Trace Oswald wrote:
I would like to hear other people's thoughts about this, if anyone feels so inclined.
Eric Hanson wrote:I think I agree with Trace’s original post, but maybe for different reasons. Please let me explain.
I, too am one of those persons who has been labeled as book smart, meaning I did well in school and generally know a lot of random facts (studying history does this).
However, I think that each time I was labeled as book smart, the term itself was actually something defensive and insulting. The person calling me book smart was decidedly (by their own admission) NOT book smart. It was defensive in that while I was labeled “book smart”, my knowledge and intelligence was not applicable to anything practical. Moreover, the label of “book smart” was implied to be limiting while the person using (and accusing) the term was trying to elevate their own intelligence.
In this vein I do not like the phrase “book smart” as it actually implies a lack of intelligence, at least of a practical sort. I think this is what Trace was stating in his opening post.
Just my thoughts and personal experiences, but perhaps something along these lines is what Trace meant in his opening comments.