The 12 August 2012 release over the Internet of an excerpt from a putative intra-KGB memorandum, which excerpt someone has titled THE KGB DIRECTIVE and dated 01 April 1994, proposed the making of a film for the purpose of further undermining American education, and thereby accelerating the collapse of American power.  Although THE KGB DIRECTIVE's claim to authenticity is neglibible and dismissible, the question arises of how it is possible for a movie that was not manufactured by the KGB to propound the same subversive messages, and to inflict the same harm, as one that might really have been.  It is to assist the answering of this question that the so-called KGB DIRECTIVE is reproduced below, and with corresponding echoes from the movie following.

It has been long recognized by our policy planners that conventional warfare against the United States is contraindicated because it would be costlier, and ultimately less certain of success, than subversion.

Right from our earliest discussions of the means of sapping American strength, it has been repeatedly proposed that the seemingly modest goal of neutralizing one hundred of America's top intellectuals every year would, if continued for several decades, erode American strength to such a degree as to leave it uncompetitive both economically and militarily.  However, the means by which one hundred of America's top-ranking intellectuals, particularly its scientists and engineers, could be neutralized could not be satisfactorily devised.  Making assassinations look like natural deaths or accidents or suicides.  Disappearances.  Inducing brain damage through chemical or biological means.  Debauching the targets to the point where they were unable to function effectively, as by involving them in alcohol or narcotics, or in sexual liaisons.  Crippling them with communicable diseases.  Blackmail.  All such initiatives have been constantly in motion and will certainly be continued, but always forced to be carried out at an unsatisfactorily low frequency so as to avoid arousing suspicion.

Eventually, however, it was proposed that it was easier to prevent the creation of 100 top American brains each year than to remove them once they had been created, and that one vehicle of such prevention was the film industry.  That is, if films implanted into American culture beliefs and attitudes that were hostile to effective education and high achievement, then America's creation of the intellectual leadership needed to maintain security and sustain growth would prove inadequate, and America would proceed to collapse, not with the lightning speed of the blitzkrieg envisioned by a few of our generals, but nevertheless inexorably and measurably.

And so it was proposed to gradually influence, and eventually dominate, what the American mass media in general, and its film industry in particular, were telling Americans about education, and the plan was put into motion, and the desired deterioration in American education did begin to appear, and today is credited with contributing substantially toward America's ongoing collapse as a global power.

The proposal before us today is the production of yet another American movie which would disseminate the following eight beliefs, which our project planners have dubbed The Eight Toxic Beliefs of Education, beliefs which on the one hand we oppose and suppress within our own territories, and among our own people wherever they may be found, but which on the other hand we disseminate and recommend among our adversaries, particularly among Americans:

(1) Genius comes hard-wired in human beings the same way that web-building comes hard-wired in spiders.  That is, the spider web is a miraculous engineering feat, and yet the spider is not taught how to spin a web by its parents, does not attend web-building classes, does not check out books on web-building from libraries, and does not acquire the skill by watching senior spiders practicing it.  The spider, rather, is born hard-wired with the ability to build webs.  The spider "just knows" how to do it.  The mathematical or scientific genius similarly performs miraculous mental feats not as a result of long study, or indeed of any study, but spontaneously and effortlessly thanks to his innate hard-wiring.

Every American who can be brought to believe that the spider-brain hypothesis applies to the learning of mathematics or chemistry, or to the playing of piano or to courtroom argument, will believe as a corollary that as he himself is obviously devoid of such spider-brain giftedness, his own learning must forever continue to be as slow and painful as he has always found it to be, and that no matter how Herculean his efforts, he will never reach the high level of mastery of those who have been born with spider-brain giftedness.  Adoption of the spider-brain interpretation of high achievement, then, can be expected to deflate self-confidence and ambition and to slacken exertion.  It's message is, "don't bother competing" — if you do, you will exhaust yourself only to discover that you can never hope to be half as good as somebody who is born gifted.

(2) Scholarship is fantastically boring.  Conversely, happiness is to be found in idleness and debauchery, drunkenness and brawling.  By implication, career satisfaction is to be had not by teaching math at MIT, or by cracking enemy codes for the NSA, but by mopping floors at MIT and wielding a sledgehammer on a demolition site.  The possibility that man's deepest gratification can come from understanding the universe in which he finds himself embedded must not be breathed to an American audience.  The realization that mathematics is the language with which nature speaks to man must never be allowed to cross the American moviegoers mind.

(3) Institutions of higher learning are worse than useless, MIT and Harvard in particular charging a fortune for a poorer education than can be gotten by purchasing a public-library card.  This belief diverts budding American geniuses from gathering at centers of excellence where they can inspire one another, and scatters them among the coarse and the vulgar who can be counted on to drag them down to their own level.

(4) Evaluation of career alternatives does not require comparison.  To justify a negative view of intellectual employment, it is necessary only to imagine some of its worst ramifications — period!  What is quite unnecessary is to go on to weigh these negative ramifications against the positive ramifications.  And also unnecessary is to compare the negative ramifications of intellectual employment to the negative ramifications of menial labor.  A nation which permits its children to be seduced by fallacious arguments to waste their talents is a nation doomed.

(5) Psychotherapy brings miraculous benefits, such that it is worthwhile to preoccupy oneself with one's emotional boo-boos, instead of merely ignoring them to concentrate on serious study and productive labor.

The truth which no American movie must be allowed to proclaim is that the chief motive of most psychotherapists is to produce emotional basket cases dependent on further psychotherapy for life.  The truth which no American movie must be allowed to proclaim is that the cathartic expression of negative emotions such as anger and grief has two effects — a brief boost in spirits, but at the same time a long-lasting inculcation of ranting and weeping as habits, such that the ranting and weeping become an entrenched part of the personality, and recur with increasing frequency not only during therapy, but at every opportunity, thus requiring still more therapy and producing still more catharsis, in a therapist-induced vicious circle from which there is no escape.  The truth which no American movie must be allowed to proclaim is that the only therapy capable of turning janitors into professors is work therapy, whereby the individual learns to refuse to be distracted by the hobby of attempting to tweak his personality, and learns instead to focus his energies on making himself useful to his fellow man by acquiring skills which he can apply toward the improvement of society and the advance of civilization.

(6) No harm comes from blindness to cheating on examinations and competitions.  Americans should be encouraged to tolerate cheating for two reasons: first because cheating permits us to win high standing in American schools for our agents and our supporters and sympathizers, and second because the failure to tie reward closely to genuine individual merit will contribute to the demoralization of American scholars.

(7) Intoxication is compatible with high intellectual performance.  The truth which this lie conceals is that airline pilots are prohibited from flying for eight hours after consuming any alcohol because that is how long it takes to clear the mind enough to fly a passenger airplane safely, and that as doing advanced mathematics is more complicated than flying a plane, a single beer can be expected to interfere with math performance for at least the next 24 hours.  The intellectual development of many a budding genius can be slowed or even altogether derailed simply by habituating him to drinking a couple of beers a week.

(8) A day contains not 24 hours, but 124, such that no matter what time is wasted in frivolity and dissipation, there still remain more than enough hours to maintain at Harvard or MIT not just passable standing, but even dominance and supremacy.  The belief that must be inculcated into the American mind is that an hour or two of amusement and recreation now and again are essential to his happiness, and indeed to his well-being, because that belief is easily expanded into the habit of frittering away not just an hour or two but two hours or three, and not just now and again but daily, and it is the allocation of those critical hours to industry or to waste that distinguishes genius from mediocrity.

The more wholeheartedly Americans accept the above eight toxic beliefs, the nearer do they approach the day of collapse of their schools, with the day of collapse of their empire trailing not far behind.

Will Hunting Is A World-Class Genius In Mathematics

Three episodes in the movie demonstrate Will Hunting's genius in mathematics: Professor Gerald Lambeau's first and second publicly-offered problems, and a homework problem that he presents to Will Hunting alone.

(1) Professor Lambeau's first problem is difficult for MIT graduate students

MIT Mathematics Professor Gerald Lambeau gives his class of graduate students a mathematics problem that he hopes one of them might be able to solve by the end of the semester:




Along comes Will Hunting in his chosen profession of janitor, notices Lambeau's problem chalked on a blackboard, and pauses over it:




At work next day, Will Hunting finds himself buffing the floor right under Professor Lambeau's mathematics problem, and when the hall empties, he writes something on the blackboard:




When Lambeau eventually reads what Hunting has written, he announces that it is the correct solution, but when he asks the few students standing around him who is its author, finds no one taking credit:




(2) Professor Lambeau's second problem is difficult for MIT professors

Lambeau's hope that the solver of his first problem will identify himself during his next class is disappointed, and leads him to offer a second problem, this one so difficult that a group of MIT professors working together had taken more than two years to solve it.






In the course of his janitorial duties, Will Hunting notices the new problem, instantly dashes off his solution, is accosted by Professor Lambeau and his sidekick, but succeeds in making his escape:




And what Will Hunting has written, of course turns out to be the correct solution:




(3) Professor Lambeau's third problem is difficult for MIT professor Gerald Lambeau

Professor Gerald Lambeau examines some mathematical work that Will Hunting has just handed in.  The movie does not disclose what the nature of this work is.  As a condition of his not being thrown in jail, Will Hunting is required to undergo psychotherapy and to study math with Lambeau.  Perhaps, then, Will has just handed in his math homework.  What the scene may depict is Will Hunting coming up with a stunningly creative solution to some standard math problem.  On the other hand, Lambeau may be assigning Hunting problems to which there is no known solution, and Hunting has solved one of these.




But soon Lambeau's reaction changes from agreement and approval to surprise.  His first impulse is to think that a solution this revolutionary must be wrong, or would be embarrassing to mathematicians because they had overlooked it.  It is Lambeau who is speaking in the two stills below:




Hunting is insistent that Lambeau accept the solution to be correct without discussion, and so as not to waste Hunting's time, recommends that Lambeau ponder the solution at home.  Hunting considers his solution so simple and obvious as to be painful to contemplate, and considers the tedium of writing anything that simple as a burden and a cause of grievance:




On top of the pain of having to write such a simple solution, Hunting finds it unbearably painful to witness Lambeau not understanding it immediately.  To show his contempt for the whole exercise, Hunting sets his solution on fire and tosses it on the floor:






Lambeau rescues the burning paper, recognizes that Hunting's solution is correct, appreciates its brilliance, and — on his knees as if in the presence of a deity — confesses his inferiority to Hunting:




And also we may take note of three estimates of Will Hunting's mathematical genius:

(1) The estimate of psychotherapist Sean Maguire

Sean Maguire considers Will Hunting to be among the two or three best mathematicians on earth:






(2) The estimate of MIT mathematics professor Gerald Lambeau

Gerald Lambeau, who was doing advanced math at 18, and who 20 years later won a Fields Medal, views himself as not merely somewhat inferior to Will Hunting, but as nothing compared to him:




(3) The estimate of the National Security Agency

The NSA can be inferred to think highly of Will Hunting's skills by its seeming to be offering him a job, much of which might involve code breaking.  Whereas one might expect that the usual job interview would consist mainly of the candidate trying to convince the NSA to hire him, this scene consists mainly of the NSA trying to convince Will Hunting to be hired:









Will Hunting May Also Be Close To A Genius In Organic Chemistry

Skylar's excuse for refusing to see Will Hunting when he shows up at her dormitory room is that she needs to finish her Organic Chemistry homework, which she goes to the trouble of describing as "fantastically boring":






Instead of just going home and awaiting the morrow, as they had agreed he would do, Will sits down in an outdoor cafe and scribbles out the answer to the ibogamine (spelled ebogamine in the subtitles) problem, then again gains entry to Skylar's dormitory and this time hands her his solution, to achieve which he has consulted no textbook or reference work, apparently remembering exactly what ibogamine is and exactly how to "assign the proton spectrum" to it:




The solution to Skylar's problem, gleaned from a source other than the movie (acdlabs.typepad.com/my_weblog/television/), is suggestive of the degree of competence in organic chemistry that it required:

Will Hunting next lures Skylar away from her work to have "some fun," which to Will Hunting means going to the dog races:

At the dog races, Skylar discovers an enjoyment that she had been unable to derive from organic chemistry, and finds herself free of qualms about falling behind in organic chemistry.  Will plays the role of her mentor and guru by remarking how happy she is, a happiness engineered by himself, and presumably a happiness which she would have missed had he not broken the chains which bound her to her fantastically-boring studies.






But Whence Originates Will Hunting's Genius?

Will Hunting himself explains that in the realm of organic chemistry, his abilities are to be credited to an innate giftedness of the sort that the KGB belittles as "spider-brain giftedness".  He extrapolates his hypothesis to include his belief — unsupported by any biographical evidence — that both Mozart and Beethoven were able to play the first piano they ever saw thanks entirely to this same spider-brained giftedness.  As Hunting is never shown seriously studying math, or anything else (the sole exception occurring during opening credits where he is shown flipping through some book or other at the rate of about one second per page) we are safe to assume that he would explain his mathematical skills in the same way: "It just makes sense to me.  I can just do it":

Worse than useless, as has been evidenced above by unlettered janitor Will Hunting besting MIT graduate students, along with one MIT math prof, in math, and as is further evidenced by Will Hunting besting a Harvard graduate student in a barroom debate in the area of American history which Hunting wraps up with "You dropped 150 grand on a fuckin' education you could've got for $1.50 in late charges at the public library".

The movie shows psychotherapist Sean Maguire administering IT'S-NOT-YOUR-FAULT-THERAPY, by means of which the repetition of that statement nine times magically produces a cathartic flood of tears and a hug, and presumably a personality transplant of his old anti-social self with a new pro-social one:

        

        

        

        

The purpose of an examination is to rank student accomplishment.  A ranking which sorts 100 students into 1 winner and 99 losers is a primitive and inadequate sort of ranking — if fails to reflect that right below the winner are a dozen runners-up whose performance is so similar to the winner's as to be almost indistinguishable from it (runners-up who might have solved the problem a few minutes after the winner did), and that among the losers there is an enormous spread (from the student who solved one minute after the winner right down to the student still unable to even understand the correct solution one week after it has been published).

On top of that, any examination or competition must be fair in every one of several ways:

First, the examination question must be delivered to every student uncorrupted and at the same time.  This is best accomplished by distributing a photocopy of it to every member of the class.  If, instead, the problem is written on a blackboard out in the hall, then the one hundred, say, students in the class are put to the trouble of trying to copy it simultaneously, which brings three drawbacks: (1) many students will be copying from a distance, which will make it easier to copy incorrectly, (2) some students will decide to come back when the crowd has dwindled, and so will get the problem later, (3) a vandal or prankster can alter the problem so as to make it easier or harder or even unsolvable, or may altogether erase it, making it unavailable to would-be late copiers until it can be re-written.

Second, the method of delivering the answer seems to be the student writing it on the same blackboard, which has several drawbacks.  If a correct answer is written by one student, then any other student will be able to erase it and re-enter it in his own handwriting, and claim it as his own.  Or, if alternative delivery is permitted, the blackboard answer can be copied to paper and delivered to Professor Lambeau's office, with the original blackboard entry either left as it is, or altered so as to make it incorrect, or else entirely erased.  And what procedure is to be followed if three students arrive at the blackboard simultaneously with three different solutions?

Third, the time available for solving the problem is unequal.  Some students may be able to tackle it immediately, and might have considerable spare time to spend on it.  Others may have schedules which keep them busy for the next few days, or even the next few weeks, and won't be able to tackle it immediately.  As recognition is given only to the first right answer, all the students whose attack on the problem is delayed will be at a disadvantage.

Fourth, a single problem will test only one skill out of the scores that have been taught.  Better to give recognition to the student who has many math skills rather than to the one who happens to best know how to solve this particular type of problem.

And fifth, and most important, whereas every school has as its mandate the rewarding of individual merit, the requirement of individuality is entirely discarded in Professor Lambeau's competition.  That is, every student will be able to get help.  Some might have fathers or mothers or friends who are accomplished mathematicians, and will be able to consult them.  A particular student may go to the library and check out a tome on the subject of the competition problem, and if the library happens to have only that one copy, all the other students will be at a disadvantage.  Some students may form teams working to solve the problem collaboratively.  In short, Lambeau's procedure guarantees that unfair advantage will play a significant role in this competition, and will often be illicit enough to qualify as cheating.

There is a standard procedure for student evaluation, and Lambeau is obligated to follow it — it is the conventional examination.  Students are tested simultaneously in an examination hall, which removes all the objections discussed above.  Several problems test a broad range of mathematics skills.  The problems are delivered to the students uncorrupted and simultaneously.  The students are all given the same amount of time.  They work individually.  They are not divided into one winner and all the rest losers, but are assigns marks which are allowed to range from, say, 0 to 100.  That is the proper method of measuring achievement, and of which Lambeau's method is a Hollywood perversion.

Skylar's summary is that Will Hunting spends half his time in bars:




The movie corroborates Skylar's summary:




And Will Hunting does not need to be in a bar to swill — his hand feels empty when it is not wrapped around a beer no matter where he is:

Will Hunting's genius is impossible because he doesn't have enough time to develop genius.  Menial labor eats up a good chunk of his day, and the mental passivity which it induces lingers beyond the labor itself, making intellectual improvement as difficult after his manual labor as it was impossible during.  Carousing takes a large chunk of what time is left, and the alcohol produces a mental haze which clogs intellectual acuity for much longer than the interval of carousing.  Brawling, stealing cars, getting arrested, appearing in court — all these take time, and all leave distracting memories of what happened and anxieties concerning what is to come, all of which makes concentrating on difficult intellectual tasks almost impossible.

The dialogue below informs us of the vast amount of time Will Hunting spends watching sports, and then also talking about what he has watched, sometimes perhaps for years afterward.  The enjoyment evidently derived from both watching and discussing seems immense, and the commitment to watching seems proportional to the enjoyment, being so strong in Will Hunting's case that he would rather miss meeting the love of his life than miss watching a baseball game live.  Yes, if the choice is (a) watch the game on TV in a bar while winning the girl of your dreams, or (b) watch the game in the stadium, but lose the girl of your dreams, then Will Hunting clearly prefers the latter, prefers losing the girl so that he can watch the game from the stands.  But it is not the lost girl that concerns us at the moment, it is the lost genius — because if baseball trumps love, then it also trumps mathematics and science.  In real life, Will Hunting would be absolutely disqualified from attaining genius status, or even excelling, or even graduating from MIT or Harvard, for any one of his vices, among these vices any one of which by itself is sufficient to bar the road to success being the time-consuming and passivity-inducing vice of sports-viewing addiction.


























Habitual passivity is typical of losers, and Will Hunting's friends are losers and they exhibit passivity profusely.  To them, time is not to be seized as an opportunity to accomplish something, it is to be allowed to flow past without requiring any expenditure of effort.  As there are no goals that have been set, there is no progress that needs to be made.  Vegetating is not in their vocabulary as a term of disapprobation.  Will Hunting shares with his friends the same propensity to vegetate.  He labors when he is commanded to labor, but when he hears no whip cracking, he relapses into what may be considered a hypnagogic trance.  He is incapable of genius because there are not enough hours in the day to create that genius, and whenever a bit of time opens up that could be used for self-improvement, he is overwhelmed by the mental passivity that has been inculcated in him during his floor mopping and sledgehammer wielding, and during his dog-track sojourning, and during his baseball watching.