Daniel Tammet, who can recite the first 22,514 digits of the mathematical constant pi.
Image: Jerome Tabet
Daniel Tammet is author of two books, Born on a Blue Day and Embracing the Wide Sky, the latter of which came out in January. He is also a linguist and holds the European record for reciting the first 22,514 digits of the mathematical constant pi. Scientific American Mind contributing editor Jonah Lehrer chats with Tammet about the way his memory works, why the IQ test is overrated, and a possible explanation for extraordinary feats of creativity.
Scientific American Mind: Your recent memoir, Born on a Blue Day, documented your life as an autistic savant. You describe, for example, how you are able to quickly learn new languages and remember scenes from years earlier in cinematic detail. Are you ever surprised by your own abilities?
See what we're tweeting about
49 Comments
Add CommentI am not convinced that memory and intelligence go together
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisas the author seems to suggest
example iq =150, memory= 110 -->same person
"The bell curve distribution for IQ scores tells us that two thirds of the worlds population has an IQ somewhere between 85 and 115. This means that some four and a half billion people around the globe share just 31 numerical values ( hes a 94, youre a 110, Im a 103 ), equivalent to 150 million people worldwide sharing the same IQ score. This sounds a lot to me like astrology, which lumps everyone into one of 12 signs of the zodiac."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's plain he doesn't understand IQ. It's simply a measure of ability, like how long you can hold your breath or how much weight you can lift. If we tested everyone in the world on a 50m track, there would be a bell-curve distribution of times.
Instead of thinking that everyone can be savants, he should realize the uniqueness of his gift and, if he wants to share it, to figure out how to present it in a way that is understandable by that great swath of humanity in the first SD of IQ.
but you have to realize that any test cannot accruatly show everones full potetal, because people specialize in certin areas and if it isnt taking tests then they would not do well, like einstein, he was horrible at basic math but he renouned as one of the worlds most brealiant mind. no one does everything the same even breathing and other functions we say are all the same.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@ gmpalmer, i think he meant that the resolution of the IQ scale is so poor that it is too generalized to meaningful on a personal level.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe IQ scale is too generalized but it is not designed for one to analyze their own skills; it's to compare yourself to the masses.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's important for people who struggle to learn to be vocal about their processes/experiences because they are the ones who have the most intimate understanding of the workings of the human brain. Perhaps his brain is structured differently than 'the norm' but it's this contrast that teaches us the most.
Even if you can't see your thoughts in Technicolor, we've all taken the time to work around our own mental limitations and are (hopefully) able to steer our own ship.
I agree with Tammut considering IQ. While it indeed may measure a person's ability in certain areas, it does not equate to the totality of intelligence nor does it measure potential.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisUltimately the brain is highly plastic and adapts the the environment and the conditions it is exposed to. It is said that the number of neural connections exceeds the number of elementary particles in the universe. If the brain is plastic, and extremely complex, why do we measure it's capabilities using static and oversimplified tests?
I am shocked by this superman. He is the lucky version of mackintosh
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI do not understand that why people choose only a small portion of the article and start giving their thought only about that portion. There are lot of ideas in this except the usefulness of the IQ test.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt almost seems as there are two types of intelligence that are somewhat independent of each other in terms of level of development. The kind that the author specializes in relies on hyperconnectivity and benefits from the brain being able to form connections betweens sounds, words, shapes, numbers ideas etc- basically the ability to make schemes. The other would be the ability to take sensory messages (sight, hearing, smell, touch) and being able to quickly and effectively translate them into information, which animals tend to be good at. That would explain the author's inability to look people in the eye and socialize effectively- so much of social interaction is the ability to process sensory information, and it seems that for him that 'intelligence' was less developed. I'm not an expert though; that's only my guess.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think you're right that working memory does not drive intelligence, however, I think memory helps us manage quantitative thought. Without it, we could never build beyond momentary thought.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI envy his level of function. Without seeing things as three dimensional objects and building a spacial relationship to other objects, I have trouble remembering or understanding. But once the matrix is built, watch out! Unfortunately, I don't relate to people well enough or find myself on the same page often enough for this to be an advantage. They just give me weird looks and brush me off. Then again, I'm not high functioning like Daniel. And maybe I'm just on the wrong end of the IQ bell curve...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisthink you're right that working memory does not drive intelligence, however, I think memory helps us manage quantitative thought. Without it, we could never build beyond momentary thought.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisi am agree with mavstar methinks.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat I find amazing is Tammut's facility with numbers in the base ten system, which unlike base 2 or base 16, is not an especially natural system of numbers.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMethinks Mavstar's comment sounds very reasonable too. I also think there are very few people that can understand or even appreciate perceived abnormal brain function within the definition of intelligence. In other words, when it comes to human based intelligence there is more than one way to peel a banana, and there is value in the variety even though few people can understand that. It sounds like Daniel is one of those lucky people. I'm interested in reading more of what he has to say in his books.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWow, this man is a pretty amazing person indeed. The variety and power of the human mind never fails to astound me. I believe that we all think like this to some degree, or at least I do. I wouldn't say that I think of 111 as 'lumpy and round" but numbers certainly do have there own character. And I find that in learning foreign languages making connections between the words and their situation is incredibly helpful.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWell it just shows how little we know about our intelligence, why they come from, and how they function. The brain is just as mysterious as the universe.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt looks as if the brain tries to 'heal' itself of deficits such as autism. I don't know enough about the causes of autism to make more than a scientific guess but I've read that researchers think that autism is caused by a lack of 'mirror' neurons which in turn causes an autistic person to have difficulty (or find impossible) seeing the feelings, mood, etc. in another person's face or body language. This deficit must also show itself as a difficulty in forming other generalizations.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTo function successfully the autistic person must find 'work-arounds' for the deficit which involve subconscious processes developed from childhood.
When I was a child I had a similar mathematical memory but it faded as I grew to adulthood. I'm not autistic but my mother is. I don't know if it's possible to have a partial autistic brain but I've never been diagnosed with autism. I was sent to a psychologist as a young man, had many tests and some psychotherapy until it was finally discovered that my MOTHER was autistic and that my problems stemmed from her undiagnosed autism!
Anyway, even into middle school, I was able to effortlessly memorize all of the baseball averages of all MLB players, including the number of doubles, triples, etc. And I was not a geek but spent most of my early years playing team sports and had little time for studying.
My mother has developed many odd ways of seeing the world that allow her to function and 'seem' normal. They are based on making analogies and metaphors that wouldn't occur to most people.
Sheransky, the man with the photographic memory described by the Russian psychologist Luria, had a similar incapacity to recognize faces (generalization.) He could memorize virtually anything to the point that sometimes he become so entranced 'seeing' a past action as in a film, that he became confused about the reality his present experiences which were not different from his memory of past events.
But Sheransky couldn't remember faces, he said, because they changed from one moment to the next to such an extent that they no longer looked the same. A clear indication that he couldn't generalize.
I was able to learn high school mathematics with ease, (Euclidean geometry, for example) and could read feelings, remember faces and do other generalizing tasks very easily and I think that's why my extraordinary arithmetic skills died off. Also, when I was about 10, the other students got very annoyed when I multiplied 3 digit numbers in my head :) They had no trouble admiring my skills as an athlete, however.
My IQ tested at 133 and 131 on 2 tests at 50< now 80. I do not think You can test someones IQ unless you are higher IQ, not the scriveners that make the silly dot patterns. I had to "back out" the writers bias in many questions to know what they meant. I know I can make better electronic designs than most all EE's.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo much for measurement of IQ and the presumption that tests are anything more than standards of prior experience.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWithout useful observations of individual adaptable cognate functions we place everyone under the same bell jar, some to suffocate, most to stagnate. and a few rise through luck, genes, nutrition, family support, sociability and tenacity, to play the game according to the rules.
Proof of individuality is the foundation for equality of legal rights, something antithetical to the democratic claims of special interest groups and the entitlement politics. The human brain has yet to evolve to a state where perception and intellect can function beyond needs of belief.
Memory is an integral part of intelligence, just about all top level chess players can play 5 0r 6 chess games blindfolded at the same time. They are able to do this because they are able to retain each separate position in their memory. Normal less intelligent people are unable to do this because their power of memory is not strong enough. Exceptional memory always seems to be present among the super intelligent. However it is always good to define intelligence when speaking such matters.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI did not know how to access my memory until I tried to create a method of storage for easier retrieval and found out that my mind had already cross referenced and very cleanly identified broad areas for function and other areas for general storage. I thought everyone had this connection until I spent my first day in a school setting. Most of my math skills were bound by music and colors which to me were tied to ratios.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMy surroundings were bilingual, therefore I was. Needless to say I found this a good read.
So I learned that he has synesthesia too....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPeople who try to represent their view of "intelligence" as what they are best at do not amuse me. How are his problem solving skills? Shouldn't that be a huge part of intelligence too; the ability to actually use things you memorize rather than forming very speculative theories (superconnectivity- not sure about that one...)
This article also failed to deliver what the title promised. Any "advice" that was given was only specific to his own style of thinking (he even stated that we should nurture our own specific brain/learning functions and not conform to standards/what we are told by others).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMemory must certainly play a role in intelligence. We can be as efficient as it comes when performing problem solving tasks, but without the room to build up your observations and calculations, they are just instantanious and become less useful. Think multiplying two three digit numbers:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this398
x
129
You must not only know what 8 x 9 is, but you must hold onto that and accumulate an answer.
Also think of how a computer works. This is the most basic model of problem solving. A very simplified brain, but it is important to utilize memory in order to be useful. A processor can be as powerful as they come, but without the room and organization to group the calculations, they would be useless. Without it, you would have to map the exact calculation to the solution directly.
I'm not sure I understand your perspective Kevin. It seems like you're saying that intelligence only exists when it can benefit the masses. But I think the inherent ability of individuals to have an intelligent state of being exists separately from how their intelligence is applied to the human system. For example, a high performance car with a high performance engine is high performance regardless of whether it's ever put on the roads. One problem is that our societies tend to not take full advantage of the "intelligence" each individual has to offer. We reward politicians, businessmen, sport figures, and entertainers to a greater extent than we reward researches, scientists, and inventors. Why? That's our fault.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTrue, roads need to be built and offices need to be staffed. I'm a worker bee like most of the rest. But that's not enough. We need to strive to reach beyond the human system. And we need to understand, foster, and reward intelligence in our species if we are to get there.
The title of this article is misleading: " Learn to Think Better: Tips from a Savant." Tammet did not develop the way he thinks, it appears to be organic. There is no mention if any imaging has been done to look at his brain structure, a likely contributor.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHe also makes some obvious mistakes: Words with "i" are associated with smallness? How about "high"? Words with "a" largeness? Such as "baby"?
The documentary that shows Tammet learning Icelandic in one week is truly amazing, but there is no lesson there.
Editor Jonah Lehrer needs a lesson in editoral judgement.
The perspectives given here are extremely intriguing. I'm always looking for ways to learn to think better. I'll give a genuine comment on this article after I've read the books and incorporated as much of his perspective as I can accommodate and made practices of as many of his thought processes as I can.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRather than claiming to understand why he's wrong, I'll attempt to do as he does, then I'll form my own judgment as to whether its been useful for me or not.
So many opinions here claim he should do this or that rather than what he's done, that he should have said something different, as if he should tell someone else's story rather than his own. I for one appreciate that he's given a particular view of his experience without attempting to reduce it to a formula good for the masses.
It seems to me we should rather observe examples of excellence and attempt to shape them to our talents than ask that those masters form a perfect little cube for our emulation.
I want to be exposed to as many excellent and peculiar achievements of man as I can, to vicariously join in the depths and the heights of humanity, to know that when I dream of such things deep in the night it's not pure fantasy but the whispered breath of someone else's world right here on Earth, and one I'm occasionally privileged to glimpse.
And because whatever is human is not strange to me, I enjoy what is most unique, whatever is far from the average, as a revelation of my own human capacities and a challenge to excel rather than something that should be reduced to commonality for the sake of my ease; not a raft that should sink itself so that its weight might raise all humanity, but a ship that extends a ladder that any might choose to climb.
"holds the European record for reciting the first 22,514 digits of the mathematical constant pi." Perhaps computer chips are also savants.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTo learn a language you have to use the "natural" way.: listening...listening...understanding...repeating...repeating...speaking. A chinese kid learned a supossed difficult idiom ( to us ) whitout problems...and speaks. I�ve learned myself some languages without toil, following this very simple instructions, and the golden rule.: practice makes master. I mean "speaking" not reading.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"I am unusually creative" There is absolutely no evidence for his self-proclamed creativity. H e has literally no knowledge of his abilities that he can communicate to others. Reciting the digits of a transcendental number is utterley useless. I have a desktop pc that can do this forever.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisit's -> its
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCombinatorial bullshit.
agc cretin, read the page again.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@gmpalmer
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisno I think he understands IQ very well. You're right, it can be compared to a 50m sprint where there will be a bell curve, but he's saying that it doesn't test for the 3000m time, or vertical jump height, or javelin throwing distance. He's saying that different brains can work very differently, and an IQ test, tests one's ability to think in a certain way.
Right on gbecdford! Very rightly and eloquently said.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is fascinating. We are all alike yet unique. Thank you for providing this individual's perspective.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisB ecause i have children with autism I am perhapse seeing a broader version of what is being expressed. I for one am very grateful for the insight and addition to knowledge this man has shared with us knowing that it could very well isolate him again. The IQ means nothing, no offense, when it comes to humanity and its potentual. The concept of IQ has been known to place labels and even hold people back when in reality it is used to place people on a sliding scale. When numbers and letters are more than just a symbology but a life in and of its self it gives me a better chance to understand and ability to assist children with learning disabilities. If I can understand their way of thinking then i can in turn teach them the way the average human thinks.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe vowels in hi[g]h and bab[y] hav been corrupted after the death of English 1000 years ago. But Tammet means the vowels in Latin, not in English or today's Einglish. Hihness then is farness or seemly smallness, and the a in bab, ma, and pa are wrihtly more ah or uh than a.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDANIEL TAMMET is indeed a special case in the world of autistic savants in that he has insights into his "unique" brain functioning... and yes, he can to some degree, explain and communicate his "intelligence" to others, particularly interested neuroscientists.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOf course, these savant abilities usually extract a dear price on the social side, and Daniel has not escaped unscathed. He has major OCD and autistic rituals consume much of his conscious thought.
What I personally find fascinating are twofold. One relates to the (bogus) notion of (contra-causal) "free will"... the other relates to brain function and further persuasive evidence (as if we needed more) on how the mind and brain are indeed one.
Clearly, austic spectrum disoder is one of the prime examples... along with many other psychopathologies, which should demonstrate to any thinking person that unfettered free will (FW) is absurd. FW suggests an ethereal agency, from some unknown source, by some unknown mechanism, supervening , real time, on our physical brains. This supernatural soul-based concept, like the childish religious notions of angels and demons, has absolutely no basis in fact.
Many savant-like abilities "emerge" in otherwise "normal" adults after some sort of head trauma or seizure activity... only to wane over time. When I first heard of Tammet's savant abilities with calculations, I wondered about his childhood... and soon discovered his intractable seizures as the explanation. Once again, the brain fully instantiates the mind, whether or not we can measure or map the details of his "hyperconnectedness". What is unassailable is that changes in the brain are predictably reflected in its function (aka, "the mind").
The notions of free willing soul and a mind as somehow existing apart from the physical brain... is... dumb.
I'm sorry...but where is the genius here? A self admitted autistic with no social skills, and a "learning disability" is telling me that he dances with numbers in his mind and has made up his own vocabulary too. Sounds more like someone who cannot cope with society as a whole. So you memorize, sorry, danced with over 22k digits of pi. That and 75-cents will get you a cup of coffee. Where's the science here? Where's the gold nugget of HOW this mind works and how it can be applied to the general population? There are plenty of individuals out there with high/low IQ's (not that IQ is really relevant to begin with anyway), that can do amazing things in isolated environments, but cannot transfer knowledge and leverage it, or have it leveraged for the greater good of humanity. Again, sorry, but a waste of a report.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere is a great deal of misunderstanding about the uses of IQ testing. FSIQ, the single number that preoccupies the lay public, is of very limited clinical utility.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf we look at the most frequently used intelligence test for adults, the Wechsler, note that the full name of the test is the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales [PLURAL] IV. The WAIS consists of 12 different tests that sample widely varying functions. Standard scores are generated for each of the different subtests. Aggregate Verbal and Non-Verbal scores and the single number (FSIQ) are also calculated. We also generate 4 indexes that look separately at Verbal Comprehension, Working (maintenance) Memory, Perceptual Organization and Processing Speed Index. These indexes were derived through factor analysis.
Clinicians look at differences between all the scaled (normed) scores and indexes, comparing them to the statistically expected values. From these calculations, we generate hypotheses about relative cognitive strengths and weaknesses--relative, that is, to oneself and relative to the population against which the tests were normed. This is always done with an eye toward empirical measures of reliability and validity.
But, this isn't even close to the whole story of assessment. We don't just give someone a set of IQ scales and assume that we have the full picture of their cognitive and intellectual functioning. Indeed, there are times when a test like the Wechsler is of little use in answering the referral question.
Psychometricians understand that they are sampling functions, so they attempt to sample based on the specific referral questions. This means they might use 5, 10 or more other tests in addition to an "IQ test" in order to sample functioning in different and overlapping domains. We never assume we've measured every aspect of cognitive, perceptual or mental functioning. But, that's okay, because we aren't trying to do that. We strive to use empirically validated methods to adequately sample from those domains that are specifically relevant to answering the specific referral question(s). It's not a blind fishing expedition. We target, but sample deeply, using multiple instruments.
Tammet's world, in which 2/3 of the population is characterized by 31 values, ignores the way IQ tests are actually used. The truth is that a test like the Wechsler generates an enormous number of score profiles (far more than 31) that can tell us a great deal about individual differences in cognitive and perceptual functioning.
What is the working memory?the short term memory where you keep a telephone number for a moment until you dial it or long term memory were a known telephone number is stored or is it interactive memory that I am using now to type this comment which is a composite of (inspirational memory,(ideas that pop into my mind),the long term memory typing, and spelling or what ever I learned about memory,from useing it or none of these and it is just the subconscious mind doing it's thing? makes you think.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDon't post too much of the related information or else what you are thinking is being abused unfairly since people will collect them into their books and resell in the market places and you will rebuy them with your own money for your own thoughts....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDon't post too much of the related information or else what you are thinking is being abused unfairly since people will collect them into their books and resell in the market places and you will rebuy them with your own money for your own thoughts....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA person could be illiterate yet could be intelligent.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIQ tests would not "measure" that person at all.
IQ test measure only whet the test makers choose.
Was Mozart as intelligent as Pythagoras?
Was Ghengis Khan as intelligent as Confucius?
No single test could have accurately measured all these people and even "ranking" them seems absurd.
Wonderful article!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWonderful article!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIcertainly agree, memory helps, but being intelligent it what helps you to make things happen
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf I follow your post, you believe that EVERYTHING is brain based? This is much too limiting of an idea, and is analogous to paying attention only to the car and ignoring the driver. Past life accounts, as well as my own experiences, have proven to me that I am more than my brain, and that something survives my mere body. Now, I suspect that you will conclude that somehow my brain has deceived me, but perhaps the truth is that YOURS has deceived YOU by limiting your perceptions and/or beliefs? I am not being dogmatic, but I have to believe my own experiences. The BRAIN is being given way too much credit for what people do, think, and feel, but it is the only things that "scientists" can observe easily, so all explanations devolve to one organ. Sorry, way too limiting.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this