Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Logical Intelligence and Social Intelligence

13

Comments

  • #62
    btard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 391 ✭✭btard


    vinylmesh wrote: »
    Just because the people described in the OP are a bit geeky doesn't mean you have to go the whole hog and assume they have aspergers.

    If they spent a little more time pondering on social interactions and less time pondering on physics/star trek/whatever, who knows? after a while they might start becoming more socially intelligent than most of us.
    To assume that mere common geeks qualify for aspergers is an unfair cheapening of a genuine condition and the reason a lot of people think aspergers is a load of nonsense.

    I'd also imagine the people in the OP would be quite offended if they knew what you were saying about them...

    I would never assume somebody who was a bit geeky had aspergers. What the OP described seemed to be classic aspie behavour. They have no need to be offended, they should take it as a compliment.

    The reason some people think aspergers is a load of nonsense has more to do about themselves and their inablity to understand anything outside the norms.


  • #63
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    btard wrote: »
    Some of them are the type who will push the frontiers of our time and develop amazing new technologies. Others will create dazzling works of art or maybe even find a cure for cancer.

    and yet they can't manage to grasp how to engage in basic human interaction? c'mon.


  • #64
    raah!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,629 ✭✭✭raah!


    I think people are referring to logical and social skills too much as "innate" . You learn sciences, just as you learn social skills. If someone spends alot of time learning science this will take away from the time they can spend socialising, and will therefore be worse at it.

    Naturally people will like to say things like "I'm too much of a genius to talk to these people", or "I'm good at maths because I'm a genius" but more often than not social ineptitude boils down to lack of experience, and success in maths/science redduces to working hard at it. Newton spent his entire life at physics, so did Einstein ,he was thinking about physics at his patent office even. As is the case with many geniuses, they dedicated their entire lives to what they did, and worked at it


  • #65
    Red_Marauder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,175 ✭✭✭Red_Marauder


    btard wrote: »
    I would never assume somebody who was a bit geeky had aspergers. What the OP described seemed to be classic aspie behavour. They have no need to be offended, they should take it as a compliment.

    The reason some people think aspergers is a load of nonsense has more to do about themselves and their inablity to understand anything outside the norms.
    Who said Aspergers is a load of nonsense?

    What's being said is that you can't extrapolate from one short online description that somebody seems to have it just because they have bad social skills.

    Intelligence and poor social skills are both independently reasonably common qualities. So when they occur together, they are often doing just that, it doesn't automatically mean Asperegers. In fact, rarely so.


  • #66
    drdeadlift
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,189 ✭✭✭drdeadlift


    Dudess wrote: »
    My cousin is an actuary and his workmates decide where they'll go for lunch via a spreadsheet - "Random lunch generator" they call it.

    I begged my cousin to confirm he was sh1tting me, but he is adamant this is true.

    classic!


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Brynn Kind Chalkboard
    Posts: 6,645 ✭✭✭ Brynn Kind Chalkboard


    Cianos wrote: »
    I disagree. Small talk is generally quite boring - and the answers to the questions won't give me any real information about what they are like as a person. I couldn't really care less where the person is from, what they do for a living or if they're going on holidays this year. These are the kind of questions that are asked because they are non intrusive. It takes more to learn about the person and what is actually going on in their lives.

    Really? I would find it very interesting if I met someone from somewhere really far away or somewhere I'd like to go. Lots of people also have really interesting jobs. Obviously it's only the beginning of knowing someone, but I think those small talk questions are much better for getting to know someone than launching into a discussion about politics.

    As for social interaction in general, I think it's just good manners to join in with what the majority of people are talking about, not monopolise the conversation with what you're interested in. I don't own a TV, so I'm not interested in talking about TV programmes, but I'll sit and listen while the conversation goes on or ask some questions about it, not sit there with a face on me acting like I'm better than everyone. I have a lot of interests but most of them are not interesting to most people. When I was younger, I couldn't relate to people very well, I just wouldn't join in conversations that didn't interest me, which when you're a teenage girl, is boys, gossip, drinking and make-up, but basically, I grew up and learned how to be courteous. I realised I could talk about a wide range of topics when needed, saving the more 'specialised' ones for people with the same interests. I mean, it's quite arrogant to assume everyone else is interested in astrophysics (or in my case, linguistics) just because you are. It's isolating to go on about a topic no-one else cares about. Someone who hasn't learned this by the time they're an adult, I'd say they either have problems with social interaction or are plain arrogant and immature.


  • #68
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    btard wrote: »
    Normal or neurotypical people may see and refer to them as socially retarded/damaged/disabled in some way. They’re not, they just see the world differently..

    Yes, differently... perhaps as self-obsessed and ignorant twats? Being "book smart" does not give you the right to belittle someone else's beliefs in the manner the OP describes, or to act the oddball. Sounds to me more like they were putting on an act trying to sound more bloody intellectual and superior than they actually are.

    Had an incident only yesterday with someone who fits the OP's description to a t.


  • #69
    El Siglo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,803 ✭✭✭El Siglo


    chapod21 wrote: »
    God this is sad but I think thats hilarious

    Thank you!:D


  • #70
    extra-ordinary_
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,567 ✭✭✭extra-ordinary_


    wylo wrote: »
    ...I always tend to argue points to people, even when I agree with them...



    How's that been going for you?


  • #71
    Riverpineapple
    Closed Accounts Posts: 142 ✭✭Riverpineapple


    prinz wrote: »
    Yes, differently... perhaps as self-obsessed and ignorant twats? Being "book smart" does not give you the right to belittle someone else's beliefs in the manner the OP describes, or to act the oddball. Sounds to me more like they were putting on an act trying to sound more bloody intellectual and superior than they actually are.

    Had an incident only yesterday with someone who fits the OP's description to a t.

    Your right there, Being book smart does not give you the right to belittle people's beliefs or act like a twat, you already have that right from birth.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,046 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Cianos wrote: »
    I disagree. Small talk is generally quite boring - and the answers to the questions won't give me any real information about what they are like as a person. I couldn't really care less where the person is from, what they do for a living or if they're going on holidays this year. These are the kind of questions that are asked because they are non intrusive. It takes more to learn about the person and what is actually going on in their lives.

    Well from personal experience when meeting new people, and I mean "new" as in the first one or two meetings, small talk is equally if not more important than actual conversation..
    If I talk to you for an hour about politics and bump into you on the street a week later, what do we talk about? Nothing, because I won't have anything to say and will walk by.
    If I talk to you for an hour about your politics course in college and your exams that are coming up, I will stop, talk, see how college is going then see if you're on for a couple of pints. Then I'd have the conversation about actual politics.


  • #73
    Davidius
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,893 ✭✭✭Davidius


    I am worse than the people described in the original post. I have next to no social skills, speaking to people I don't know well is very difficult for me. I'm mostly certain this is down to lack of experience as I simply avoid social situations. Trouble with avoiding social situations of course is that the more you avoid them, the less oppurtunities you get.

    Personally hate any of those rules that have to do with clothing. They're all really contrived.

    That said I'm not a particularly bright person. I'm good at maths and a bit obsessive but that's about it.

    PS.
    Random Lunch Generator is a brilliant idea.


  • #74
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    Davidius wrote: »
    Personally hate any of those rules that have to do with clothing. They're all really contrived.

    which ones?


  • #75
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,046 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    phantom_lord wrote: »
    which ones?

    There arn't any.. It's a defense mechanism where people try convince themselves they don't want to be part of something. That's not an insult, that's just how people work.


  • #76
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    oops, i meant to ask what he meant by rules about clothing?


  • #77
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,046 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Ya, that's what I was referring to.. He has developed a dislike of these imaginary rules about clothing.



    edit: I just re-read my last two posts and realized I am talking shite.. Just disregard.


  • #78
    Davidius
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,893 ✭✭✭Davidius


    I mean in the sense that you're supposed to dress up a bit for interviews, all about presentation and what not. Sticks out in a bad way to go in your everyday clothes doesn't it? Would be deadly if you could, much more convenient.


  • #79
    franklyshocked
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 444 ✭✭franklyshocked


    NERDS!

    Let them bicker over how many quantum dimensions exist while you work out what colour underwear the ladies are wearing.


  • #80
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,046 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Davidius wrote: »
    I mean in the sense that you're supposed to dress up a bit for interviews, all about presentation and what not. Sticks out in a bad way to go in your everyday clothes doesn't it? Would be deadly if you could, much more convenient.

    I wouldn't like to do a serious interview in my regular clothes... It helps ya get into the right mindset if nothing else.


  • #81
    Davidius
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,893 ✭✭✭Davidius


    franklyshocked wrote: »
    NERDS!

    Let them bicker over how many quantum dimensions exist while you work out what colour underwear the ladies are wearing.
    Of all the things one could be wondering about, it's the colour?


    OK.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    MrPain
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 440 ✭✭MrPain


    ScienceNerd wrote: »
    150 < x < 200, x ∈ N
    182?


  • #83
    kowloon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,186 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    Dudess wrote: »
    My cousin is an actuary and his workmates decide where they'll go for lunch via a spreadsheet - "Random lunch generator" they call it.

    I begged my cousin to confirm he was sh1tting me, but he is adamant this is true.

    On just that subject, one of housemates is in third year of actuarial science, very social, like a drink, but only just last night she asked me if Inglorious Basterds was a true story.

    Everyone has their strengths and weaknesses.


  • #84
    btard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 391 ✭✭btard


    Sorry guys. I should know better. I should never have tried to defend these terrible people in the OP or try to give some insight in to their behavour. As most of you can see, they are clearly bad mannered arrogant nerds who should spend more time learning to be social. How hard could it be?

    Yes, I should know better. I’ll make my exit now. Have fun guys. Have lots and lots of fun. :):):):):):)


  • #85
    goose2005
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,798 ✭✭✭goose2005


    Red_Marauder wrote: »
    Yeah I would agree with this. I take no truck with people jibing me for my own a-la-carte Christmas and exam time hypocracies, or how I contradict my "religious affiliation" census return with my lifestyle. That's perfectly understandable. Religious debate should be encouraged in general - even vigourously so.

    However, when it comes to those facing into the final years of their long lives, quizzing personal belief or addressing faith disparagingly as some horrifyingly harmful craze is just rude. If they find it comforting, let them.
    So, don't treat old people like adults, you'll just upset them?


  • #86
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    btard wrote: »
    Sorry guys. I should know better. I should never have tried to defend these terrible people in the OP or try to give some insight in to their behavour.

    well you were wrong about what you said. the vast majority of people i've met that are like this are very average nerds who are just inept but very studious. they're usually not anywhere near as intelligent as they think they they are. whereas the highly intelligent people i've met are usually very well rounded. social interaction is not difficult and anyone who is intelligent should easily be able to integrate with people.


  • #87
    Wagon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,119 ✭✭✭Wagon


    I know a fair few people who are really intellegent and are complete pricks. Shyness is understandable. But i do hate when people aren't shy, look down on you for having ceretain beliefs, or if you cant do a certain thing. For example some years ago i went to a gig in trinity (worth it, it was Kila) It was my first time dealing with a real shower of self rightous very intellegent ****. My mates were chatting with people so i striked up a conversation with 3 lads i didnt know. Asked what i was doing on college, told them computer science but was switching to a slightly different course cos i found the programming too difficult. Cue the whole "oh thats easy" and "any retard can do that" and they smiled their smug smiles. i told them "you think thats good, wait until you see breasts!" then gave them the finger and later on i kicked one very hard in the crowd. he cried, i smiled. everyone who wasn't afriad to talk to women went home happy.


  • #88
    Ickle Magoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    I think it's a bit unfair to assume logical and social intelligence are somehow inversely related. There are idiots at every level of every kind of intelligence - I think perhaps I just expect smarter people to have more skills & common sense in general and so it's a bigger shock when they turn out to be deliberately rude or unthoughtful but I have never noticed a larger percentage of pricks within a particular IQ range...


  • #89
    Helix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,661 ✭✭✭✭Helix


    Red_Marauder wrote: »
    Bad social skills, or inability to understand tact or how to handle a conversation seem completely lost on some people.

    im probably one of them, tho i wouldnt put it down to bad social skills as such. im perfectly able to be as social as the next person, i just have no interest in it most of the time. im generally of the opinion that i dont want to bother talking to most people, coz im fairly sure theyll have absolutely nothing to say that interests me in the slightest


  • #90
    Red_Marauder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,175 ✭✭✭Red_Marauder


    goose2005 wrote: »
    Originally Posted by Red_Marauder viewpost.gif
    However, when it comes to those facing into the final years of their long lives, quizzing personal belief or addressing faith disparagingly as some horrifyingly harmful craze is just rude. If they find it comforting, let them.
    So, don't treat old people like adults, you'll just upset them?

    If that's how you want to think of it, absolutely. I personally would describe it as not throwing things you read in a Richard Dawkins book at those in their final years in order to win some rather cheap religious debate in which they are unlikely to want to engage.

    I know lots of old people who I would consider far more intelligent than I am. I'm sure they have questioned religious faith many times in their lives, but if it gives them some comfort at 80, I'm glad, and I don't think it should be meddled with.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Red_Marauder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,175 ✭✭✭Red_Marauder


    Helix wrote: »
    im probably one of them, tho i wouldnt put it down to bad social skills as such. im perfectly able to be as social as the next person, i just have no interest in it most of the time. im generally of the opinion that i dont want to bother talking to most people, coz im fairly sure theyll have absolutely nothing to say that interests me in the slightest
    That's fair enough.

    But from the other point of view lots of seemingly pointless things don't interest us in the slightest - giving directions to a stranger, giving a colleague a lift home in the rain, letting someone elderly into the queue before you, whatever. Making conversation out of politeness is the same. There doesn't have to be a benefit or an interest, some people just consider it the normal fabric of social engagement I suppose.

    It does have its benefits, I usually find.


Advertisement
Advertisement