The frustration at parties

[genfastsalts]

I went through a political phase. My political position is still very much like religion to me -- a deeply held belief. I think you will find yourself very disillusioned with discussing politics out in the open, if you are truly a free-thinking intellectual. Politics 90% of time can only lead me to arguments. Or at least the desire to argue... because I suppress the urge well if it gets there. If you find yourself agreeing with most people, I'd argue you're probably not a true political intellectual

In Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People, one of the central tenets is that arguments are an extremely poor method for either persuasion or likability.

I also like Nassim Taleb's books and one of his arguments that struck a cord with me (and is sorta peripheral to his central work on randomness/Black Swans) is that book-smart intellectuals are usually boring, and that social intelligence is more natural to the human world than academic intelligence. Someone who can be charming at a cocktail party probably has more upside (not necessarily a better bet to succeed, but a higher ceiling) than someone with a pHd, all else equal.

I honestly think you will be real unhappy taking an anti-social, pro-intellectualist viewpoint towards life. If I can put it in non-insulting statistical terms, I think you are erroneously extrapolating a few poor experiences to all possible situations, without a proper sample size.

 

[Fitz]

I understand what you're all talking about and all that, but jesus all this **** about you being intellectual? The word is used so much it's losing all bloody meaning. What the hell does it even mean anymore? What teenager wants to talk about politics at a party, huh? **** that, you're supposed to have fun. Get a little wild, be spontaneous. You can be all proper and intellectual when you're middle-aged, married, kids and talking to some stiff about the state of the economy or some ****. You're no smarter than anyone, who do think you are? Look, I'm sorry for coming across all aggressive, but whoever you are, you need to change your outlook on people. Seriously you do. Grow up a little will you? Loosen your inhibitions and you'll be much better off. There's more to people than what you build in your head on first impressions. This is to the rest of the people posting responses too, don't be so damn cynical, jeez. Lighten up.

Intellectualism has a meaning. It is being knowledgeable with yet even the thirst for more knowledge. I'm not a teen anymore. I think I am smart and I am confident I am smarter than someone talking about their collection of body tattoos like it's the best damn thing in the world. I believe you need to grow up. I HATE to argue on the internet, but you remind me of the bullies in my high school. This is the type of **** I have to deal with everyday, people talking about the latest wrestling match or their sweet COD Kill/Death ratio, and it sucks.

*steam blown*
Don't know if this will help the situation but I appreciate your advice, I think we just see things differently. To all the other posters sharing similar stories as mine, thank you.

---

IgnoredOne I'll check that site. Cellophane which artist made that song?

---

Whoah, relax you don't have to give me a definition of intellectualism, jesus. You responded exactly how I predicted you would. I remind you of bullies in your high school? That's a very childish response. You're acting as if I physically assaulted you. Look, I'm not trying to argue anything here. It's just the post I'm replying to here nothing else: Frustration at parties. You think you're smart. So? Who gives a ****? It's a hilarious statement. I'm criticising your outlook, that's it. Besides, you don't seem to grasp what I'm trying to get across. I'm very like you, I really am. I consider myself an intellectual, but did I have to state that? Does your opinion of me now change? My point is that you shouldn't be defining yourself as such.

 

[Soup]

Are you a politician?
Just so I can continue with this notion, I'll assume you aren't.
Since when did talking about politics if you are not a politician and therefore have no influence over matters you're discussing become intellectual? Stimulating, maybe... intellectual? Certainly not.
Maths and science is where it is at.

 

[IgnoredOne]

Are you a politician?
Just so I can continue with this notion, I'll assume you aren't.
Since when did talking about politics if you are not a politician and therefore have no influence over matters you're discussing become intellectual? Stimulating, maybe... intellectual? Certainly not.
Maths and science is where it is at.

That's silly. Intellectual means that it leans toward intellect; not necessarily effectual. Philosophizing can be intellectual while simultaneously without overt influence in the world.

At any rate, one would not become involved in politics without initially become interested enough(including discussion) to begin to participate. I think that you'll be surprised how much can be altered on a grassroots level, a fact which I have personally discovered for myself.

I will concede that mathematics and science are very valuable, but as you might find if you visit the other forum I linked, intelligent and educated individuals tend to have strong opinions as well.

Look, I'm not trying to argue anything here. It's just the post I'm replying to here nothing else: Frustration at parties. You think you're smart.

Therein lies my point. He's being frustrated at parties because the others there are simply not at his level - its like being an excellent dancer in a society that abhors dance, or being the sighted in the country of the blind. And yes, I argue that they are simply not as intellectual or intelligent, for that matter.

My own life and experience indicate that often there can be little to gain, and certainly shouldn't be enough to make one doubt one's self-worth. I've learned to interact well in parties, but only essentially by dumbing down myself. Its silly and sad. And insofar as effectuality, I find that most parties do not lead to meeting the kinds of individuals that will promote one's career or improve one's prospects. More often, they encourage negative and unintelligent behavior, including alcoholism.

This is all from personal experience. And for what it is worth, I now am happy with my own place, my own girl, and a small circle of friends who I do appreciate.

 

[Soup]

Noted.
I don't think I'll be finding myself doing anything that doesn't have a positive effect for a while. Discussing politics is like discussing religion. I have no interest in either.

I've commented on this a few times but have yet to give a solution.

Intelligence, like most things can be modeled by a normal distribution, I'm guessing you know what that is... high concentration of people around the mean.. in terms of IQ this is 100ish is western countries. In answer to your question, yes, you have a crowd of people but your 'crowd' of people will not be a crowd more of an asymptotic few drifting off to infinity.

Just be aware, if you really are 'intellectual', as you say you are, then most people will appear 'dumb' when in reality they may be of average intelligence relative to the population.

Try various physics and mathematics forums, go out and try to meet people at events that people of greater intelligence go to.

Perhaps you'll bump into someone by chance. I wish you good luck in your venture for a companion.

 

[IgnoredOne]

Intelligence, like most things can be modeled by a normal distribution, I'm guessing you know what that is... high concentration of people around the mean.. in terms of IQ this is 100ish is western countries. In answer to your question, yes, you have a crowd of people but your 'crowd' of people will not be a crowd more of an asymptotic few drifting off to infinity.

Quality over quantity. And I believe that individuals of that persuasion are not such outliers as you suggest; the Pareto Principle is more accurate in my experience, with approximately 20% of the population having 80% of an effect. If I can only get along well with one in ten, or one in five, then I'm completely all right with it. Those are the 20% which matter the most for me.

 

[Soup]

Intelligence, like most things can be modeled by a normal distribution, I'm guessing you know what that is... high concentration of people around the mean.. in terms of IQ this is 100ish is western countries. In answer to your question, yes, you have a crowd of people but your 'crowd' of people will not be a crowd more of an asymptotic few drifting off to infinity.

Quality over quantity. And I believe that individuals of that persuasion are not such outliers as you suggest; the Pareto Principle is more accurate in my experience, with approximately 20% of the population having 80% of an effect. If I can only get along well with one in ten, or one in five, then I'm completely all right with it. Those are the 20% which matter the most for me.

Turin said "Do I even have a crowd?"

I was answering that question.

It seems you replied just because you could, rather than having any useful input. Either that or you just wanted to show people you know what the Pareto Principle was.

I didn't suggest people of high intelligence were outliers, it's clear you don't understand the normal distribution, these people aren't outliers just of a lower concentration. Most people are grouped around the mean with less people towards the extremes, signified by the asymptote.

So yes, he does have a crowd, but his crowd isn't a large percentage of the population ~5%.

 

[IgnoredOne]

I think its obvious that I do understand the normal distribution, and a lower concentration is exactly what I meant. "Asymptotic few drifting off to infinity" does /not/ imply merely a lower concentration, but of extreme scarcity. I'm objecting to that. And I replied because I was in a similar situation when I was younger.

 

[Soup]

I think its obvious that I do understand the normal distribution, and a lower concentration is exactly what I meant. "Asymptotic few drifting off to infinity" does /not/ imply merely a lower concentration, but of extreme scarcity. I'm objecting to that. And I replied because I was in a similar situation when I was younger.

A normal distribution has an asymptotic curve that drifts off to infinity. A normal distribution implies lower concentrations the further away from the mean, in this case, people with exceptional high IQ scores implying intelligence, and it still drifts off to infinity (people with IQ of 190+).

Although, I'm sure since you understand the normal distribution so well that you already knew that.

 

[IgnoredOne]

I think it has a lot to do with how exactly you are expressing it. And that's all I have to add - if you wish to flame me, you can do so in PM.

 

[TurinTurambar]

I'm glad this didn't blow up. I agree that I will have to take more time than usual to find a group I am comfortable with. The problem I have is as stated that I always have to dumb myself down to 'fit'. It's really taxing pretending to be someone you're not.

It's funny last nights south park episode encapsulated my demeanor a lot. I'm a cynical ******* 8D

 

[Destructotron]

I want to ask you, what the hell did you expect from that party? Heated intellectual debates?

Just because they don't know or don't care about politics doesn't mean that they are any less intelligent. This subject simply doesn't interest them, especially at parties where people come to dance and mingle, not to debate.

Lets say that there's a person who knows a lot about history, but knows little about physics. Then we have the complete opposite - a person who is a genius in physics yet doesn't know much about history. By the logic that circulates these forums, both of them can call each other intellectual degenerates because both know nothing about the other's field of expertise.

Anyone who has to point out that they're intelligent has delusions of grandeur. Calling yourself smarter than everyone else is a safe fallback because it puts the blame of social failure directly on other people. It's also a very typical reaction for someone who is bad at socializing. You are not smarter than the rest, you are just bad at socializing and finding common ground.

 

[rosebud]

With a few exceptions I always hated parties. It starts and ends the same way, no matter how many people are there and what is the subject. I always prefered going to the beach or to a concert. I guess I'm not a fan of parties, because my ultimate goal isn't getting drunk.

 

[condemnedsoul666]

I never even get invited to parties so you really should consider yourself at least a tiny, minute bit lucky
and just thought should know that there are two types of parties, political and social.

 

[rosebud]

Political parties are just one non-stop orgy from dusk till dawn. I bet they are more fun than the social ones. The bottom line is if you are surrounded by people who you find boring or the other way around the whole concept of parties doesn't work.