From: johnson@sleipnir.mnesouth.corp.mot.com (Mark Johnson)
Subject: The nerd stereotype
Reply-To: johnson@sleipnir.mnesouth.corp.mot.com
Organization: Motorola Wireless Enterprises, Schaumburg, IL
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 16:23:04 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.214653.24293@athena.cs.uga.edu>, fuller@athena.cs.uga.edu (James P. H. Fuller) writes:
=)>     The cliche of the poor maladjusted genius is just that, a cliche, a
=)> stock figure of second-rate comedies.  Historically the great majority of
=)> the most gifted people have moved through ordinary society without any dif-
=)> ficulty -- and in particular have had fewer, rather than more, problems
=)> than usual in locating and forming longstanding friendships with their
=)> peers.
...
=)    The combined results of the medical examinations and the physical
=)measurements provide a striking contrast to the popular stereotype of the
=)child prodigy so commonly depicted as a pathetic creature, over-serious and
=)undersized, sickly, hollow-chested, stoop-shouldered, clumsy, nervously
=)tense, and bespectacled." (ibid.)
...
=)    I could go on and on but I won't.  However, it is a simple fact that
=)(as I wrote) the cliche of the poor maladjusted genius is just that, a 
=)cliche, a stock figure of second-rate comedies.  This is an extremely well-
=)researched and thoroughly documented finding and I would have thought it
=)known to any educated person, let alone a Mensan.
=)
=)   Of course this doesn't prove that there aren't *any* unpopular dorks
=)and dweebs with high IQs.  Of course there are -- but if such people are
=)unpopular it isn't merely because they're smart, it's because they've found
=)other methods of being unpleasant.  (And work these methods overtime, as
=)like as not.)

This is a very interesting series of references, which I confess to being
previously unaware of.  It does, however, beg the question of where the
stereotype comes from and why it's so pervasive.  To stimulate a discussion
of the topic, here are a few ideas off the top of my head (no references
provided or research done whatsoever :-)

* An intellectually gifted but socially inept person might attempt to gain
acceptance by emphasizing his/her strongest point, i.e., intelligence.
Such an individual will then be perceived as as more intelligent than an
intellectual equal who does not overtly draw attention to this quality.
Thus, intelligence becomes more associated with social ineptitude in the
minds of their associates.

* Society, recognizing the value of intelligence, is more tolerant of
people who are maladjusted, socially inept, or physically inferior when
they display high intelligence.  Thus, the sickly, maladjusted genius
becomes more visible to modern society than his less intelligent
counterpart.

* Intelligence is, erroneously, associated in the public perception with
certain specific and relatively rare skills and/or interests such as
mathematics, science, etc.  People who apply equal intelligence to more
common occupations or interests (teaching, accounting, management) are
not seen as being particularly intelligent since what they do is
understood to some extent by most people they interact with.  Thus, the
general perception of extreme intelligence is reserved for people who,
due to their more unique interests and skills, have more trouble
communicating with "regular" people.  Often, this communication
problem is blamed on a large gap in intelligence, making the error
self-reinforcing.

* Intelligence comes in two largely independent flavors--logical and
creative.  People can be gifted with large amounts of either or both,
and often little effort is made to distinguish between the two.  (Just
my perception; disagreements are welcome.)  People with large amounts
of creative intelligence tend to confuse people who can't follow thier
leaps of intuition, and also tend more to use radically and visibly
original approaches to problems.  Further, while creative thinking is
faster and sometimes more powerful than linear, it is less reliable.
(Again, just my opinion.)  For these reasons, people with high degrees
of creative intelligence may seem less stable and predictable to an
observer, while seeming particularly intelligent at the same time due
to the difficulty in understanding their methods and motives.  This
may reinforce the "mad genius" stereotype.

* Maladjusted and highly intelligent individuals appear (not completely
erroneously) to be more of a threat to individuals and society than
maladjusted individuals of average or low intelligence, who are less
effective at destruction and more easily apprehended and/or controlled.
Thus, they are more highly visible in general and get more media
attention in both fact and fiction.  (How powerful a character would
Hannibal Lechter be if he was on the dull side?)  The insane genius is
thus a more compelling stereotype than the insane moron, a character
I have never encountered in all my reading.

Well, this should start either a good discussion or another vicious flamewar.
-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  "Johnson"                              | "                               " |
|  johnson@sleipnir.mnesouth.corp.mot.com |               -- Marcel Marceau   |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  Disclaimer:  It's just my Tourette's Syndrome acting up again.             |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa