Paul Graham essay "Why Nerds are Unpopular"

[Chad]

Thanks, Ego. I thought it was one of the better ones I have read recently. It all kind of ties to a study I read a long time ago comparing the success of students with 4.0's to ones with 3.8's. The 3.8's had more success. The theory being that the massive extra work for those last .2 GPA points wasn't worth losing out on social skills that could be learned in that time.

[2handband]

Nothing that happens in public schools is the fault of the kids, it is the fault of a system that was designed not to benefit children but to benefit the economic system by breaking them to the habits of the workforce. BTW, that's not just me blabbing; the public education system as we understand it today came together under the Wilson administration. The system was designed to specifically combat the labor problems that had come with industrialization up to that point; politicians and captains of industry had very quickly discovered that humans don't take naturally to factory or office conditions! So they designed a system in which children learned, from a very young age, to sit quietly and do boring, repetitive tasks for long periods of time, to promptly follow a carved-in-stone schedule, and to obey a managerial class that they vastly outnumber. I'll find a link if anyone wants to see it, but in a speech given to a group of high-level politicians and industry leaders, an ivy league college professor who was amongst the architects of this amazing new system told his audience that they were going to turn out a superior product (workers), and the specifications would come from government and industry. Yes, that's your kids they're talking about. This is why I turn off my ears when people start talking about "reforming" our educational system: the system works. Just like our political system works, and a bunch of the others that we'd like to reform. They work with nearly 100% efficiency; we're just in denial about their purpose. Look at it this way: last night 10 million kids went to bed hoping for a snowstorm to close the schools... and it's late May! Can this really be the fault of the kids?

[fiby41]

Plus, Jacob found out through the blog that the Lord of the Flies mentality still applies even when you avoid direct contact with people.

The lack of direct involvement of 'authority' into the social structures created in schools, prisons and on the internet is a common threads connecting the three.

Schools pecking order: Principal, teachers, non-teaching staff, parents are the authority; students create their own social structure in order of popularity or grade

Prison: Head warden, warden, guards, are the authority; inmates create their own social structures by, for example, the gangs they were part of before being imprisoned

Internet: Whatever government organization is approved to be the competent authority for censorship in your country; website owners, admins, moderators, and finally the user.

All authorities mentioned before the semi-colon impose their rule in a top-down fashion; while those after the semi-colon get their power from the other members of that group bottom-up. So the latter social structures are lose as they require the buy-ins of the people who are going to use them. Example, there need to be users/members for the moderators to have something to do.

Since there are no real consequences of the actions to keep people in check, the positive feedback loop people unconsciously use to make sure they are still well liked by the tribe to prevent being ostracized is made numb on the internet.

This applies, not despite indirect contact, but especially because of it.

ie. due to the contact being indirect and lacks direct consequences.

[oldbeyond]

Very interesting thread! I would agree that there is a majority/minority dynamic at play here. The labels are interesting to discuss and define, but I think the really interesting thing is what strategy(-ies) the minority should employ. A few typical ones:

(1) Assimilation - learning to behave like majority, to the best of their abilities. Playing the majority's game, and thus being always at a disadvantage, but perhaps to a lesser degree than if chosing another tactic.
(2) Emancipation - appealing to external actors(the school system, parents, the public) for symapthy followed by cultural, legal and social accommodation of the interests of the minority. Can improve the groups standing in some ways, while most likely angering some part of the majority. If the strategy doesn't work(no sympathy) the situation might simply become worse than before.
(3) Isolation - distancing itself from the majority, closing ranks. Can foster cohesion, strength through unity, identity. Risks hostility from the majority and denies the minority the majority's resources/ideas/connections entirely.
(4) Domination - striving to wield power over the majority against it's will. The obvious risk is that failure could be catastrophic. An initial success could lead to failure through rebellion. In the long run often leads to assimilation.

I guess most nerds applied 1 and 3 in different situations and possibly 2.

For me, what I found was that certain parts of the majority culture was superior to my own. I didn't like a lot of the social interaction with other nerds, as there was a lot of narcissism, insecurity and bitterness present in the exchanges. These were not the only characteristics of nerd-dom, but they became badges of honour for the nerds as it clearly set them apart from the minority(a classic trap for a minority to fall into). The way I see it, innate differences between nerds and "normal people" create the divide, which is then made wider by group dynamics(imitation of people you can identify with, contempt/hostility for the other group, sour grapes, pride in dysfunctional traits out of identification with the group, etc). I used http://www.succeedsocially.com/ as a sort of assimilation manual, in areas were I felt I had something to learn.

[7Wannabe5]

Different nerds have different experiences. My closest sister (infp) and I were persecuted intermittently for being nerds when we were children. My sister was skinnier, had thick glasses and was even shyer, so she suffered more. I defended myself by mastering the skill of composing mean-spirited limericks. But when I was 13, I shot up to 5'9" and puberty was otherwise mostly kind. Same thing happened to my sister a year later and she got contacts. Then we both got into pretty much all the kinds of trouble that you might imagine the typical immature-yet-precocious teen nerd, who was reading adult literature by age 10, would get into if suddenly encased in attractive, fully-developed female body (attempted seduction of married high school teacher, causing 3 car collision while hitch-hiking, solicitation for prostitution (not accepted!) , etc. etc.) While I was setting the curve in AP Chem in 11th grade, I was also dating a man in his 20s who drove a potato chip truck just because he looked like Hutch, and I was also receiving regular anonymous obscene phone calls from one of my nerdy classmates with whom I actually attempted to make friendly, rational conversation, mostly along the lines of challenging the physical possibility of performing the various acts he suggested during the course of the school day.

Flash forward 20 years and my sister and I are at a high school reunion and one of our former nerdy classmates, now much more man-sized and attractive, breaks away from his group of former nerds and approaches me and says (actually comes right up and talks to me!!) "We were all wondering if the __________ sisters would show up." and hugs me just a bit longer and stronger than appropriate.

[fiby41]

Your post ranks up there with Dragline’s for best first post. Welcome.

You mean this?:
http://www.forum.earlyretirementextreme ... 571#p18571

[jennypenny]

Your post ranks up there with Dragline’s for best first post. Welcome.

You mean this?:
http://www.forum.earlyretirementextreme ... 571#p18571

No, this one ... viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1396&p=18642#p18642