<p>A guy I knew said this a while back. His basis was that at the times in his life when he cared more about academic accomplishments, he cared less about other people, and vice versa. He's also seen this in others. He says some of the most well-published people he knows are people he wouldn't want to spend five minutes with.</p>
<p>What do you think?</p>
<p>I think people only have the capacity to do so much. Personally, I find it impossible to have a very active social life and also receive top grades in difficult classes. So I do a little of both. It’s about trying to find balance, and yes, if the scale tips too far one way then the other side will start to slip.</p>
<p>It is what you believe it is.</p>
<p>It probably depends a bit on the field, but it also probably depends on how exactly you define “caring”. I mean there’s a difference between short term and long term priorities. And short term priorities often seem to be informed by one’s ability to satisfy their long term goals. It seems likely to me that social frustration can often encourage a person to bury themselves in other things, like work or studying. Maybe being unpleasant is the cause, rather than the effect, of academic achievement.</p>
<p>Unfortunately that last sentence seems a bit more simplistic than what I set out to say.</p>
<p>To a certain point yes. People who REALLY obsess over grades are likely to be anti-social and too competitive to care. I know people who make straight As who are really nice people, but mostly that’s because their intelligent and hard-working, not because they’re the paranoid, competitive type. Those people never turn out well in my experience. But people who flunk out are probably also not the caring times.</p>