I'm not sure the piece answers the implicit question posed by the headline. This seems less like a general lesson about "Why smart people have no friends," and more like a personal story from which the author extrapolates generalities. In this case, I found myself relating to a few of the author's observations, but seldom agreeing with his conclusions.
And that's kind of the problem with generalizing from n=1, particularly when n=self. We're not all the same. It may in fact be true that smart people have a harder time making friends. (Or it may not be.) But if it is, and we're going to make categorical statements about "smart people," we need to base those statements on something other than personal anecdote -- especially when we suspect that our personal lives are atypical in some way.
I think this guy gets it wrong, and this has nothing to do with being 'smart', but rather sitting somewhere along the aspergers/autism spectrum.
The one interesting takeaway for me was this:
"I realized that the reason people missed me was because they had received positive energy from me. And the reason I didn’t miss them is because I rarely received positive energy from them. But this wasn’t because they didn’t send it. It was because I saw it coming. I expected it, and therefore could never feel real gratitude."
I think he's on to something there that a lot of people like him might be doing but not thinking about. How to address this knowledge is left for the reader to determine.
Yes. There's even something about the "tone" of this piece that screams "spectrum" to me.
As far as I know there's not reliable evidence that smart people have fewer friends. In fact, I would hypothesize just the opposite. This is pretty easily testable.
It sounds like he has a combination of Aspergers and depression. It's telling that he doesn't mention seeking out a mental health care provider. That sounds like the best course of action.
It's noteworthy that he was raised in a Christian household. Frankly, most religions do not do a good job of taking mental health seriously.
I sympathize with this post because I was raised as a conservative Christian and I had little to no exposure to modern mental health ideas when I was growing up.
I ended up struggling massively with depression in my twenties because of it. Finally, therapy and medication helped to change my life for the better, in a way religion* never did (and probably couldn't).
I hope this guy gets good professional help. Apparently, he's a coder so he can probably afford it. That would go a long way to solving his problems. It's also the truly "smart" thing to do.
* This is not meant to disparage religion, there are plenty of good, well-qualified Christian therapist. Whatever your belief system, a trained professional is probably your best bet.
>but rather sitting somewhere along the aspergers/autism spectrum.
I think this is as contentless as his assertion that it is about being 'smart'. Let's just describe his behavior, not try and ascribe a spurious category to it.
>It was because I saw it coming. I expected it, and therefore could never feel real gratitude.
I have a hard time understanding this statement, and I think that rather than trying to parse it I would rather assert that his understanding of what constitutes a good friendship is still unformed.
Forming good, deep friendships is hard. Our lives are idiosyncratic and complex; the emotional, political and social factors that satisfy us may become particularly gnarled and difficult. What I think most of us crave isn't reciprocal/mutual aid - this isn't really the basis of friendship, it's aid that is based on understanding.
What I want to know of my friends is not "X helped me", but "X really understands what I want". This is hard to find, and for the insular individual who has trouble projecting his emotional needs (or hides them behind a mask of constant cheer), it might be even harder.
1. Most smart people I've met that have few friends have few because they are freaking weird to normal people, and lots of folks just can't tolerate it. I'm not sure about the asbergers, since a lot of the vague lists I see also apply to other problems, including being socially excluded at a young age - which, coincidentally, many smart folks are.
2. Whoever wrote this has had a much better social life than I ever have. I'm somewhat envious, honestly, and have a lot of trouble figuring out what he's complaining about.
3. I'd more liken this to some sort of depression, because it can truly make people not realize they have friends.
The author claims he can't feel the positive emotions because he expects what is coming.
One can train their brain to avoid this trap. I am a "smart" person, but through Vipassana meditation and gratitude practices, my mind is now more attuned to the novelty and spontaneity of the present moment. It's not perfect, but is significantly better than my former clouded way of experiencing.
How does Vipassana help you in this? Just thinking about it - observing that your breaths are long or short, and other mindfullness meditations - would seem to me to make you less present, and disconnect you from the local environment - and become more of a remote observer.
The practice of Vipassana is to observe present experience nonjudgmentally and to eventually meld with present experience so there is no Observer. So it's the exact opposite of what you're describing.
I'm tired of these "I'm smart X is hard" articles. When I read posts like this I have a nagging feeling that the authors are just as interested in proclaiming their "smartness" as they are in publishing meaningful observations.
That's an unfortunate misinterpretation. Being "smart" is a part of one's identity, and the author is merely examining his present situation through that lens.
Like most people on HN, I like to think I'm at least somewhat "smart" at least by some metrics, so what I've found works is actually "dumbing myself down" by not showing others my intelligence. I've made a lot of "normal" friends that way actually.
Here's why (written from others' perspective in the second person):
For whatever reason, most people are really put off by you "smart people" -- you're "different," and us humans are evolutionarily wired to be suspicious of things that are "different."
You say things we don't understand, or you may challenge our core beliefs, and we humans do not like people like you who say or do things like that -- it immediately incites distrust in you and makes it VERY hard to relate with you. We think you are trying to trick us.
You're deviating from the "herd" in society through thought, and we're a social species, so such deviations come with consequences in the form of ostracization.
Your interests are things we don't understand (and so we don't care about) like "reading," "coding," and "mathematics," and we can't get a good read on what you are like as a person, so we (unfortunately) resort to thinking you are arrogant -- that you think you are too good to show us what you're truly thinking about.
You might have used your intelligence to make money, now you're just another rich asshole, etc...
For all of these reasons, we feel "inferior" to you, because like most people, we feel very insecure about ourselves and where we fit in society. Thus, we are overly sensitive to anything you say that might even remotely imply that you are smarter than us. "That guy just used a 'big word,' he's full of himself." And we're jealous that you have something that we don't have because you are smart. We think you are happier than we are and have a better life than us (even though you actually aren't) because "the grass is greener."
-- and then there's the philistine aspect of American culture --
It's not "cool" to study and be smart 'round these parts. You're a "nerd." We don't associate with "nerds" because they will lower our social status.
You have trouble relating with us because of your "intelligence," but we see that as you being aloof or "stuck up." You think you're too good to be our friend (even though it's actually an oil and vinegar type mixture -- an incompatibility, if you will).
And just throwing it out there, I think a lot of smart people are misdiagnosed as "autism spectrum" because the diagnosing physician/psychologist falls more moderately on the "intelligence spectrum" and so is biased by their same visceral "weirded out" reaction to their diagnosee. Either that, or (less likely) autism and intelligence are two sides of the same coin. Or the "disorder" (or should I say, label?) was fabricated because such "intelligence people" -- THOSE people -- MUST have something wrong with them because of all of the above reasons.
It's also my hypothesis that at least some of the "techie backlash" in San Francisco is the result of the above -- unfortunately, the in-group effects caused by grouping together a lot of "intelligent people" together who suffer from the above ostracization is a perfect storm for dividing a population into "us" and "them" factions, even though, ironically, San Francisco's "nativist" population was really formed under similar ideals (i.e. "we're the weird ones, come join us").
Ever tried to philosophize about unfix-able mindbugs (aka retardations) that every human (including those discussing these) have, in a bar with another smart guy/girl?
If you are smart you will perceive reality, and many prefer to not do so.
For them reality is a insult, and the truth can be voted for with fists and not arguments. And if the arguments are stronger, they would punch Darwin in the face to remain ignorant.
They want the benefits of science, but they don't want to really go on the full intellectual adventure, with all its insults, its discoverys of weak spots and its inherent uncertainty.
You are alone then, because you are alone. You can not friend with someone who can not understand your situation. If you befriend a dog, the dog sets the limits of understanding to which this relationship can grow. The dog will not speculate on quantum physics with you.
Well not today.
Well not today in every part of the world that is not the valley.
I'm fairly certain.
In a way, with all that awesome shared, you have equals. And there obsession, and dedication, is at least a relationship. Not in person.
But its not lonely.
26 comments
[ 2.3 ms ] story [ 63.9 ms ] thread>If you’ve ever hung out with a bunch of Christians, the first thing you probably notice is that they’re always smiling.
What???
hard pass
And that's kind of the problem with generalizing from n=1, particularly when n=self. We're not all the same. It may in fact be true that smart people have a harder time making friends. (Or it may not be.) But if it is, and we're going to make categorical statements about "smart people," we need to base those statements on something other than personal anecdote -- especially when we suspect that our personal lives are atypical in some way.
The one interesting takeaway for me was this:
"I realized that the reason people missed me was because they had received positive energy from me. And the reason I didn’t miss them is because I rarely received positive energy from them. But this wasn’t because they didn’t send it. It was because I saw it coming. I expected it, and therefore could never feel real gratitude."
I think he's on to something there that a lot of people like him might be doing but not thinking about. How to address this knowledge is left for the reader to determine.
As far as I know there's not reliable evidence that smart people have fewer friends. In fact, I would hypothesize just the opposite. This is pretty easily testable.
It sounds like he has a combination of Aspergers and depression. It's telling that he doesn't mention seeking out a mental health care provider. That sounds like the best course of action.
It's noteworthy that he was raised in a Christian household. Frankly, most religions do not do a good job of taking mental health seriously.
I sympathize with this post because I was raised as a conservative Christian and I had little to no exposure to modern mental health ideas when I was growing up.
I ended up struggling massively with depression in my twenties because of it. Finally, therapy and medication helped to change my life for the better, in a way religion* never did (and probably couldn't).
I hope this guy gets good professional help. Apparently, he's a coder so he can probably afford it. That would go a long way to solving his problems. It's also the truly "smart" thing to do.
* This is not meant to disparage religion, there are plenty of good, well-qualified Christian therapist. Whatever your belief system, a trained professional is probably your best bet.
I think this is as contentless as his assertion that it is about being 'smart'. Let's just describe his behavior, not try and ascribe a spurious category to it.
>It was because I saw it coming. I expected it, and therefore could never feel real gratitude.
I have a hard time understanding this statement, and I think that rather than trying to parse it I would rather assert that his understanding of what constitutes a good friendship is still unformed.
Forming good, deep friendships is hard. Our lives are idiosyncratic and complex; the emotional, political and social factors that satisfy us may become particularly gnarled and difficult. What I think most of us crave isn't reciprocal/mutual aid - this isn't really the basis of friendship, it's aid that is based on understanding.
What I want to know of my friends is not "X helped me", but "X really understands what I want". This is hard to find, and for the insular individual who has trouble projecting his emotional needs (or hides them behind a mask of constant cheer), it might be even harder.
Opening line : To this day, I’ve always had trouble making friends.
Are we supposed to assume that the author is indeed smart?
I'm a strict empiricist; I could never be friends with a rationalist.
2. Whoever wrote this has had a much better social life than I ever have. I'm somewhat envious, honestly, and have a lot of trouble figuring out what he's complaining about.
3. I'd more liken this to some sort of depression, because it can truly make people not realize they have friends.
One can train their brain to avoid this trap. I am a "smart" person, but through Vipassana meditation and gratitude practices, my mind is now more attuned to the novelty and spontaneity of the present moment. It's not perfect, but is significantly better than my former clouded way of experiencing.
Here's why (written from others' perspective in the second person):
For whatever reason, most people are really put off by you "smart people" -- you're "different," and us humans are evolutionarily wired to be suspicious of things that are "different."
You say things we don't understand, or you may challenge our core beliefs, and we humans do not like people like you who say or do things like that -- it immediately incites distrust in you and makes it VERY hard to relate with you. We think you are trying to trick us.
You're deviating from the "herd" in society through thought, and we're a social species, so such deviations come with consequences in the form of ostracization.
Your interests are things we don't understand (and so we don't care about) like "reading," "coding," and "mathematics," and we can't get a good read on what you are like as a person, so we (unfortunately) resort to thinking you are arrogant -- that you think you are too good to show us what you're truly thinking about.
You might have used your intelligence to make money, now you're just another rich asshole, etc...
For all of these reasons, we feel "inferior" to you, because like most people, we feel very insecure about ourselves and where we fit in society. Thus, we are overly sensitive to anything you say that might even remotely imply that you are smarter than us. "That guy just used a 'big word,' he's full of himself." And we're jealous that you have something that we don't have because you are smart. We think you are happier than we are and have a better life than us (even though you actually aren't) because "the grass is greener."
-- and then there's the philistine aspect of American culture --
It's not "cool" to study and be smart 'round these parts. You're a "nerd." We don't associate with "nerds" because they will lower our social status.
You have trouble relating with us because of your "intelligence," but we see that as you being aloof or "stuck up." You think you're too good to be our friend (even though it's actually an oil and vinegar type mixture -- an incompatibility, if you will).
And just throwing it out there, I think a lot of smart people are misdiagnosed as "autism spectrum" because the diagnosing physician/psychologist falls more moderately on the "intelligence spectrum" and so is biased by their same visceral "weirded out" reaction to their diagnosee. Either that, or (less likely) autism and intelligence are two sides of the same coin. Or the "disorder" (or should I say, label?) was fabricated because such "intelligence people" -- THOSE people -- MUST have something wrong with them because of all of the above reasons.
It's also my hypothesis that at least some of the "techie backlash" in San Francisco is the result of the above -- unfortunately, the in-group effects caused by grouping together a lot of "intelligent people" together who suffer from the above ostracization is a perfect storm for dividing a population into "us" and "them" factions, even though, ironically, San Francisco's "nativist" population was really formed under similar ideals (i.e. "we're the weird ones, come join us").