There is a big difference between smartness and genius. I consider quite a few people smarter than I am in this dimension or that – and I think it’s related to their ability to master things like chess, chemistry, and mathematics, using axiomatic systems to permute applications of rules within the limits of the game. In other words, those people that live in a world of proofs I consider smart.
I suppose I COULD work in that ﬁeld, but axiomatic thought is a very different way of thinking from theoretic. In my world there are no rules, there is only information and order. To some degree I see all rules as errors, or contrivances, the same way I see legislation and norms.
Unlike the axiomatic mind, the theoretical mind does not work with boundaries at all, but with creating new orders in order to break through the boundaries that limit us.
This, I think, is the difference between the techniques of deviant and cunning, moral and wise, axiomatic and smart, theoretical and genius. Some of us cunningly circumvent rules, some morally work within them, some us axiomatically think of new ways to apply them, and some of us theoretically think of new organization of rules – all of us using slightly different methods of decidability.
Intelligence can be applied using cunning (immoral), moral (wise), axiomatic (smart), and theoretical (genius) methods. I think this is the correct framing of a problem where we generally confuse ourselves through conﬂation, and allows us to consider ethics and methods of thought as separate axis.