Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site decwrl.DEC.COM
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!decwrl!larrabee
From: larrabee@decwrl.DEC.COM (Tracy Larrabee)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: Skipping grades -> Undersociali
Message-ID: <1840@decwrl.DEC.COM>
Date: Sun, 23-Mar-86 06:16:47 EST
Article-I.D.: decwrl.1840
Posted: Sun Mar 23 06:16:47 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 25-Mar-86 03:42:24 EST
References: <1130@burl.UUCP> <26600174@uiucdcs> <2849@reed.UUCP>
Reply-To: larrabee@decwrl.UUCP (Tracy Larrabee)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 42


I am very interested in the perception that "smart" kids end up being asocial. 

I read with interest an article in the Thursday edition of the San Jose
Mercury News about unpopular children and the sources of their
unpopularity.  One of the things the article said was that the unpopular
children seemed just as intellectually aware of the mechanics of children's
society and politics, but they seemed incapable of applying them correctly
in actual situations.  I realize it is a big leap, but it made me think
that those of us who may sound the wisest on the net (the best with the
pithy phrase, the most tolerant on the screen, so to speak) may not
necessarily be the ones that are most happy with the actual results of
practicing their social skills.

I have been dealing with mostly scientific folk most of my life, and I
think there are a couple of reasons that such people have a tendency to
blame their social ineptitude on their IQs.  One is that they discount the
intelligence of people in other fields (no, an actor or a sculptor doesn't
have to be able to get into Mensa, but I bet the best ones are pretty damn
smart). Another is that children who avoid socializing by diving into
academics are frequently channeled into the sciences because that is one
of the areas that can provide some ego support in an otherwise uncarring
world:  I mean to say that the sciences pre-select for social incompetence.

Now, I went to Caltech, and I would guess that about 30% of the students
(while I was there) were noticeably socially backward.  I think that is
a much smaller percentage than the average person would guess of a small
population (about 700) that has been selected solely on paper proof of
intelligence and aptitude for scientific work.  Most of the Caltech
people I knew were remarkably normal (this includes a woman who got there
at 14 and several men who got there around 13). (And yes, I used the words
"man" and "woman" on purpose:  a person out of his parent's house who
wishes to be treated like an adult should be so treated until proven
inappropriate.)

So what is my final point?  Well, I agree with what Elizabeth (Lady
Godiva) said about socialization and intelligence:  intelligence can be
used to solve problems that are not stated on paper.  We all have our
crutches;  sometimes we need to check that they are helping us and not
making our problems worse.  I have known seveal social bumpkins who just
needed to stop worrying and being so self-conscious: sometimes we all need
to be gentler with ourselves.