's still possible that someone would do that and win big. but it would still a bad choice, ex ante. |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 8:28 PM Author: Exhilarant Wine National Laser Beams I agree with you that Gates and Ellison aren't "freak fringe genius smart", but I don't think your analogy applies. Anticipating a market trend is not just a matter of throwing blind darts and hoping it hits bulls-eye. Figuring out what consumers will be needing or wanting in the near future is the basis of any successful business venture, which involves considerably more brainpower than pulling a slot machine lever. Some element of luck too, but not to the extent that you're framing it.
I think we were discussing wildly successful people, though. Not all of those people are "freak fringe genius smart" and not all "freak fringe genius smart" people are wildly successful. |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 10:55 PM Author: Soul-stirring hyperventilating really tough guy "Anticipating a market trend is not just a matter of throwing blind darts and hoping it hits bulls-eye."
but it could be. some market trends certainly are; tickle-me-elmo comes to mind.
if enough people threw blind darts, some of them would get very lucky. and if they all started with the amount of capital that gates and ellison started with, some of them would become fantastically rich. there is really no way to know that what happened was skill or luck. they both predicted exactly one market trend, and they both were right on the money. but people play the lottery with even longer odds every single day, and lots of them win too. |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 8:35 PM Author: narrow-minded dead corn cake gates is at very least extremely intelligent. he's exceptionally able to process and retain and synthesize huge swathes of information very quickly. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=424076&forum_id=2#5871163) |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 10:44 PM Author: Soul-stirring hyperventilating really tough guy wait, you know this how? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=424076&forum_id=2#5871933) |
|
Date: May 29th, 2006 3:21 PM Author: Amber fragrant station masturbator I think "Ganguli" is spelled with an "i." Much like "Jehovah" in Latin. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=424076&forum_id=2#5874607) |
|
Date: May 29th, 2006 3:25 PM Author: Amber fragrant station masturbator This thread is great. It's like pouring sugar out all over the sidewalk and then watching the ants come out to eat it. Now we just need a giant magnifying glass and the sun ... (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=424076&forum_id=2#5874618) |
Date: May 28th, 2006 3:40 AM Author: vivacious mewling church rigpig (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=424076&forum_id=2#5868395) |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 3:53 AM Author: Erotic mauve doctorate sound barrier So I skimmed it. The take-away seems to be that he is brilliant and he knows it, and expects perfection in himself, though doesn't do well in school because he thinks he's too good to learn under the boundaries set by the "syetem." Moreover, on standardized tests, he can do very well because there is no emotional investment in taking a test, it is purely intellectual. However, when it comes do dealing with people he is not very good because he expects perfection and complete mastery in relationships as he would in handling a test, which is impossible by definition. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=424076&forum_id=2#5868432) |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 4:31 AM Author: henna cerebral range dysfunction He thinks he's too smart for homework and grades, just like I did. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=424076&forum_id=2#5868471) |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 11:06 AM Author: Glassy Ceo that therapist is awful. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=424076&forum_id=2#5868775) |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 11:23 PM Author: Confused tattoo TITCR (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=424076&forum_id=2#5872194) |
|
Date: May 28th, 2006 11:48 PM Author: Offensive fishy keepsake machete why?
(rhetorical question, I realize you and jim criticized in absolute ignorance of psychological techniques, but did so only to appear smart). |
|
Date: May 29th, 2006 6:59 PM Author: Marvelous hairy legs persian Could someone crystalize what the therapist is trying to achieve here? Its not a case of Pensive, who is explaining away his failure to be admitted to Harvard, this is a case of a man who understands the obstacles in front of him and appears to repent his previous failures in life. I dont understand how the therapist is helping in any way. ** majorporcupine? |
|
Date: May 30th, 2006 2:37 AM Author: Exhilarant Wine National Laser Beams Nah, I was joking about pensive.
The therapist is trying to help him understand why he gets bad grades. One of the key problems that emerges during the session is that he uses poor grades to excuse himself from success. By deliberately (though unconsciously) sabotaging his transcript, he avoids having to really try--really try, even with the risk of failure. This interview is only an excerpt from others, so it may not be as clear. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2006 8:54 AM Author: rose trust fund point Subject: This passage is definitely pensive-like A: So to avoid the failure?
C: I try to avoid applying to Stanford.
A: And the price you pay?
C: Not getting in, which I could possibly do.
A: You might not get in. By avoiding taking on the challenge, you don't have to face being imperfect.
C: Right.
A: You can stay perfect forever!
(Or so his delusion would have him believe.)
C: I don't have to screw up.
This all seems very similar to pensive's rationalization that he sabotaged his Harvard application on purpose, could've gotten into Princeton but "just didn't apply," failure to apply to MIT and Caltech, and so on. |