<p>
It is true that a good number of CS majors who got into the tech field at a very young age, but asserting that that’s necessary to succeed is so wrong it hurts. I didn’t learn how to program until college and I certainly did not play with circuits or html as a kid. Neither did most of the other CS majors at my college. Doesn’t mean that we cannot have successful careers in the tech industry.</p>
<p>kmazza, I…I… I don’t even know what to say</p>
<p>Any can do well at a subject if they are willing to put in the time. It’ll just take some people more time than others.</p>
<p>Also, comp sci is a lot of problem solving and algorithims. If you have the ability to run those through in your head to a decent level and you generally have good problem solving skills you’ll be able to succeed. I don’t think everyone can do that, whether they try to learn it or not.</p>
<p>Also, as far as your roommate goes, they may have taken the class already. I had to retake Calc 3 because it didn’t transfer from my senior year of HS. I hardly studied and just chilled all semester. I wasn’t naturally smarter than everyone else, I just had already done it.</p>
<p>My roommate?!?!? I just wanted to get the math class and homework out of the way is all. </p>
<p>Want to understand Computer Science better…read philosophy!</p>
<p>Elimanative materialists, determinists, and computationalists deny the idea of free will. I hear people always blindly saying well we humans have free will. Fair enough…prove it then!</p>
<p>Some people ,no matter how hard they try ,will not do as well as some people . Do the best that you can ,and don’t beat yourself up if you don’t get an A .</p>
<p>i agree with fauxmmaven. not getting an A doesnt mean your stupid or anything. everyone’s brain comprehends things in different ways. i know you’re in college, but maybe your brain isnt matured enough to handle what your doing, maybe next year everything will be smoother.</p>
<p>brain maturity has little to do with intelligence as well and doing computational processessing </p>
<p>While you people are at it, if care too…</p>
<p>Please prove that love exists too over the argument that it is just a bio chemical hormonal reaction causing glandular actitivity, heightened bodily sensations, and a state of euphoria.</p>
<p>kmazza^ it actually has a lot to do with it.</p>
<p>brain maturity based on the IQ ends up being circular reasoning. Again prove ‘it’</p>
<p>Humans are very resilient. Adaptive behavior (vs rigidity), efficacy, and efficiency display better results of fluidic and crystaline intelligence than any IQ test.</p>
<p>Rinse. Wash. Repeat.</p>
<p>IQ tests are bs.</p>
<p>Naturally smart people do exist, they have photographic memories.</p>
<p>Eidetic memory has shown to have very low correlations to intelligence as well.</p>
<p>Even chimps have beat humans in tests akin to eidetic memory.</p>
<p>I did some basic research and found ZERO evidence for actual eidetic memory even with all the studies and contests. Many claimed to have it (to feel special?!?!) but no proof. </p>
<p>Ironically, one guy who claimed up and down that he had it and could remember anything including words and phrase spelled eidetic incorrectly.</p>
<p>^then it sounds SUPER credible</p>
<p>More like an urban legend.</p>
<p>In general I don’t believe people are naturally smart, but there need to be some qualifications there:</p>
<p>There ARE people who have photographic memories or Edietic memories (yes I know they’re the same thing but I’m seperating them because when you talk about people with Edietic memories it’s generally referring to the people who have that to a VERY high degree and photographic memory generally refers to someone with a weaker Edietic memory… just my two cents).</p>
<p>And I believe there are people who are Low Effort High Output students (I think there’s a more clinical term for it). That’s to say they’ve learned how to get the same effect from 1 hour of studying as others do from 2 or more. </p>
<p>I think people can develop degrees of both through study skills but other people have the neurological structure for it.</p>
<p>ALL that said… OP, you shouldn’t give up. Like others have said, try and ask the people who are getting As and see what they’re doing different then work to that. It might be worth asking how you study and memorize… so much of college work is memorization, even in math.</p>
<p>kmazza - ever heard of stephen wiltshire, you smelly ■■■■■?</p>
<p>
naturally smart … to get straight … huh
wat
also, this makes sense cause those are probably people who’ve actually <em>read</em> their religion’s comical texts</p>
<p>I don’t understand how you can’t think someone can be born worth a hereditary advantage toward inteligence. Especialy when you can be born with advantages/disadvantages toward everything else.</p>
<p>So you think everybody can be an Albert Einstein? Nikola Tesla? Newton, Hawking, Shakespeare, Jefferson, Bach Mozart Faraday Locke, Nash, Malkmus?</p>
<p>…
simple google search first 2 results:
[Researchers</a> confirm association between gene and intelligence](<a href=“http://www.physorg.com/news91799494.html]Researchers”>Researchers confirm association between gene and intelligence)
[Heritability</a> of IQ - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ]Heritability”>Heritability of IQ - Wikipedia)
…
and these aren’t saying that there’s a specific IQ gene and it’s as simple as having a cleft chin or not, but these are saying that there are various genes that have roles in various pathways involved in critical thinking, logical reasoning, spatial and visual perception, etc. All of these are factors that contribute to intelligence. And sure, there are other non-hereditary genetic factors as well - I guess some people with mental disorders, maybe synaesthesia, whatever you define as intelligent. What do you think is the difference between us humans and jellyfish? We have the genes that code for advanced nervous systems, complex brains, etc. Even within the same species, not everyone has the same genetic code. There have to be differences somewhere.</p>
<p>On cell so too much to type articulately. Extensively read about history of iq so understand where im coming from. Yes mix of genes and environment. Bit of a on off effect. Defects can enhance intelligence too. The brain is kinda clunky with residual primitive thoughts. Evolutionaly residual effects are flaws that are your personality. Proteins and neural synapses dont always fire the way someone wants. There is lots going on under the surface that is denied n buried for coping reasons. Are you honest about your own conditioning and random thoughts n opinions? Too many complexities to oversimplify intelligence.</p>
<p>You should go back and read the artical again. She didnt confirm crap. Jus another expensive study with mediocre results. The title is totally misleading hype.</p>