Monday, September 21, 2015
Surprising Downside of Being Smart (Why Intelligence Is Holding You Back)
Jasky Singh | LinkedIn: Much of our education system is aimed producing "smarter" students - academically. We, as a society, all seem to firmly believe that the smarter a person is the more successful, the more well-off, and the more likely he/she is to have a fulfilling life.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
There was a lot of value in this article, but I found a lot of troubling ideas scattered within. When we speak of academic institutions, many can argue the idea that school isn't established to increase your "smarts" or "intelligence". For many, school is simply job training and exposure to important ideas that will expand our personal perspectives in order to in some way prepare us for the harsh realities of the world. Depending on personal or accepted definitions of smart, school could also definitely be argued as being there to increase our levels of intelligence. This idea operates in a very grey area however, because there is little to no scientific evidence that solidly supports any theories, other than those that come from psychological intelligence studies that are biased, as they contain all of the flaws that any psychological study brings with it. What I found most interesting about this article was the way that they looked at all of the things that people that are "more intelligent" do worse than those who are considered to be lacking in intelligence, as I feel like I could very easily identify many of these aspects in either myself or my peers.
We spoke about this in a previous Amy Needs A Name class! There is such a stigma in the modern society that IQ is everything, and all that anyone needs. People only value book smarts and not street smarts. When I briefly lived in Mount Vernon, NY, (just north of the Bronx) street smarts were much more valuable than book smarts. In the ghettos, survival is much more important than anything else. The idea of having a high IQ was actually a bad thing, because it was a threat to other people. People thought that the smarter you were, the more likely you were to become a mob boss or ring leader of some illegal activity, and so it gave you a target on your back. From the few years I lived in that environment, I realized that just being able to regurgitate information on tests is not enough to get through life. In my opinion, CMU emphasizes the kind of life where IQ is extremely important, and street smarts are second. I think the IQ system is ridiculous because it only tests two types of thinking. I have a rather low IQ, but that means nothing about my intelligence.
From reading this article I can see that the author makes a good point but his title however, is not completely accurate. The Downside of being smart? He brings up the definition of smart that society has lead us to believe, but I think this definition is superficial. A person can be smart in many other ways than academically. Today's education system has made it difficult for people to differentiate the different types of smart and that has lead to this stigma that gives being smart a bad reputation. Although this is true, I completely agree with the authors findings, smart people are more stubborn, over analyze things, and less willing to take risks, but there is much more to being smart than those who are identified by a test score. I think a person who is truly smart understands that they must keep improving themselves because even though they are the smartest at the moment doesn't mean that there isn't someone working to better themselves that will soon pass them up if they do nothing about it. A truly smart person listens to the arguments of others and seriously consider their claims because a different perspective gives different insights and challenges that they have never even considered and can help strengthen or even correct their argument.
Being smart does have its disadvantages but if you ask me, a smart person always know that there is more to learn and that anyone can teach you a lesson.
A frequent romantic ideal is that of "blissful ignorance". Sometimes, smart people envy the people that are stupid, because they get to think less, worry less, just get out there and throw a football around. Let their minds go completely empty. Smart means a lot of different things to different people, but stupid is concept that is almost universally recognizable. As the author states, there are really two kinds of smart: book smart and street smart. There are a lot of people who are smart in one, but not in the other. The article deals particularly with academic intelligence, but immediately begins by using a metric that doesn't particularly mean anything. IQ is a very relative number, with the actual value being one that is as relevant as the test being given is in the culture that it is being given. The article then goes on to his perceived shortcomings with being smart, but almost all of them deal with how other people perceive you, which is only a weakness if you are a bad guy on top of your intelligence. The moral of the story is that if you're smart, don't condescend, don't talk down, just be a regular guy. Then, all your weaknesses become strengths.
I am a person who hold’s intelligence and education as one of the most important things in my life. To me, a life without intellectualism, understanding, and wisdom, is not really living. That being said, I absolutely agree with the point that this article is trying to make. I come from a community that values book intelligence rather than a more rounded worldly intelligence. Knowing is different from understanding, and I have grown quite disappointed in the way America educates it’s youth.
You can have all of the knowledge in the world, but if you don’t know how to apply it, you’re just as lost as someone who has none of the intelligence you have. You can know more about something than anyone else in the room, but if you can’t discuss it in a way that engages everyone, you’re intelligence isn’t worth anything to anyone else. This is something that I have been trying to work on as a person, but also something that I truly believe to be integral to a productive, creative, and collaborative mind, which is something that the school of drama strives for.
As for people who wish they were ignorant, or value their ignorance, I see no pride in that. I used to hold that position, but I’ve come to the conclusion that that is wishing away a wonderful gift. Education and intelligence is something to cherish, it’s one of the few things you can always have, and that very few circumstances can take away from you. It’s a defining factor of who you are as a person. Instead, I offer an alternative perspective, try and see what people you view as less intelligent have that you don’t. Clearly, they are more versed in that particular skill or issue, and if you value that skill, than maybe you should try and follow their lead on that issue. Life should be about learning more things, about a lot of things, and becoming as understanding of yourself with respect to the rest of the world, not about looking down upon people. Isn’t that what theatre is about too?
I view intelligence as something that has many facets to it: book intelligence, street intelligence, artistic/creative intelligence, and emotional intelligence, and people can have many different combinations of these things. I know many people who have a lot of book intelligence and not as much artistic/creative intelligence, and I have plenty of friends with artistic or emotional intelligence who have no street intelligence whatsoever. I do feel like educational systems often focus far too much on book intelligence, especially in the overall atmosphere of CMU. During orientation week oftentimes at the beginning of events like Convocation the presenters would congratulate everyone about how smart we all were for getting into Carnegie Mellon and it would always make me uncomfortable, though I couldn't really understand why. The School of Drama almost has an opposite standing in their emphasis of artistic and creative intelligence, though seeing as we are in the College of Fine Arts, this is understandable. However, I believe that it's healthy for people to develop as many of these types of intelligence as possible, because all of them are crucial for succeeding and feeling happy throughout life, which I believe was one of the points this article was attempting to make.
Okay here we go. This was definitely an interesting article, but very flawed. For starters, just because a person is smart does not mean that they are unaware. I think we all should strive for awareness, but it is not an exclusively- smart person pursuit. Also, cognitively speaking, having a high IQ does NOT inhibit a person's ability to see past their flaws or take action. That is a ridiculous correlation and has not been concluded by anyone. The Termites experiment (which was not biased because it is not a psychological experiment that would allow for bias...how could these kids have gotten better jobs based on the fact that someone was observing them?) was interesting but not relevant. "Kids with high IQs had good jobs, similar struggles to the rest of the population, and weren't satisfied with themselves therefore being smart is holding you back." Sorry, what? That sounds like a normal person with a good job. I just find myself totally confused by the author's intentions with this article.
Post a Comment