Why do nerds even exist?

[StevenR]

In my reading of some of these posts on here, namely this one by Deepdish that I recently read, he mentions in the importance of things that "genius is merely a ghost to women, and abstract concept but nothing more", in other words, he is saying that intelligence is not sexually selected for even in our species. Women only care if a guy is a genius if he is hot. I tend to think the same thing, I wonder if Leonardo DaVinci, who is practically worshiped nowadays by men and women alike, could even get a date in modern day America? Then there is Issac Newton, who couldn't even get a date in his time. This poses an evolutionary contradiction, that is, how did intelligence evolve in humans in the first place if it is not sexually selected for, which obviously, it isn't?

Intellectuals, nerds, geniuses, rocket scientists, whatever you wish to call them, not to mention the worlds great artists and philosophers, are the source of virtually all of humanities advances, both scientific and cultural. Without them we would still be living in caves right now, or the plains of Africa, or even extinct.

You would think women would have a little more respect for that, but practically speaking it means that if intelligent genes don't get passed on anymore than anyone elses genes, something extraordinary had to happen with our species for humans to evolve intelligence to have a technological society. No I am not implying religion played a role, I am an agnostic, but it still seems odd to me. All I can think of is there must have been some very unusual and very strong natural selection pressures on humanity in the past for this to occur, since sexual selection typically happens much faster then natural selection does. Maybe this is also the reason it seems that intelligent life in the universe is so rare after all, why we haven't picked up any sign of intelligence out there yet. But to my original question, why do you think nerds/geeks even exist when they should have been selected out of the gene pool by now?

 

[ketostix]

I think one answer to your question is that it wasn't until very recent times did women have total control over who they choose to mate with. Before, men had much more direct control and influence. And I agree with you women generally choose poorly and choose "idiots". I question whether it's the natural order of things for women to have so much control over choice, or if nature intended they should even have much choice at all, being they're so much pysically and logically weaker. There's a lot of truth that women don't even know what the hell they want. Although, ac ounter-argument that nature intended women to have at least some choice is that women seem to be fairly skilled by nature to manipulate men.

 

[Falcon]

I like your inquisitive mindset. There are a lot of unanswered questions. I don't even think it is safe to assume that intelligence is mostly genetic. But that's a whole other debate. I think the answer to your question is that mating is not the end-all-be-all when it comes to survival, at least for the short term. I mean, what good is game when you're starving to death?

 

[djtdot]

Hmm how come intelligence is genetic? I have seen children of profs who aren't that smart. And people whose parents aren't in any "smart" profession who are pretty damn smart.

A good part of intelligence is nurture too.

 

[SmoothTalker]

Intelligence has been proven to strongly correlate to genetics. The best evidence is if you look up twin studies, and even adopted identical twins who haven't seen each other or their biological parents since birth, will often have very similar IQ.

Of course it's not 100% genetics, but more so than most people think. I think the reason you see kids of smart parents acting stupid has less to do with them being stupid and more to do with them being spoiled. I've known plenty of bright people act like complete idiots because they wanted to, or their friends did.

I think raw genetic intelligence is like a tool, but it's the person's environment (nurture) that will then decide how well he uses it.

Anyway, from personal experience, I disagree that women don't like intelligence. I've always been smarter than average, and even worse, in the 'boring' logical subjects like math and science that I heard people tearing apart in some post recently.

My girlfriend loves it. I have several friends that are as smart or smarter than me, and they have or have had very hot girlfriends also. And we're still all under 25 years old. I think the benefits of intelligence won't really kick in until we're all done university and start sweet careers.

Anyway, you're on to something with nerds/geeks. Women, at least the ones worth your time, like smart guys. What they don't like is nerds and geeks. But though most people think they are related, I disagree - I know plenty of 'nerdy' people that aren't all that smart.

Nerds and geeks don't do well with women because they don't have any social skills, not because they are smart. But there's no reason why being smart stops you from being good with women, because being smart does not mean you have to be a nerd.

At least that's how it is up here in Canada. If smart people are treated like **** down in the States just for being smart, then I truely worry for the future of your country. You guys should remember to be nice to nerds, you'll work for one some day.

 

[TheHumanist]

It is not intellegence that defeats intellegent men from finding a woman. It is social incompetence.

Think about all the nerds and geeks in the world and look at their intelligence, you'll be surprise that many, despire their stereotypical looks, can be quite dumb. Do not forget there many types of geeks and nerds with a broad range of activities. They may like some of the geeky/nerdy things such as the geeky stuff like some like D&D or nerdy stuff like looking forward to doing differential math during winter break (yes, I just heard that recently from a girl...).

What keeps nerds from gaining girls is many freeze up and turn into idiots around them. Many are afraid to even talk to them, even one that is not that attractive. Like many accuse this forum, overthink.

On top of that, think of all the smart people you met. Are they all that nerdy, in the sense of the streotype of dressing bad, looking funny, and all that stuff? Or are many are pretty suave and cool guys and have a side that interests in nerdy subjects. Also don't forget that the nerdy people that doesn't get girls, you'll notice they also the most socially incompetent, do you think it is they intellegence that prevent them... or that? Many "nerdy" people still have wives and so on if you look around (like college professors).

Interestingly, this subject reminds of the Flynn Effect (wikipedia it), which notice how IQ is moving up an average of 3 points every decade (fyi, the IQ model is based on an average curve, so even though it is shifting up, when enough is shifted, it is reshift back to 100 for the average).

I also believe most people are actually pretty intellegent. Those who act dumb can many times turn out to have many ideas. Others never realize that they have the potential. Then there those who grew to become too spoil and gain a princess mentality to care.

 

[Interceptor]

It is not intellegence that defeats intellegent men from finding a woman. It is social incompetence

Exactly.
Lack of a concept of social activity.
Socially mal adjusted.
Inable to properly calibrate, and more often, an unwillingness to participate and to learn.
They way they "see" things, and their often senss of importance and superiority only serve to further alienate themselves.

 

[KarmaSutra]

At first I thought this was a slam on my man 'DISH and I was going to come in swinging but I'm glad that this is props to him and other like minds.

Carry on.

 

[Falcon]

Pook offers an insightful perspective on this subject too.

Origin of the 'Nerd'

 

[Road Demon]

I also believe most people are actually pretty intellegent. Those who act dumb can many times turn out to have many ideas. Others never realize that they have the potential. QUOTE]

INCORRECT. Not in my experience.

Perhaps we are confusing IQ with EQ?

'Nerds' have difficulity in late teens to mid twenties, then with significant career success the tables turn. I agree out is that it has to more with social compentence then intelligence.

These 'Nerds' they have the ability (intelligence) to learn the techniques of seduction and self-improvement.

 

[Mad Manic]

It is not intellegence that defeats intellegent men from finding a woman. It is social incompetence.

Well I don't really agree with that although I agree it's the social aspect that holds them back. But intelligent people do not relate as well socially to normal people and below BECAUSE of their intelligence. They don't find the same type of conversation as interesting or don't find humour in what normal people laugh at. Usually the conversation has to be more stimulating than that of the average person and indeed humour etc. There's also pesonality traits that come with intelligence; namely, since they have intelligence, they're less bothered about other things and focused on things that encourage intelligence. e.g.) Maths, rather than looking cool and doing what the media says and other schoolkids say.

A study was done and the optimal IQ level for getting laid was a bit below the mean. Past the mean IQ, the sexual activity declined steeply. I think the optimal IQ makes sense because it's close enough to relate to most but also being slightly under (rather than above) means that you're more likely to make amends by doing stuff that's socially 'encouraged'.

MM

 

[Giovanni Casanova]

Been around the world and found
That only stupid people are breeding
The cretins cloning and feeding

-- Flagpole Sitter, Harvey Danger

 

[Mad Manic]

I think one answer to your question is that it wasn't until very recent times did women have total control over who they choose to mate with. Before, men had much more direct control and influence. And I agree with you women generally choose poorly and choose "idiots". I question whether it's the natural order of things for women to have so much control over choice, or if nature intended they should even have much choice at all, being they're so much pysically and logically weaker. There's a lot of truth that women don't even know what the hell they want. Although, ac ounter-argument that nature intended women to have at least some choice is that women seem to be fairly skilled by nature to manipulate men.

I wouldn't say it's by nature that women are skilled to manipulate men. They're skilled because from an early age they are hit on and pursued so much that they develop these intricate skills to manipulate men and to take advantage of their pandering to them, along with all the BS social conditioning women are fed, unlike men. Women choose 'idiots' over smart guys because idiots are better at not qualifying themselves to the girl and spiking her emotions in unpredictable ways. Intelligent guys tend to be rather logical and predictable (not the same as boring) which doesn't comply as well with the process at hand. I also believe nature wasn't intended for women to have control over men. Men are supposed to be the drivers of the world and the last thing they need is the concept of manuals on how to get laid because the pool of men doing so is shrinking to 0.

MM

 

[DJDamage]

Einstein was messing around alot even when he was married.

 

[Aboleo]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jqa4LpdtOD8

:nervous:

 

[StevenR]

I was going to respond this morning but got distracted, anyway, last night when I wrote this what I really met was that intelligence doesn't seem to be advantageous, that is, it doesn't matter as much as looks. A good looking genius has as much of a chance as a good looking moron. Sexual selection is also much stronger form of selection then even natural selection, and is some cases, as Darwin pointed out with male peacocks' tails, defies logic even in the natural world. Also, in most species it is women who do the choosing, and the fact that male peacocks have large and colorful tails even though in practical terms it is a negative fitness trait demonstrates this fact of female choice (Charles Darwin "The Evidence of the Descent of Man").

They don't find the same type of conversation as interesting or don't find humour in what normal people laugh at.

Interesting you mention this. When I joined this one dating site they were sending out David DeAngelo emails to the male members, so I get these free emails from the guy now. In a recent one he was saying how most guys bore women on dates and how they need to be more interesting to them, which incidentally is a problem I have been having with women on dates. Anyway, he says that women get excited by people related gossip and drama, the kind of shvt that is printed in tabloids basically. I almost puked when I read that, there is NO WAY I can force myself to be interested in what a bunch of movies stars who have no bearing on my life are doing. I think this may be a case in point of finding different things interesting.

Even with men who like to talk about sports I get bored. I like playing some sports if I am participating, and sometimes it is fun to watch a game on TV with friends while shooting the shvt, but I just never got the mentality of fanatical sports fans. It is like they are living a vicarious life through a bunch of overpaid millionaire jocks who are most likely not even from their city, and only in said city because the billionaire team owner was able to offer them the most money. It just seems like a big corporate money making machine to me now, what is the fun in that?
I am just giving an example of things that interest most men in conversations that don't really interest me and more specifically WHY they don't interest me, a self-proclaimed geek.
As a geek I do get normal jokes, and even laugh at them. I think South Park, the Simpsons, Beavis and Butthead and various other comedies are hilarious and I love comedy, I also seem to get more subtle jokes that go completely over some peoples head too.

 

[jmchavz]

You're from toronto??? Canada???

this is also the reason it seems that intelligent life in the universe is so rare after all

I tend to think that intelligent life is in abundance in the universe and that stupidity is in abundance here.... in Mexico

Dude, what's your prob? :crackup: you mad cause WE LATINOS are better Dj's than YOU?

Here's to your QUOTE..... F*** OFF!!! :cuss:

Oh I'm Sorry??? Where you expecting me to CRACK SH!T about Toronto, CANADA??? Haha Sorry!!!!

Guess I USED MY INTELLIGENCE....

BTW I am Proudly Mexican, born and living here

And I'm Pretty Sure That There is a LOT OF INTELLIGENT LIFE IN CANADA, but better luck next time, you might be intelligent in a future life :crackup:

 

[martinM.]

. I think this is more of a regional question rather than a nature (natural selection) question. What i mean by that is in other countries this really isn't the case. Intelligence isn't really looked down upon, it doesn't mean you're weak physically, bad in bed etc. Just means you're intelligent plain and simple.

In the states for some reason being intelligent carries a horrible stigma (In most cases.) It's not so much that smart people are socially inept by birth it's more their experiences that cause social awkwardness.

 

[Quiksilver]

Actually girls want a well-balanced intelligent guy, TBH.

The OP seems to equate genius in one part of the mind as intelligence overall. It's the common mistake people make in assuming that someone who is very good at school is also very intelligent.

How could you call somebody a legit 'genius' if they can do complex mathematics in their head with little effort, while at the same time their Social intelligence is that of a lab rat?

There are many areas of intelligence, and many guys who are 'geniuses' in one aspect, have a retardation in another. That doesn't sound well-balanced does it? For instance, my dad is a lawyer and many people think he's ridiculously smart, yet his emotional intelligence isn't very developed.

That's why you ask some 'smart' people about themselves, they sometimes respond by saying "im not smart, im an idiot", because in their own mind they know that with the strength they have in one area, it's balanced by a glaring weakness in another(commonly Social/Emotional intelligence, largely ignored in modern educational philosophies).

If you're emotionally/socially very adept, chances are THAT will not be ignored by the ladies.

 

[Hooligan Harry]

Perhaps we are confusing IQ with EQ?

'Nerds' have difficulity in late teens to mid twenties, then with significant career success the tables turn. I agree out is that it has to more with social compentence then intelligence.

These 'Nerds' they have the ability (intelligence) to learn the techniques of seduction and self-improvement.

What do you base this on? Seduction techniques are relatively new. 30 years ago you were either a natural or developed thick skin and taught yourself through trial and error. Even self improvement is a relatively new concept. So Im not quite sure what you base those statements on.

Seduction techniques are a short term solution. Its a web of deceit you spin that cannot hide insecurities or inadequacies forever. That requires a total change in mindset and life experience.

Being a social retard does not get you laid. Being a rich social retard will get you laid. Being a well known very rich social retard is still going to land you 10's. Only for them to divorce you or make your life hell after you settle down with them.

Sorry pal. If you think the geeky nerd is going to become a playboy once he has a high paying job and has studied mystery method backwards you are mistaken.