In regards to Neil, in my day job I've had to work with many PhD types. And that description is pretty accurate. In their small little field, that are outstanding and brilliant. Outside of that field they can be complete idiots (with a few exceptions). But to say they are no better than some random person is not accurate - generally they are way way worse. The problem is that they know they are smart in one area and assume they are smart in all areas, and then they actually come across sounding very confident and authoritative. Fools a lot of people a lot of the time. I've learned that the minute they stray from their chosen field that I should basically ignore them completely.
I agree. I have a relative who fits the bill exactly. He knows his stuff ... as long as it's HIS STUFF. But we have had to repeatedly let him know he's nowhere near the authority he thinks he is in other matters.
In regards to Neil, in my day job I've had to work with many PhD types. And that description is pretty accurate. In their small little field, that are outstanding and brilliant. Outside of that field they can be complete idiots (with a few exceptions). But to say they are no better than some random person is not accurate - generally they are way way worse. The problem is that they know they are smart in one area and assume they are smart in all areas, and then they actually come across sounding very confident and authoritative. Fools a lot of people a lot of the time. I've learned that the minute they stray from their chosen field that I should basically ignore them completely.
ReplyDeleteI agree. I have a relative who fits the bill exactly. He knows his stuff ... as long as it's HIS STUFF. But we have had to repeatedly let him know he's nowhere near the authority he thinks he is in other matters.
Delete