I've always wondered who's more aware of reality, those who brutally keep their noses stuck to a book in the infinite world of academia or those who are most connected to people despite societies obstacles. We've always measured intellect by the success of our careers, but what if we're all connected and functional because of our different 'smarts' that isn't constant by degree but rather integrated through variation and subtle but continuous relevance. Why is a stock-broker always socially handicapped to a political graffitti artist?
2006-10-28 00:38:00 · 6 answers · asked by Alexandria 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Other - Cultures & Groups
Why do u have to label them?Each can be smart, in their own way. An academically inclined person can also be a scintillating conversationalist, and who says a social butterfly cant be bookish too? After all, if u want to attend parties, u have to know what to talk abt, u need something in ur head, dont u?
2006-10-28 00:46:59 · answer #1 · answered by Sunrise 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Those closest to God and nature are most aware of reality. The smart guy with a large net can easily catch a butterfly. I'll put it this way, it would be easier for a smart person to be socially functional than for someone of average intelligence to be smart. Keep thinking though sweety, you almost got it.
2006-10-28 07:59:12 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
"Smart" really has nothing to do with education or social status. Scholars appear to be smarter than social butterflies by choice.
You may have heard of the phrase ''dumbing down''. This is when someone who is intelligent pretends not to be in order to fit in with a particular social group. It seems absurd on paper that anyone would choose to be less intelligent and knowledgeable than they actually are, but it's quite a common phenomenon.
2006-10-28 07:47:35 · answer #3 · answered by lesroys 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It would probably depend on the subject matter. A fifteen year old is probably a better source for pop culture than a bookworm. However, a scholar is probably much a more better source on intellectual matters. Now if ya come across a well rounded person, ya get the best of both worlds... and yes, we do exist! :-)
2006-10-28 08:15:07 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
thats why the smartest people don't always end up to be better off.
2006-10-28 07:48:51 · answer #5 · answered by anonymous 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
neither.
It takes a loss to make a gain.
2006-10-28 08:31:45 · answer #6 · answered by s t 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋