The differences in Insanity and Genius

Probably a question asked by many a person throughout the years, each with a different theory on its answer. Fortunately for me I am not of a stature deemed sociologically astute enough for my theory to be questioned, so I can actually give my views quite freely and without the worries of an uproar! To be honest I probably wouldn’t care for anyone else’s view or opinion anyway. Although my question I frequently ask is probably one of the most random you will hear, its answer, in my view is one of the reasons I believe I am here writing today. Let me explain.

When Alexander Graham Bell picked up his telephone idea out of whatever crevise in his mind that idea lay dormant, how do you think people felt when he turned to a bunch and said:

“I am going to create something where I can be in one place and you can be elsewhere and we can talk!”

Let’s be realistic, they probably looked at him and thought he was absolutely mental!

How do you think people felt when Man said he would fly to the moon? If I told you now that we are sending a spaceship into the universe and guess what, its going to take pictures of Mars. You would probably look at me and ‘think this guy is an idiot, move with the times'

Genius and Insanity is in fact the same thing, there is no difference what so ever. Genius and Insanity is judged by whom? Psychologists? And who the hell are they? People that are trained in psychological theories and understand the way the mind works. So?

I am going to break this down in the way that I perceive it. However many years ago a telephone was created, and today is an integral part of our daily life. Even though years before that anyone would could conceptualise such a thought would have been placed in a strait jacket, as time moved forward with technology theories were given space to develop. Now what is the definition of a Genius? Extraordinary intellectual and creative power, (as quoted by a dictionary online). Now what is Insanity? The condition of being insane; a derangement of the mind, (as quoted by a dictionary online). So in actual fact reading both the sentences back there is a striking similarity that would definitely support my view. If something is ‘extraordinary’ it is different; if something is deranged then it is ‘out of the ordinary’? In which case, both statements would actually mean exactly the same thing, the only difference being the way the Titles are perceived. The ONLY reason that one deemed Insane is because our ‘Social Norms’ would pronounce it so. The only way you can be classed Insane is to do something completely out of the ordinary that is not in accordance with our Laws as Human Beings, put in place by who? Other Human Beings throughout the course of time. So in actual fact there is no one to say that actions that would deem you Insane in 2010 would be classed as Normality in 2040! The same way that Genius is Genius because other Human Beings have classed them Genius because they have done something out of the ordinary that IS in accordance with Human Law. Like if I said I am going to be able to fly by the time I am 30 and tried to jump off a building everyday they would lock me up and throw away the key. Would not the same have happened 1000 years ago if someone tried to start a piece of metal up with a motor, throw it off a cliff saying that they were going to put seats in it, and next time fly from the UK to Jamaica in that very contraption. They would tell you get on your Horse and go for a ride!

I am not saying that Insanity is good in any respect here, I am saying that Genius and Insanity has a very thin mark of moral between it. Of course there are people that just take the biscuit, like those locking up kids and killing thousands of people and getting away with it. But in their own World they would be Genius to those that like that kind of thing, do you catch my drift? The only difference is that their actions are applauded and wondered by the minority whereas people like Michael Jackson are applauded by the majority and so he is a Genius, which I would agree with! But my point is that are thought patterns are affected by sociological development more so than anything else. To think outside the box is always hard, always, especially when those around you would call you crazy for some actions. These people that have made millions of pounds in short periods of time have done one of two things: Either been extremely lucky; or done something that no one else thought of, or attempted at the time.

My argument would be that the view of Genius or Insanity is not actually concurrent with what Pyschologists or Scientists theoretically assume. In my 'view' I am of the the contention that the two are actually identical. The only differences between them is in fact society. It is Society and the way Society changes through TIME that the line between the two extremes is found. The way that most would perceive the two extremes would be to automatically class someone a certain one and then disregard anything else but their reasons for being a Genius or Insane. The thinking process is therefore blocked about history or future because our minds are trained to do so because of the Norms we are accustomed to in every day life. If people were to question the Norms and think outside of society's psychological protocol then we would have a generation of thinkers, in which case the infrastructure of schooling and education would therefore be in direct question. There is so much that would be in question in fact, that just simple questions like this Genius and Insanity one would lead to people questioning Earth's entire psychological dispostion. We are taught to think in certain ways depending on where we have come from, who we associate with and many other factors....I will go on to these in time. My first post is merely to pose a question that will develop thinking on a deeper level. If we are 'told' something by someone in a position we would consider ample enough to enlighten us, it is unlikely we would question it, we would take it as gospel almost. If we are in coversation with people we would see from a similar background, of the same intelligence etc, we would be more likely to 'discuss' instead of being 'talked at'.