<p>fact or fiction?</p>
<p>Generally, people start having issues communicating with people who are 2 standard deviations away from themselves in intelligence.</p>
<p>So, on average, smart people have an easier time communicating with people like themselves. Stick someone with a 100 IQ in a room with a bunch of PhD Physicists and the dumb guy will likely be the one who is socially awkward. The converse is also likely true.</p>
<p>Naturally, someone with a 100 IQ will be able to communicate with the highest number of people normally.</p>
<p>Define 'smart' first :) Grades aren't a reflection of smartness.</p>
<p>The problem is that there is too much of division on roles. The myth is that you are either a socially inept nerd or dumb jock. This is fun to joke about but do reality check.</p>
<p>I think smart in this case is defined as IQ.</p>
<p>Can you say Becky Sharp?</p>
<p>Definitely fiction, all us smart kids at our school rule everything socially.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Definitely fiction, all us smart kids at our school rule everything socially.
[/quote]
Nothing like some solid anecdotal evidence?</p>
<p>I'm not exactly a Plastic, but I'm not totally inept.</p>
<p>Oh, I love that movie; a bit mind numbing, but cute.</p>
<p>The most intelligent people I've met are not socially inept, but more just don't see the need for communication with the majority of people. I can understand that; why communicate with those who just don't interest you?</p>
<p>A smart person has the ability to communicate to lesser intellectuals when he needs to--when they can benefit them, even if they don't take any other interest in them.</p>
<p>I don't know, I think of someone smart as more of a calculator than an introvert.</p>
<p>That's why I'm so quiet. I'm calculating.</p>
<p>Einstein communicated very well with all kinds of people both in speech and writing. A lot of women fell in love with him too.</p>
<p>
[quote]
A smart person has the ability to communicate to lesser intellectuals when he needs to--when they can benefit them, even if they don't take any other interest in them.
[/quote]
Is this some cosmic rule I'm not aware of?</p>
<p>Actually to better adhere to the second section of my post, I should have said "A smart person to me has the ability to communicate..." etc.</p>
<p>Sorry for that, that's just my opinion.</p>
<p>"..even if they don't take any other interest in them."</p>
<p>so you say that smart people have more will-power than most people; they're able to concentrate even when they aren't interested? afaik, that's false. smart does not necessarily equal hardworking.</p>
<p>I actually meant that they would not normally take any interest in the person if they were not communicating to them for their own benefits.</p>
<p>This is a more manipulative, calculating view on smarter people, and I'm in no way saying that all smart people are like this, only some. It is to suggest that some smart people who are nicer than others might be more introvertive because they don't want to be manipulative. </p>
<p>Basically I'm saying it depends on the person, can we agree on that?</p>
<p>Yea, but let's get back to the topic at hand: are smart people bad at socializing, even when they try? or is that too broad a generalization?</p>
<p>too broad.</p>
<p>If one has a developmental disorder, such as high-functioning autism or Asperger's Syndrome, communicational skills may, to a degree, be compromised for "intelligence" [I quote the word because I am using the word as it is commonly used; there are no absolute means by which to define it explicitly, although one may argue that certain tests may be able to identify a specific type of intelligence] corresponding the person's narrow field of interests. However, one may say that because of this developmental disorder, which inhibits the person from socially developing [among other things], the person becomes reclusive and thus spends more time pursuing his or her interests [in the form of books and whatnot] alone. This, in turn, correlates to increased expertise and thus more "intelligence" in that area.</p>
<p>Note that this is not always true for all "smart" people. I am talking only about the autistics. In this case, the person, when forced to interact with people in a setting that others would say is normal, such as the mall, could be labeled "socially-awkward" [once again, a relative term; people who say it are comparing the person to themselves - they find that the person exhibits a behavior foreign to them and so they deem the person awkward]. </p>
<p>On the other hand, we see that there can be people would be considered normal [exhibit social behaviors that are similar to those that are judging him\her] - they are brought up in a social environment and they are able to socially develop. At this point, intelligence and social development can be completely independent. I believe that now, it is not dependent on the person himself, but the people around him.</p>
<p>Do the hokey-pokey [I'll finish this post later].</p>
<p>
[quote]
The most intelligent people I've met are not socially inept, but more just don't see the need for communication with the majority of people. I can understand that; why communicate with those who just don't interest you?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>:)</p>
<p>==
[quote]
Generally, people start having issues communicating with people who are 2 standard deviations away from themselves in intelligence.</p>
<p>So, on average, smart people have an easier time communicating with people like themselves. Stick someone with a 100 IQ in a room with a bunch of PhD Physicists and the dumb guy will likely be the one who is socially awkward. The converse is also likely true.</p>
<p>Naturally, someone with a 100 IQ will be able to communicate with the highest number of people normally.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Where did you get the figure of 2 SDs? It could be 1 SD for some people, 1.5 for others, 2 for others. It depends on the person's personality. I know a lot of very intelligent females who are perfectly able to converse with people much dumber than they are (hell, some of them even marry males who are a lot dumber than they are) - the reason is because they're willing to dumb themselves down for the sake of observing social niceties (and females are a lot more likely to have such personalities).</p>
<p>I've certainly seen cases of wide disparities of intelligence within a marriage (though this assertion reeks of small-sample size bias). I'll leave it to be refuted on its own merit.</p>
<p>For me, it's not a matter of intelligence inasmuch as it is about interest + curiosity in the fields I'm interested in. The problem is that no one's curious in the fields that I'm interested in - so I have to rely on sending notes to myself. Of course the more intelligent are more likely to pursue academically stimulating fields (for the reason that the less intelligent find them so difficult and people won't enjoy the fields that they cannot pursue). Since people 2 SDs of intelligence below me probably cannot pursue such fields, I won't find any point in talking to them. But someone of my intelligence still may find a point in talking to them (since that person is probably less academic than I am).</p>