It's pretty simple, actually. Intelligent people tend to want to make sure that others don't think ill of them, and thus are trying to do their best at all times, but by being so bogged down by trying to be perfect and think of the right response each time, they become stressed and disrupt the communication flow, so they end up not being able to properly handle the social situation.
The less intelligent people tend to not have the capability to wonder about what the other people are think of them, they don't care because they don't think of the consequences of their actions whatsoever. That's why you have 15 year old pregnant kids whose parents were already on the lower end of the intelligence spectrum. Intelligent people care too much about what other people think, and that is their demise. I imagine that being unintelligent is similar to what it's like to be under the influence of a few shots of vodka. You just don't care at all and do whatever seems right at the given moment.
Of course, a truly intelligent person can identify their errors and rectify them. In the case of communication, you literally just have to think less before you say something, and not care whether you've made an error or not. Simple solution.
Because the more intelligent you are the more you realize you don't know much. Stupid people tend to have more confidence because they don't realize how stupid they sound and think they have all the answers.
Socrates said it well "all I know is my own ignorance" and Shakespeare with "the fool doth think he is wise but the wise man knows he is a fool"
You fail to realize that there are different types of intelligence. There is social intelligence. Those typical bubbly popular cheerleader types who are very dim and slow, are extremely socially intelligent. That typical nerdy kid who is on his way to Harvard has no social intelligence. Intelligence isn't defined as understanding everything and excelling in every field. There are many types of intelligence. Kinesthetic intelligence is excelling in sports, dance, anything physical. There's amazing dancers who might not score well at all on IQ tests.
People with Aspergers have NO social intellect and are often technical geniuses. There are people who are geniuses but stutter when in the McDonalds drive through. Likewise there's suave popular and likeable people who can't multiply simple numbers. The world isn't black and white, dude..
skyview.vansd.org/.../...s%20of%20Intelligence.htm
This is what's wrong with our education system. Even people who are "trained" to deal with and understand kids fail to see that there's no STANDARD for a human being. In school you have to be this or that. There is no accommodation for kids who learn differently or think differently. Geniuses rarely do well in school at a young age. My mom is a special ed teacher and some of her kids are absolutely brilliant, will remember every fact ever shot at them, can tell you about the digestive systems of every animal you name and how many light years are between us and every planet but because they can't read they're labelled retarded.
Also ignorance is bliss.
Intelligence usually exists comorbidly with other disorders which lead to social isolation and social awkwardness. Very intelligent people are typically depressed or psychotic, suicidal, etc. The world isn't as rose tinted when you understand things in a certain way.
Lol in a way you've just described what I've said but instead used different terminology. I said "intelligent" people have talents skewed to a particular area of life, whether it be academia, sports, music. The popular cheerleader is not necessarily socially intelligent. The real socially intelligent types are politicians, high powered businessmen. They need to use their social skills influence hundreds, or millions of people.
What I'm saying is my definition of someone who is "intelligent" is someone who universally excels. Again this is just a difference in terminology. I believe for the most part, there are attributes which apply to just about every skill in life. Just as an example, Understanding, learning, application of knowledge are three attributes which applies to just about everything from riding a bike, job interview or doing well at school. So a person who is excels in this area, technically should excel in multiple facets in life.
Your definition and the actual definition are very different. You can't say someone isn't intelligent if they don't excel in every aspect. Because there are so many aspects to excel in.
But ok that's your opinion. Whatever.
For the record there's more to social intelligence than persuading large groups of people. It also encompasses the perrson who always knows what to say and do in social situations who climbs the social ladder easily. That's not something everyone's got
Again that is a matter of terminology. Everyone has a different interpretation of a word. What is "colourful" or "beautiful" to you is not the same for me. There isn't a universal definition for what is considered intelligent and what is not. You have your definition, which you've explained in length.
And my definition which I have explained, is someone who theoretically at least should be able to excel in multiple areas in life. Because the attributes required to become good a particular skill often crosses over into other skills. I. e. playing the piano, riding a bike, doing well at school. So an intelligent person who naturally has these attributes, should theoretically do well in multiple areas in life. Of course, there are other factors like opportunity, money and social upbringing etc but that can be said of people of any level of intelligence.
Beauty is subjective. Intelligence is not. Bottom line.
So you're telling me it takes more social intelligence to know what to do in a social situation than it does to manage and be leader for hundreds of employees? Or as a politician, convince millions of people that their hard earn tax dollars are being better invested than by someone else?
From my experience anyway, all the "popular" guys/girls in school are not getting anywhere in life. Most of them have ended up as tradespeople or "personal assistants" - hardly climbing the social ladder. It's the nerds/geeks for the most part that are excelling in life.
Not true at all. Clearly intelligence is subjective because what you and I both described as "intelligence" is different. What makes a person intelligence? At what point does a person become intelligent? Lets say social intelligence. How much social skills quantitatively is considered socially intelligent? Again, the answers to those questions are purely subjective.
What the fuck? When did I say it takes MORE social intelligence? I said both take social intelligence. Didn't say it took more though. Apparently you like to argue stupid points other people haven't made. Go yell at a wall then.
Yeah and some people think that homosexuality is a choice. Doesn't make the determinant of sexuality subjective. Just proves some people are ignorant to the truth.
You said there is more to social intelligence than just managing and leading millions of people, but also, and I quote, "who always knows what to say and do in social situations"? So is knowing what to do in a social situation a greater demonstration of social skills than being able to lead and manage hundreds of people, being able to convince millions of people to vote for you and commit their hard earn tax dollars to your policies? What I am saying is just because someone knows how to act appropriately or "well" in a social situation at a doesn't mean they have GOOD social skills and cannot even be compared to the latter.
Didn't say they were necessarily comparable.
I said both require social intelligence. I can't see how that can be denied. You must be bored.
NO again, you are talking apples and oranges. Homosexuality has a clear cut definition, that is a person is sexually attracted to, and prefers the same gender. It's clear cut, if a person is NOT attracted to the same gender then they are not homosexual. Period. If you have a sexual attraction to both genders - the definition is bisexual. There is no grey area.
Intelligence, beauty etc. Is completely subjective becuase there is no clear definition of what they are. I. e. what is the quanititive criteria for someone that is beautiful, or at what point (quantitatively) is someone considered intelligent? Ask 10 different people and you get 10 different answers.
Ask 10 different people: "If a man sexually prefers a men over a women, is he by definition, homosexual?" You, for the most part will get the same answer.
I consider myself intelligent, a tad nerdy, yet fairly social. The degree to which I'm social is circumstantial and depends largely on my environment. For example if I am new to a situation, I take time to warm up and get acquainted with people before getting too chatty. It also depends upon whether there's actually anything going on that might make it easier to meet people. If I'm in a big city with plenty to do it's not difficult to meet peopleor find people to hang out with. However, in a small town where everyone stays in their house it takes a lot more effort to find people to spend time with.
And that is why the term 'emotional intelligence' came up and now you have a distinction between IQ and EQ.
Perhaps a truly intelligent people will have to be both, especially these days when a lot of importance is put in reading people, controlling emotions, public speeches, etc.
Some people are natural conversationalists but, supposedly and like you say, with practice, anyone can reach a level of proficiency in social avenues. Except many people just don't like it and can't be bothered.
The same cannot be said about IQ, you're basically born with it.
Opinion
16Opinion
I've often had to dumb myself down to join in conversations with people and to appear sociable... it gets to a certain stage though and you either have to keep your mouth shut or just let loose. There are a lot of really incredibly stupid and ignorant people out there, it's hard work not offending them or making them feel stupid.
Very true
What I've noticed is that intelligent people realize the futility of too much socializing. Therefore, while its generally assumed that being an introvert is a negative quality, if we really analyze it logically, socializing is not of benefit beyond one point. So, I guess its just the media that has blown it out of proportion. And remember its mostly extroverts who speak up and write, so its their opinions that count. Its just the extroverts thinking very high of themselves that's all.
Of course, not all introverts are deep and intelligent, and some of them might be having severe complexes, but this doesn't prove that all the people who don't enjoy socializing have low EQ either. EQ is having the skills to face life as a whole, how strong you are in facing life's challenges. That's got nothing to do with how many friends you have.
I disagree - socializing isn't futile, it's an essential part of life. If you mean small talk, then sometimes it can be a waste of time, but socializing in general is often beneficial.
Extroverts probably just are more likely to comment on questions in general - maybe. I don't know.
Intelligence is quite a broad term. You can be academically intelligent. Musically intelligent. Artistically intelligent. Spatially intelligent. "Physically" intelligent ( great at sport etc). I'm pretty sure there are more categories than what I've listed. You could fall into some or all categories.
Then there are said to be classes of people in the world. Introverts and extroverts. But all people fall into each category at different levels. There's even a term called ambiverts.
People are unqiue. No 2 people are the same. So the combinations of all categories are infinite.
Being socially awkward doesn't make you dumb. Just as sucking at Math doesn't make you dumb. If you could only draw stick men in art class you're not dumb either. Can't play sport to save a life? So what. Tone deaf? No one cares :)
We need to be more tolerant of people as they are and stop judging them by the standards society deems favourable. One love. Peace.
I can attest to this from experience. I used to be quite awkward as a kid and I fit the profile quite easily of the bookworm genius kid. I suppose in some sense I might have an above average cognitive ability but in all seriousness, it's a completely different skill set. Emotional intelligence often comes at the expense of cognitive intelligence, however, the former is an acquired skill. honestly seems a if awkward smart kids tend to have had financially well off, yet emotionally absent parents leading them to devote an excess amount of time towards solitary activities.
I went to Harvard thank God and I would say the vast majority of people there were fairly socially normal. (Then again the admissions office specifically looks for well-rounded people...)
MIT was a different story, on average. Not all Harvard kids are socially adept and not all MIT kids are socially inept, however. A lot of it has to do with how well you relate to different levels of understanding. Some people have trouble "translating" for different audiences, but that tends to be more a side effect of specialization in a field like physics. Some people are just awkward in that they are really enthusiastic about a subject or field and don't understand why others don't share that enthusiasm. I've done that before.
I don't think it's necessarily intelligence = awkward. I think people just don't always notice that they're talking to the wrong audience. (The over-analyzing everything doesn't help, per @Mesonfelde's post.)
I think a more appropriate term is: "socially unskilled." You are more skilled in the domain you devote your time into, and are less skilled in others.
Doctors poured numerous hours into their studies, but they also work with people every day, which develops their social "skill." However, this day-to-day, person-to-person interaction may not exist for an Astrophysicist as it's impractical to their goal.
There's only so many minutes in a day. You can't be good - or "skilled" - at everything.
Most people who are that highly intelligent can't handle the stupid of most people so they prefer to be more antisocial. They can be very social if they have to be though.
The people I think you're thinking of though are ones with super high functioning autism. They are extremely interested in one or two particular subjects, become obsessive and can't reall talk about anything else. They also physically can't pick up social cues for a number of reasons making them appear to be socially awkward.
What about in the case that you understand social cues and the appropriate responses, but you aren't socially adept enough to respond in a way that isn't awkward? Even though you're fully aware of how awkward you are? You're still conscious of everything, you're conscious of the fact you're not coordinating the response correctly... Surely that doesn't take away from your intelligence?
You described me lol. That's a good point. Awkward people usually know they're awkward.
Haha, I know the feels.
I've had the nicest guys talk to me in my new class. I genuinely cannot maintain eye contact. They'll be attempting to talk with me and in my head, I'm repeatedly thinking- "hey... So you're aware you're literally staring at your shoes, right? Ok, cool. Just checking..."
:/
The reason intelligent people have trouble being social is because they do not know how to relate with other people that are not as intelligent the mass majority of the population isn't so then intelligent people are few and far between so they get picked on for being smart or they correct people a lot not meaning any harm but normal people take it the wrong way and statistics show most intelligent people have mental disorders
there's different types of intelligence so not everyone has the same skillset. However I do agree that it's good to be well rounded. You can be "book smart" but if you can't interact/Comunicate effectively then I think your intelligent is somewhat wasted. I think the reverse is just as bad though. You need that balance.
Actually a lot of seemingly intelligent people tend to fall somewhere on the Autism spectrum. Albert Einstein for instance had aspergers. Which even though we was considered a genius he wasn't very good in social aspects. Some people also are just socially awkward. That is why it is important for parents to get their young children in social setting to develop those skills.
Albert Einstein had Asperger's syndrome? Nope.. He was only speculated and that debatable. It's hard to prove if he had this condition because he's dead.
It's easy to say when you don't have anything like that... I had depression and I still have bad social anxiety, and i've had people come over and tell me to 'be happy' or to 'be confident' as if it's really that easy. It really isn't something you can just decide to get over, I can fake socialising to an extent but i'll quickly revert back to the way I always am. It's just not a realistic way to try and sustain friendships, intelligent people usually do suffer from some mental issue or another.
Intelligence is the capacity for you to gain and maintain knowledge. Being smart is using what ya git and finding things out for yourself.
Writing lyrics has nothing to do with smarts. One might call it a talent to be truly great with your words. Otherwise all you can do is practice.
Fyi- most rappers I wouldn't call necessarily intelligent.
Knowing what to do and say on paper and in real social situations are two different things, i think intelligence can help to give an idea of social cues but experience trumps all...
... you can say what you want about how it should be done and argue all you want, but when the man speaks who has done it then you should shutup and listen, his argument beats theory
I'm not too sure.
I think it might have to do with the fact that I have a tendency to profusely vomit on people and I communicate verbally using Gorilla noises.
There is intellectual intelligence, emotional intelligence and relational intelligence. When people say "intelligent" they normally mean "intellectually intelligent". But when you say "truly intelligent", I guess you mean intelligent on every level; in which case, yes, a truly intelligent person should not be socially awkward.
Intelligent people see other things as more important than the social aspect. Obviously they want to be included in the group, but they're more likely to spend their time studying for the future rather than practicing how to waste time with "friends". I don't know if intelligent people think this consciously, but this is perhaps the subconscious reason.
I am an interesting case. I am very good at understand people but I overthink every social interaction especially with girls. So many times I will not do anything simply because I am overthinking it. I am a very intelligent person as well.
I see your point. but I don't know I can't really generalize any of this :D im not saying you are either :) I would say its all dependent on the individual. regardless of intelligence or not, or other factors and variations, etc. :D
Most people who are considered to be 'socially UN-awkward' are about as fake as you can get, and intelligent people are too intelligent to blend into that mess.
We can't be great in all things that exist.. In some things we are good without trying too much (talent) and in some not so much, unless we try hard. but I agree that a intelligent person is one that has a talent to adapt and take well changes.
Yup, I think you're right. Intelligence is way too often associated with "book smarts" rather than actual, real-life abilities.
They spent too many hours learning from books, and not enough hours with other children, learning social cues and social lessons which everyone else learns and eventually takes for granted.
Some book worms spend most of there time reading and in their studies vs. going out to public social gatherings and practicing their social skills
It's hard to relate to the stupids.
because they are just book smarts, not street smarts.
I've learned how to socialyze over the years but have put more towards studies then toward people.
Some humans are simply introverted, lots of geniuses were socially awkward people, like Nikola Tesla, Albert Einstein, Leonardo Da Vinci etc.
Socialization is more emotional than logical. Intelligence usually goes hand in hand with logically minded.
possibly... but then intelligence is a subjective thing...
They are just antisocial or only talk to intelligent people
You can also add your opinion below!
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Most Helpful Opinions