How come nerds, geeks, or highly intelligent people tend to lack

>>8698127
because cortex is a finite resource and social analysis is an extremely cortex intensive operation

>>8698127
They see the underlying cause of the universe. They see you as a giant hulking mass of scientific garble. It scares them.

nerds are busy

geeks are almost defined by lack social intelligence

highly intelligent people, as a rule, don't lack it

"Social intelligence" is a made up thing that brainlets tell themselves that they have to make them feel better about sucking at math

>>8698127
>It's another "life is like an RPG" thread

They don't. In fact I think the only actual autistic "great" physicist was Dirac. I mean Feynman got around to say the least, Schrödinger had a thing for teenager girls, and I think Einstein told one of his wives (yes there were several) not to expect fidelity.

They lack emotions, as did people of the likes of da Vinci

>>8698127
Do they? I don't feel that's the case. Most of my peers have average or even above average social skills.

>>8698154
>Da Vinci
>Lacking emotions.

No my friend. Italians tend to be just all around badasses, guy could compose as well as he invented, was strong as an ox. Wrote poetry, sculpted. Just...one hell of a renaissance man.

>>8698154
G..God king?

>>8698177
Fucking pleb, bet you didn't even acquire the fundamentals of pure logic until you were like 15 or something.

>>8698177
You fall for an obvious meme

wasn't Von Neumann a party animal?

>>8698127
the really successful scientists and engineers are the ones with good social skills

>>8698198
Are you a troll. This better be.

>>8698127
Because they dedicate more of their time on their education while the other group dedicates more time to social experiences. They aren't mutually exclusive though, you can still have both, but very few people have the motivation it takes.

>>8698211
Yes
Though I think the more accurate observation to make is that the people with generalized intelligence (who also seem to tend to be polymaths in some sense) are socially capable whereas the equally accomplished savant-like people tend to lack this

>>8698127
Because intelligence has never been able to be quantified outside of, "He must be a wizard!", or something similar. When society raises those of intelligence above/below their own status then obviously those people aren't exposed to that realm of experience.

Negative: Nikola Tesla + Edison (Or any capitalist that has stolen an inventors idea)
Positive: Richard Feynman/Lao Tzu/Socrates (Stands the test of time to help future brainlets)

Think of intellectuals as the outcasts of ALL HUMANITY but because we are denied the social/interactive aspect we don't know how to merge our sciences.

>>8698127
I think it's more that people who lack social intelligence tend to try to compensate by pretending they're highly intelligent.

A S P E R G E R' S S Y N D R O M E

>>8699011
C H E E S E B U R G E R C H R O M E D O M E

>>8698988
>people who lack actual intelligence tend to
>try to compensate by pretending they have
>"social" intelligence
FTFY

>>8699020
Not him, but I think it works both ways

>>8698154
Did he also smoke cigs and fuck sluts?

>>8698127
Something to do with the prefrontal cortex and a lack of synaptic pruning in specific regions of the brain.

>>8698611
"Savant-like" would imply being capable of only one field of study. There are plenty of anti-social people that have high general intelligence. I once knew a woman who had around 190 IQ but would only talk about stuff she considers interesting and was discouraged from anything else. The smartest people I know have social problems, usually anxiety or depression, but they do well in life.