Are you really smart? Are you really dumb? Are you average? How did you come to your conclusion?

You're viewing a single thread.

126 comments

Anyone who says their smart overestimates themselves. Anyone who says their dumb underestimates themselves. How does anyone even answer this question?
Pedants who choose to make big deals over minor issues are always out to prove something and are objectively not smart.
- Anyone who says their smart overestimates themselves. Anyone who says their dumb underestimates themselves. How does anyone even answer this question?
  I think it’s possible for someone to know that they are generally pretty smart or not very smart without over or under estimating. A lot of people will over or under estimate but if you’re just looking for a rough placement in a third of the bell curve, there’s a lot of feedback in everyday life to help.
  Pedants who choose to make big deals over minor issues are always out to prove something and are objectively not smart.
  Some people sincerely have trouble adapting to different precisions of language in different situations. I know some very smart and successful people with autism who struggle with this. It can be super annoying when they are way too pedantic for the context but I don’t think being deficient in this one area makes them dumb.
- Edit up top: you lose points for the wrong they're. I didn't even notice it until now, so I also lose points.
  Fair enough answer, but plenty of ways. That's the point of the question. To hear people's answers. Their creativity.
  If you win the Nobel prize, you should reasonably be able to say you are really smart.
  If you voted for Trump, you should reasonably be able to say that you are really dumb.
  Additionally, lots of people know Dunning-Kruger about how dumb people overestimate themselves, but that has another part: smart people underestimate themselves.
- Their smart what?
  
  Dude's nouning an adjective. That's a smart person move, and dude does it twice.
  
  found the not smart one. they took the bait.
  
  Relying on Schrödinger's typo to dismiss your own mistake and expecting people to swallow that excuse isn't much of a clever move either.
  But that's ok, proficiency in language is not that important anyway.
  You do you.
  
  Exactly my point. Proficiency in language isn’t that important and pointing out minor mistakes knowing full well you understood what was intended is a combative and pedantic attitude. It serves no purpose other than to elevate yourself and try to make others feel dumber.
  The language did its job in portraying information. Not everything needs to be made by an english PHD. Especially not in the world of internet comments.
  https://youtu.be/J7E-aoXLZGY?si=lkWFvrmgMlaAHb2d
- I won't guess where I am on any spectrum but from hiring and working with many people over many years, there certainly is a range. One thing I noticed is that about one person in twenty has a overall intelligence that just 'gets it' for lack of better word. They might be really good in one profession but can see how everything fits together. These are the guys that can be two or three times as productive as you average guy and generally they have the right answer. They typically know it as well.

126 comments