The giftedness epidemic: diagnosis or excuse?

The giftedness epidemic: diagnosis or excuse?

The fact that more and more people claim to have high intellectual abilities is not due to a burst of genius, but to a possible trivialization of the concept. While intelligence tests show that only 2% of the population scores above an IQ of 130, in forums and psychological practices it seems that half of patients walk out with the label. The paradox is obvious: if everyone is gifted, the category stops meaning anything.

The rise of self-diagnosis and social pressure

In the education field, more and more parents attach the gifted label to their children at the slightest sign of precocious behavior. A child between 2 and 13 who can use a smartphone is already a candidate. According to shared experiences, of all the children said to be gifted, barely 1% earn top honors; the rest hover around mediocrity or below average. The gap between self-diagnosis and actual performance is enormous.

Work performance: the real test

The contrast becomes even more evident in the workplace. It is pointed out that by age 25, many self-proclaimed gifted individuals lack common sense, initiative, and resilience. Sick leave over any inconvenience is frequent, and the complaint that immigrant workers take their jobs for lower wages becomes a paradox: if they are so intelligent, why don't they compete on productivity? The answer may lie in the fact that intelligence without discipline and perseverance is not enough.

A suspicion runs through the debate: are we facing a psychological fad that makes anyone who visits a psychologist feel special? The giftedness diagnosis, once reserved for a statistical minority, risks becoming a wildcard to explain personal failures or justify a lack of adaptation. Meanwhile, true giftedness—the kind that combines talent with effort—remains as rare as ever.