Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why People Dislike Really Smart Leaders

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 336 posts

Re: Why People Dislike Really Smart Leaders

#51

Post by HumanDrivenDev »

zafka wrote: post #6
oblib wrote: post #5

When I was a kid my family would often chide me for using "big words" and told I was trying to "impress everyone" doing that. The truth is, I was just trying to relate something I'd learned and thought was interesting and every time that happened I was kind of shocked and left wondering how they'd missed the gist of what I was talking about. My own mother did it. I finally stopped sharing things I thought they'd atta…

I don't know my exact position on the curve, but I can relate. I find it ironic that many of the folks who score pretty high on general intelligence, often have an issue with social intelligence. I spend a lot of time now trying to study human nature in a game of catch-up. What most people seem to learn instinctively, I need to study.

> What most people seem to learn instinctively, I need to study.

I'm curious what part of being socially intelligent you had to learn. Any examples?

Re: Why People Dislike Really Smart Leaders

#52

Post by jasonkostempski »

invalidOrTaken wrote: post #27

>The study’s lead author, John Antonakis, a psychologist at the University of Lausanne in Switzerland, suggests leaders should use their intelligence to generate creative metaphors that will persuade and inspire others—the way former U.S. President Barack Obama did. “I think the only way a smart person can signal their intelligence appropriately and still connect with the people,” Antonakis says, “is to speak in char…

Maybe the title should be "Why Really Dumb People Dislike Really Smart Leaders". "Talk to them like they're five" is what that suggestion sounds like to me.

Re: Why People Dislike Really Smart Leaders

#53

Post by insickness »

Immediately when I saw the title I assumed this had something to do with Trump. Both Bush II and Trump have been chided as being stupid. Yet their seemingly stupid demeanor is part of what attracts people. When people come across as super intelligent they can also come across as fake, particularly if there is already an inherent lack of trust in a domain like politics. When Trump tweets, his lack of diplomacy and unpolished grammar make him sound like a normal guy just talking about what he thinks rather than an elite, lifelong politician which no one can relate to.

Re: Why People Dislike Really Smart Leaders

#54

Post by ThrustVectoring »

WalterBright wrote: post #16

There could be something else at work here. My father told me that con men preferred to go after smart people, like doctors. The reason is that smart people thought they were too smart to get conned, and hence were more gullible. He was also an economist, and told me that there wasn't an economist born who could stand the idea that the economy would run better (i.e. free market) without their "help". And I've noticed…

This is likely related to trait Openness to experience, which is positively correlated with IQ. Those with a better ability to assess ideas on their merit don't need to develop as much of a memetic immune system, since their formative experiences contain much fewer learning examples of getting burned by malign ideas.

And similarly, I think there's a good argument for wanting leaders with lower Openness than is commonly found among those with very high IQ. Obviously you want your leaders to consider new ideas, but you definitely do not want them to get carried away by any pipe dream that comes across their desk. Instead, you want their opinions to be pretty well fixed. That way, if you figure out that their values are aligned with yours, you can rely on them to stay true.

Re: Why People Dislike Really Smart Leaders

#55

Post by roenxi »

guelo wrote: post #28
WalterBright wrote: post #16

There could be something else at work here. My father told me that con men preferred to go after smart people, like doctors. The reason is that smart people thought they were too smart to get conned, and hence were more gullible. He was also an economist, and told me that there wasn't an economist born who could stand the idea that the economy would run better (i.e. free market) without their "help". And I've noticed…

> the economy would run better (i.e. free market) without their "help". As if boom and bust business cycles aren't a thing in free markets. Or monopolies. Or monetary policy. Or externalized costs. Or tragedy of the commons. That's just run of the mill anti-intellectualism.

If putting economists in charge somehow curtails monopolies, externalised costs, tragedies of the commons and boom and bust business cycles then someone really should sit down and get that news out there. Nothing I've heard suggests economists outperform a healthy democratic process.

Monetary policy is one that is more up for debate - it seems reasonable that it can have a positive effect on gdp, but something has decoupled GDP from measures that actually effect people. I think that something is monetary policy, and note in passing that GDP was, prior to 1970, a much better proxy for energy/capita than it is now [1].

I watch the US economy with curiosity and note, for example, that core inflation, the central plank of US monetary policy, excludes basically anything I spend money on.

[1] EDIT: https://wilcoxen.maxwell.insightworks.com/pages/804.html

Re: Why People Dislike Really Smart Leaders

#56

Post by LyndsySimon »

guelo wrote: post #28
WalterBright wrote: post #16

There could be something else at work here. My father told me that con men preferred to go after smart people, like doctors. The reason is that smart people thought they were too smart to get conned, and hence were more gullible. He was also an economist, and told me that there wasn't an economist born who could stand the idea that the economy would run better (i.e. free market) without their "help". And I've noticed…

> the economy would run better (i.e. free market) without their "help". As if boom and bust business cycles aren't a thing in free markets. Or monopolies. Or monetary policy. Or externalized costs. Or tragedy of the commons. That's just run of the mill anti-intellectualism.

> That's just run of the mill anti-intellectualism.

Respectfully, you just dismissed an entire school of economic thought out of hand.

Re: Why People Dislike Really Smart Leaders

#57

Post by padobson »

guelo wrote: post #28
WalterBright wrote: post #16

There could be something else at work here. My father told me that con men preferred to go after smart people, like doctors. The reason is that smart people thought they were too smart to get conned, and hence were more gullible. He was also an economist, and told me that there wasn't an economist born who could stand the idea that the economy would run better (i.e. free market) without their "help". And I've noticed…

> the economy would run better (i.e. free market) without their "help". As if boom and bust business cycles aren't a thing in free markets. Or monopolies. Or monetary policy. Or externalized costs. Or tragedy of the commons. That's just run of the mill anti-intellectualism.

Or monetary policy.

There are laissez faire arguments to counter every example you provided, but calling monetary policy laissez faire is oxymoronic or, if you prefer, anti-intellectual.

Re: Why People Dislike Really Smart Leaders

#58

Post by tzs »

lostmsu wrote: post #17
QAPereo wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had the same issue, and essentially developed a lingo to speak to those kinds of people. More contractions, dropped g’s, “fucking” used as an adjective. It’s been a couple of decades, and every time I switch to that, I feel like an utter fraud, but sadly it works. I can’t imagine what I’d do if that hadn’t been an option though. Edit: Support group at my place everyone, coffee and donuts will be provided. ;)

You forgot to add "fucking" in couple of places. :-D

A friend from college told me about a buddy of his who took a summer job working at a naval shipyard, assisting mechanics. Those salty old sailors used "fuck" quite liberally. Any noun had a good chance of having a "fucking" in front of it.

The pinnacle occurred one day when they opened up an engine that wasn't working, and saw that it was totally beyond repair. The head mechanic turned to his crew and gave the verdict: "This fucking fucker's fucked".

Re: Why People Dislike Really Smart Leaders

#59

Post by strictnein »

rb808 wrote: post #40

Related: 'George W. Bush is smarter than you'. Elite leaders often make themselves look dumber than they really are. https://keithhennessey.com/2013/04/24/smarter/

Great article. Especially the bit about the creation of the GWB caricature.

People are so beholden to the idea that he was an idiot that almost no amount of evidence will change that.

Re: Why People Dislike Really Smart Leaders

#60

Post by maxxxxx »

WalterBright wrote: post #16

There could be something else at work here. My father told me that con men preferred to go after smart people, like doctors. The reason is that smart people thought they were too smart to get conned, and hence were more gullible. He was also an economist, and told me that there wasn't an economist born who could stand the idea that the economy would run better (i.e. free market) without their "help". And I've noticed…

I think there are different kinds of smartness. For example I am good at solving difficult technical problems. But I can only operate well in an honest and open environment and am prone to falling into traps built by politically savvy people. Being good at politics is also a smart thing but it requires different tools than you need for good engineering or science.
Post reply on HN