“The test of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function” – F. Scott Fitzgerald, The Crack-Up, 1936. Do you agree with the statement? Or disagree? Or both? Please be as specific as possible and limit your answer to 1000 words.
Understanding the context -
Before debating the degree of agreement with the given statement, it’s important to step back and analyse the circumstances under which F. Scott Fitzgerald had made this observation. An established, well-acclaimed author witnessed a steep downfall after years of literary stardom. His personal problems along with his alcohol addiction further catalysed the southward process. This resulted in a physical and mental breakdown, which forced the author on the path of self-expression and public confession through his writings.
Fitzgerald always imagined himself among the top literary personalities. Despite his continuous downfall, he brought alive his imagination through his writing skills and determination. In his own words, he saw the improbable, the implausible, often the “impossible”, come true. His observation - The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function – was inspired by his own life. He managed to see the light at the end of the never-ending tunnel of sadness and despair. Whether it was a reality or an illusion, he decided to chase it. Oscillating between emotions and thoughts as varied as success and failure, illusion and disillusion, dream and nightmare, Fitzgerald managed to walk towards the literary nirvana.
Dissecting the statement -
Fitzgerald’s observation needs to be analysed in two parts. Firstly, the ability to hold two opposite ideas in the mind at the same time reflects an individual’s capability to think rationally. Secondly, retaining the ability to function requires eliminating one of the ideas in the given context and determination to implement the other.
In other words, despair and opportunity can co-exist. It’s all about leveraging those opportunities. Remember, the half empty glass is always half full.
The opinion -
Having discussed the context, judging an individual’s intelligence on the basis of his/her capability to hold two opposite ideas and still retain the ability to function is not suggested. The first part signifies the ‘rationality index’ of an individual whereas the second part requires will power and determination. Is there is no correlation between rationality, determination and intelligence?
One of the brilliant corporate examples of rational thinking combined with determination is Nokia. In the late 80’s Nokia diversified into several new fields, mostly by acquisitions. However, in the early 90’s, the company ran into serious financial problems due to heavy losses posted by its television manufacturing division and other diverse business units (footwear, wood products etc). The situation changed from bad to worse when a suspected total burnout probably contributed to the suicide of Kari Kairamo (CEO, Nokia) in 1988. The situation worsened further when Finland underwent a severe economic depression in the early 90’s. It impacted Nokia as well.
Nokia decided to divest itself from all the diverse businesses and focus solely on the business of future – telecommunication. Today, the brand Nokia is worth more than $35billion. It required a great deal of risk-taking ability and determination for Nokia to convert a hopeless situation into an opportunity of a lifetime.
Managing two conflicting ideas is a challenge. If done successfully, the existing norms and beliefs are shattered and a more evolved and relevant belief system emerges. More recently, the established economic models of the West, once considered as the benchmark, gave up to the recession. What survived were the lesser mortals – India and China. The perceptions have changed and the Asian economies are more respected than ever before.
The alternate perspective -
Not every competitive frame of reference is black or white. On several occasions, two opposite ideas need to be analysed in the given context. Be it a graduate’s dilemma to choose between a high paying job and an opportunity that ensures steep learning curve, or a brand manager’s compulsion to focus on short-term profits rather than long-term brand building, these are few real life situations where both the options have their own pros and cons. In such scenarios, it’s not about elimination. It’s about selection. It’s about ‘constructive destruction’.
Fitzgerald’s observation also ignores people with high emotional quotient. Two opposite thoughts like ‘I am a nice person’ but ‘I was compelled to do a wrong thing’ result in emotional side dominating the rational side of an individual, thereby determining subsequent action. These actions can’t be benchmarked to judge the ‘intelligence’ of any individual.
Conclusion –
Fitzgerald’s observation needs to be analysed through three lenses – Context in which the observation was made, rational and emotional quotient of an individual, the process of elimination vs selection. Having done that, I believe that the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function can’t be a testimony to an individual’s intelligence.
Posts
