Smart Enough to be Dangerous

I was reading the blog of Julian Assange yesterday (Jan 2) where he had posted some material relating to the tendency of smart people to be socially maladjusted. My position has long been that ‘smart’ people are not that much smarter than the average person and that the pride that some smart people exhibit is debilitating and a limiter toward ones own growth. While the frustration that smart people have in regard connecting with ‘lesser lights’ need not be discounted, still if one is so smart, why do so many revel in their frustration rather than finding ways to work around the issue?

My young experience was one where my father and later my older brother allowed themselves to get beat up by life because they did not accept the seeming disconnect between their intelligence and what they were able to get out of life. It was very useful to have had them as both guru and anti-guru for the development of my own strategy toward life, so I send blessings from the heart any time I think of them. Yet the sad truth is that most trouble in this world is caused by smart people that are overinvested in convincing the world and themselves that they are smarter than they really are. The fact is we all have limitations in efficiency for the firing of our neurons. It’s called consciousness and it’s largely bounded by consensual representations and our context for operations.

Possibly I’m simply being contrary to assert that ‘smart’ people are not much different than average people. However it seems reasonable to think that the difference is in volume of content and not difference in kind. Sure, smart people know more things, big deal, now prove how really smart you are by helping to show better ways to navigate this labyrinth of circumstance. Instead more often the smart types apply their neuronal energy in enforcing or at least promoting the existing context and understanding of reality, because I suppose that this is how they maintain their stature of being ‘smart’.

The preceding was written as a response to reading the following. More is included than originally intended because these adjustment problems are worth reflecting on. My suggestion is that if smart people want a genuine challenge they may want to turn their focus toward the creation of a new psychical conditioning system so that all of us might find better ways to distill information out of our perceptions.

http://web.archive.org/web/20071020051936/http://iq.org/#WilliamJamesSidis

One of the problems faced by all gifted persons is learning to focus their efforts for prolonged periods of time. Since so much comes easily to them, they may never acquire the self-discipline necessary to use their gifts to the fullest. Hollingworth describes how the habit begins.

Where the gifted child drifts in the school unrecognized, working chronically below his capacity (even though young for his grade), he receives daily practice in habits of idleness and daydreaming. His abilities never receive the stimulus of genuine challenge, and the situation tends to form in him the expectation of an effortless existence [3, p. 258].

A second adjustment problem faced by all gifted persons is due to their uncommon versatility. Hollingworth says:

Another problem of development with reference to occupation grows out of the versatility of these children.

A third problem faced by the gifted is learning to suffer fools gladly. Hollingworth notes:

A lesson which many gifted persons never learn as long as they live is that human beings in general are inherently very different from themselves in thought, in action, in general intention, and in interests. Many a reformer has died at the hands of a mob which he was trying to improve in the belief that other human beings can and should enjoy what he enjoys. This is one of the most painful and difficult lessons that each gifted child must learn, if personal development is to proceed successfully. It is more necessary that this be learned than that any school subject be mastered. Failure to learn how to tolerate in a reasonable fashion the foolishness of others leads to bitterness, disillusionment, and misanthropy [3, p. 259].

But if the exceptionally gifted is isolated from his contemporaries, the gulf between him and the adult authorities in his life is even deeper.

The very gifted child or adolescent, perceiving the illogical conduct of those in charge of his affairs, may turn rebellious against all authority and fall into a condition of negative suggestibility--a most unfortunate trend of personality, since the person is then unable to take a cooperative attitude toward authority. A person who is highly suggestible in a negative direction is as much in bondage to others around him as is the person who is positively suggestible. The social value of the person is seriously impaired in either case. The gifted are not likely to fall victims to positive suggestion but many of them develop negativism to a conspicuous degree [3, p 260].

Anyone reading the super high IQ journals is aware of the truth of this statement. Negative individuals abound in every high IQ society.

So, is this negativity manifesting itself in credit default swaps and more efficient devices for control and killing? Is this a sensible response from ‘smart’ people to having been picked on in school? The reactive mind expressions of ‘smart’ people kill more people than any school yard bully could ever dream of harassing.