[extropy-chat] it's all understandable, except

[MB]

>
> So I retort that the "wrecked ones" MB speaks of---having succumbed
> to drugs, drinking, and other maladaptive behaviors---are a small
> minority.  Almost everyone turns out (as in the twin studies) pretty much
> the same as if they'd been raised hundreds of miles apart by
> entirely different families.
>

Perhaps it is that I do not know if the ones I see dragging about were actually "the
brightest" - really they probably were not, but they were bright and bored and not
challenged or meaningfully encouraged.

Also, my perception is skewed by the dyslexic child problem... a bright child who
cannot seem to move ahead in the "school-approved" fashion. And they *do* become
discouraged and they do tend to get into trouble. Acting out, boredom, considered
stupid and knowing they really aren't but everybody thinks they are... frustration.

We need to nurture the bright ones, all of them, not simply the very top ones,
because who on earth will the very top ones find to help them at their work?

Do we notice how many of the very brightest seem to have had non-traditional schooling?

I'm bitter on the dyslexic thing, my son is one of them. My brother is another.
Looks like my great-nephew is also one. The schools (public schools, USA) often have
nothing much to offer.

Regards,
MB