Intelligence has nothing to do with speed

Love this, from Laurent Schwartz‘s ‘A Mathematician Grappling with his Century’ [via Jo Boaler]

“I was always deeply uncertain about my own intellectual capacity; I thought I was unintelligent.  And it is true that I was, and still am, rather slow.  I need time to seize things because I always need to understand them fully.  Even when I was the first to answer the teacher’s questions, I knew it was because they happened to be questions to which I already knew the answer.  But if a new question arose, usually students who weren’t as good as I was answered before me. Towards the end of the eleventh grade, I secretly thought of myself as stupid.  I worried about this for a long time.

I never talked about this to anyone, but I always felt convinced that my imposture would someday be revealed: the whole world and myself would finally see that what looked like intelligence was really just an illusion.  If this ever happened, apparently no one noticed it, and I’m still just as slow. (…)At the end of the eleventh grade, I took the measure of the situation, and came to the conclusion that rapidity doesn’t have a precise relation to intelligence.  What is important is to deeply understand things and their relations to each other.  This is where intelligence lies.  The fact of being quick or slow isn’t really relevant.  Naturally, it’s helpful to be quick, like it is to have a good memory.  But it’s neither necessary nor sufficient for intellectual success.