I always hear people describe themselves "smart but lazy", especially on the internet...

I always hear people describe themselves "smart but lazy", especially on the internet. Do you think that's the truth or is that just an excuse brainlets use to justify their failure?

>"smart but lazy"
Possibly true, formally unprovable, statistically unlikely.

It started off as a true statement and valid excuse, but brainlets appropriated it, just like robots appropriate autism.

I don't believe it. Anyone under 30 who is smart has no reason to be lazy.

It's true.
When I was in school, I really didn't give a shit. In university, I give a shit and am no longer lazy

its just means they blew through middle school without effort because they are actually gifted to a degree but once the workload of high school hit them they were totally unwilling to do the work to replicate their previous success, which isn't that much effort at all considering they are gifted to begin with. They do become dumb as shit eventually though if they don't turn things around and actually learn.

I don't think someone smart would let themself fail, nor would they boast so obnoxiously.

I used to be like that and I accept I was a stupid kid. Now I'm older and smarter I realise i have to take responcibilty for failure in order to improve.

It can be true but they are generally retards

>workload of high school
>having to do jackshit for highschool
I didn't know I was on /b/

I said
>which isn't that much effort at all
It starts with just not doing work because it worked out in middle school and then leads to actually not knowing shit because you did anything but learn all day.

Unless intelligence can fluctuate wildly, you can be smart but lazy, I was. Didn't do anything for a year and barely passed everything, then decided to actually work and was in the top 5 for each subject till I graduated. So its possible, but I don't think most people who call themselves smart but lazy fall into this category, I never called myself that, and the fact that I was unmotivated to work was worse for me than being dumb so I would never tell anyone irl this.

Most people just say it because its more acceptable to be lazy then dumb for some reason. Personaly I dont care if someone is dumb and they know it, ask for help and so on, but someone who is lazy pisses me off to no end so I dont know why its this way around.

Yes. I describe myself lazy, because of my bad grades I got in school, but I've never ever considered myself "smart". A smart lazy person write average grades in school, a average lazy person is just bad in school. I have no Idea why people won't called themselves "average", like, what is so bad in being average intelligent? A average person can learn everything just a bit slower than a smart person do, but that's all.

If you are smart you won't be lazy.

>I have no Idea why people won't called themselves "average", like, what is so bad in being average intelligent? A average person can learn everything just a bit slower than a smart person do, but that's all.
Because if you say nothing people automatically assume that you are average. You will only describe yourself with traits that distinguish you from the mean. It's like describing yourself as having two arms and two legs.

Everyone has a reason to be lazy. It's literally hardwired in us to spend as little energy as we can.

Good work ethics is something that's learned.

Being lazy isnt smart

Of course it's possible to be smart but lazy. It's only a problem if you're too lazy, or not smart enough.

it depends on the situation. it is lazy to compute 13234*3612421 on a calculator instead of in your head or on paper? I'd say yes, and I'd also say it's the smart thing to do.

I funnily enough am pretty smart and very lazy. Currently in 4th year physics, and I do well in exams/continuous assessment, but I know for a fact I would do better if I committed half the time my friends do to studies. Makes me feel both jammin and cuntlike.
Huge part of it is me drinking like a fish, often underestimating myself and being unavoidably disorganised and cripplingly lazy.

it is more like people who are smart haven't had to try as hard as others to accomplish things so they don't have a very good work ethic

>its more acceptable to be lazy then dumb for some reason
Because people are innately aware that you can't change your intelligence. Everyone likes to think they could still turn their life around, not that they were born inferior.

I'm a grandmaster in 5 different games, including chess, and am doing greatly as an undergrad in a foreign country studying medicine in a foreign language. I also have terminal cancer lmao

I guess being lazy would have been better, since I'd atleast have enjoyed life and gotten laid once or twice.

Be happy you are anything

I think its valid for a small number of people but any lazy person that has heard the phrase applies it to themselves because they overestimate their intelligence

Look at their job status, people who are smart and lazy still have a job that requires skills above the average person but they are underachieving and/or unambitious and don't meet their full potential.

I don't like the tag, it has a stigma now, but in my personal experience I feel as if it fit me during certain time periods. Blew through high school, dropped out of uni first time because couldn't be fucked. Now doing well in my paramedical degree because it motivates me to do the work as I actually like it.

>blew through middle school
>but once the workload of high school hit them
then they weren't smart at all
I did no work in elementary school
I did no work in middle school
I did no work in high school
I did no work for my bachelors degree
I slept through all of it
the only time I had to actually sit down and learn something was for calc in college
and I'm not even that smart
the smart kids didn't even have to do that much

People have called me lazy but smart before. I think I'm just lazy and dumb though.

This.

If you have to say you're smart, most likely you're not. ^___^

The problem is retards think good grades means you're smart when it actually means you're hardworking.

Wrong. Good grades means you are smart. Hard work is needed when you write scientifical papers.

The dumbest kid in the class can go straight to the top of the test scores when you put him on ADD meds. I do believe that someone can have high IQ and poor motivation. It's definately something that can happen, just like how you can have someone with high athletic potential who never exercises.

Depends on what you're studying, if you dropped out of high school you're most likely a lazy faggot and not necessarily stupid. Which is the case for most people who state this.

Always disregard what a person says before the "but"

I have SAD, so I can literally tell you, motivation makes a huge difference.

I had problems in university until I started taking medication. I would get nothing but As on all courses one semester, then I would basically lie in bed waiting to die and barely eating the next.

If you don't do the work, you fail. All grades are is work, to get good grades doesn't really take much beyond average intelligence and a willingness to put in effort.

The place where intelligence shines is when you have to do unique problem solving or creative work. In a non-brainlet career you can quickly see the difference between "hard work smart" and "how is this person this smart" with how quickly and well they solve unique problems.

The hard work smart person can approximate it by constantly working to add stuff to their toolbox, but they will never be as good at solving novel problems as the latter.

I'm lazy but smart.

Lazyness will turn them into brainlets eventually.

>once the workload of highschool hit them

Muh sides

The brainlet infestation is unreal

>Good grades means you're smart

Anyone who says this is legitimately a retard, which is funny.

Not true. They'd know when it's worth trying and when it's not worth trying. So they might skip out on a lot of shit, but they also aren't some lazy bum sitting around doing nothing all day and complaining about rent being due or not having anything to eat. They'd at the very least have the foresight to have either created or have placed themselves in a system where their needs and wants are fulfilled.

So yeah, maybe if they're lazy in the sense that they choose not to try in college when they know they have a fall back option, but it's not smart but lazy if they're operating without a safety net. It's dumb and lazy.

I never showed up to uni during my undergrad.

However the one semester i attempted to attend most lectures and labs i had exceedingly high grades, nothing spectacular but still top grades.

Once i decided i didnt want to do post grad i didnt show up and grades dropped.

Its a hard one, because a guy i know is doing a PHD and is really interested in his subject matter, yet he is also one of the dumbest people i know.

I think subject interest/or hardwork makes up for a large portion of whether or not someone succeeds in uni rather than brains.

Half the "brainy" engineers at my fathers firm apparently are very smart but lack any common sense or other skills outside of book work.

>I slept through all of it

You're an idiot if you're telling such a flimsy lie. If you did homework in school, then you did work. If you were able to answer enough questions on tests to get passing grades, then you studied. A smart person isn't going to magically do well in school with no effort, because being smart doesn't cause random bits of knowledge to materialize in your brain. In fact, school isn't about intelligence at all, it hardly even comes into the equation.

And if they recognize that it's never worth trying? Your logic is flawed and you're stupid.

Then they would be smart if they are content where they are and don't complain. They would be stupid if they complain, yet had the means to change their current situation.

Going "I could have, I would have" doesn't mean shit if you didn't do when you should have and on top of that makes it worse if knew you could and chose not to do it. You're a slothful idiot.

The only true kind of smart but lazy person is a smart person who genuinely is completely fine with their hand in life and has no want to change. Whether that be some rich kid with everything handed to them, or some stoner who just likes sitting on his beanbag.

It sounds like this post is implying smart people don't suffer from depression, which is truly hilarious. You're a retard, stop making up fake psychology.

>tfw gain nothing from lectures
>learn at much better pace by solving problems and reading
>just because I don't attend lectures, people assume I'm lazy

Being depressed != not doing enough to survive.
You can be amotivated but still do stuff because you understand its what needs to be done in order to keep moving. Being depressed never stopped anyone from working a job or getting an education. Made it more difficult, but it never stopped these people from understanding why they should do something if they want to get ahead.

>Being depressed != not doing enough to survive

It does equal that, actually. I'm going to write you off as baiting, there's no way anyone can believe this self-help bullshit.

I define smart as the "capacity to use your available resources in the most efficient way to obtain your desired result".
Saying "smart but lazy" is just using excuses to not recognize you're being stupid.

Then you're obscenely stupid. Smart is being able to see the path, walking it has nothing to do with being smart. You can see the path but decide that because it won't bear fruit until you're old, you don't care to walk it. Or decide not to walk it because life is pointless and awful. Or you can be incapable of walking it because of illness or disability.

You're legitimately retarded if these thoughts didn't occur to you before you made this terrible post. It's actually really simple. Solving the problem on a piece of paper is intelligence, deciding whether to throw it in the fireplace or use it afterwards is something else entirely.

"being able to see the path" is not a clear definition.
If you are at school and take a test, solve it perfectly and then throw it away consequently getting a 0/10, then you probably are not smart.

>then you probably are not smart

No, you're just making false attributions to intelligence, probably out of desperation to make sense out of a universe that doesn't care about you. It's the same reason people believe in nonsense like karma.

In that case, then that means the depressed aren't intelligent.

Does anyone else play FIFA?

You can be 85 overall but if your work-rate is Low then you are going to do fuck all

Conversely the mediocre can make up for lost ground with tireless effort

>If you did homework in school, then you did work
I didn't do much homework, I just passed tests
I did some homework in the classes where the teacher/professor said that homework is required to get a passing grade, but that is really a rare occurrence

>If you were able to answer enough questions on tests to get passing grades, then you studied
no, I'm just not retarded
you can get most questions correct on a test by simply reading the test carefully and using
>context clues
>common sense
>basic knowledge of the subject that you pick up by having gone to class once in a while

Like I said, the only class I studied for in all my years in school was calc II in college
and again, the truly smart kids didn't even have to study for that, they picked it up in class and aced the tests no problem just like in every other subject

Who said anything about failing? You can be smart and lazy and just do enough to pass

It means literally not doing work retards. Doing the minimal required effort in high school will get you A's, literally not doing so will have you be shit. That is the workload of highschool.

>minimal required effort

Like what? Doing homework in the short breaks between lessons or after the class is dismissed and before leaving? Showing up to class?

There isn't any extra effort compared to elementary or middle school unless you're a brainlet

And Uni is even less work since you don't even have to go to lectures

>the truly smart kids didn't even have to study for that

Your bait was almost believable until here. School has nothing to do with intelligence. Anyone who told you they aced Calc 2 without studying lied to you, and you believed them because you're an idiot.

I've always seen it as laziness that stems from lack of ambition or seeing life as impossible to navigate. I have friends that don't have the will to try anymore because they see all opportunities already taken by other people. It's sort of an interesting phenomenon among this generation. And I know they're smart people, they just gave up too early.

there must be some classes that were easy for you, right?
and you must have known people who found that class to be difficult, right?

now just imagine there are people who find even more classes to be easy.

I personally knew two of the four people in my calc II class who found it to be a breeze. The third guy was one of those high IQ autistic types and the fourth person was some hispanic girl from the ghetto who I think was legitimately genius tier.

Intelligence = Capacity to do calculations/solve poblems.

It doesnt matter how good you should be in theory or how well you did in elemntary school before you realized you actually had to study. If you have no capacity you aren't intelligent. The only legitimate excuse is if you never had your limits pushed due to environment, but if you had the opportunity and then sat there and did nothing, all you proved is that your capacity to calculate is effectively zero because you cannot handle inflows of problems.

Think of it like your stomach. We know that if you throw solid food in there and solid food and blood comes out your ass, that means it's not good at digesting food. You eating baby food as a kid or preblended foods and getting nice brown mush out your ass is good, but it doesn't say shit about whether you have a quality stomach. If you then decide to call it a day and never put larger pieces of food in there as you get older, that doesn't mean that you have an iron stomach that can handle anything and that you know better and don't want to bother testing it. It means you have a stomach that can handle baby food. And disgesting baby food isn't the measure of an adult's stomach.

I wonder what motivates retards like you to make up fake definitions for intelligence just so you can say intelligence and achievement are actually the same thing. Cognitive dissonance? A person can be a genius and sit in a box doing nothing until they die. Or they can serve fries. They're still a genius. If you need this simple logic explained to you, you are not.

>acing calc 2 without studying is unbelievable

Hah, next level brainlet right here

It's a lot of memorization which equates to studying and doing homework. Being smart doesn't mean you magically absorb the formulas from the chalkboard. You're a brainlet if you think doing well in calc 2 is related to intelligence at all. It's just mindless rote memorization that appeals to retards.

Look up the definition of genius and of intelligence.

There's like what? Half a page? Of formulas to remember

Literally go to class and that's it, no need to even revise or use any rote memorisation

Nothing "magic" about it, if it's easy then seeing it on the board and doing the compulsory homework is more than enough

Doing all of the homework to get the grades in homework because having a 0 or something like a C in Homework will bring your overall grade down to a C+-B+ assuming you have A in tests

I got plenty of C's for not doing any of the homework
the thing to keep in mind is that in most careers nobody gives a single fuck about the grades you got in college

>american colleges actually have middle school style mandatory homework
kekking

I was obviously referring to high school god damn

So... getting good grades in high school is important, but only if they're in subjects relevant to continuing education. "A"s in history, sociology, and German won't help much in trying to get a degree in Chemistry, for example.

It's also helpful to have relevant extracurricular activities, and they don't have to be school-sponsored. Volunteer work shows good general character.

The question is, does the college really matter, and does the subject? Maybe. It can certainly help. But I have a Liberal Arts degree in history, from a state university, and have been doing scientific analysis for biologists for the past 25 years. My minor was physics.

Therefore, do you need to go to an Ivy League school? Again, it depends on what you want to do, and it can help.

But what seems to have mattered more than anything, was that I have a degree at all. This can mean the nature of the school is unimportant as is the type of degree. That means it may not matter much how good your grades are in high school.

But it helps. It can help get scholarships. With the costs of unis now, that can be the biggest reward, and it's huge. And grades *should* be a measure of how well you understand the topic. That means continuing education will be if value, and you will know when you've hit your brain's limit. Then stop.

Studying will always help. You can be a genius, but if there's no data in your head, you're still an idiot. The ability to have your own set of references in your head is an invaluable asset. Sponge all the info you can, until your brain is full. Otherwise you'll end up regretting you've wasted your life.

I'm sure "smart but lazy" is a real thing.
I'm also sure that if someone is "smart but lazy", they wouldn't self diagnose as an excuse for poor performance.

I think of myself as smart but lazy, thing is, I'm only lazy with studying, if I'm doing some real work I work way harder than some straight A brainlet, without even noticing it.

It's real, but they don't deserve any sympathy. Your intelligence doesn't do the world any good if all you do is smoke weed and play video games.

>I always hear people
>voices
indicating a psychotic break with reality

Both, but most likely the latter.
The thing is, whichever one may be, it doesn't matter. Nobody else cares that you're smart. People put too much emphasis on what they are -- most likely to make up for a lack of real-world accomplishments. The only thing others care about is what they do.
Anyone who's functional to the degree of being able to keep themselves alive can think they're pretty smart and there's no way to prove or disprove that. Doing things is a much more objective measure. What have you published ? What concrete problems have you solved ? Do you have anything to show for all this time alive and all this intelligence ? That's what the world wants to know about.

If someone describes -themselves- that way, they're definitely just making excuses.

Thankfully this one's pretty much run its course.

Smart able do things.
Lazy lack motivation.

Long ass post, I will try to answer all your questions

>So... getting good grades in high school is important, but only if they're in subjects relevant to continuing education. "A"s in history, sociology, and German won't help much in trying to get a degree in Chemistry, for example.
Thats wrong. If you are trying to get a Chem degree your Chem grade matters most but if you neglect any of your grades so that they aren't A's or sometimes B+ then you hurt your chances at super elite schools. You need everything to be great and contrary to what Veeky Forums memes its not EXTREMELY easy if you went to a hard high school, which usually means high quality private school. At public schools its dogshit easy unless your teachers are all terrible, which often happens when you get a super massive public school.

>extracurriculars
You want to have them concentrated in one area to show great interest, as it makes you unique but it is good to have them in other areas too so you don't seem one-dimensional for Ivies.

>The question is, does the college really matter, and does the subject?
Depends. For Engineering as an example, the college's prestige is important as the most important thing for an engineering guy is to get internships, and that is far easier at a school that is very reputable with industrial/tech/whatever companies. The thing is that the schools that are prestigious for engineering don't always match up with general prestige, for example in undergrad Cornell is much more prestigious for engineering than Harvard (although at that point it doesn't matter), and Penn State (Pennsylvania flagship public uni) is fantastic for engineering because employers love them and they have a massive alumni network and career fair(s)

>does the subject
Often it doesn't, although if you want to go into a certain area you should major in it. For many engineering disciplines you have to major in it to get certified, other things not really.
Cont'

>tfw to intelligent too live

I feel feels for you tbqh familia

>Therefore, do you need to go to an Ivy League school? Again, it depends on what you want to do, and it can help.
It depends on what you want to do. Its not 100% needed but for many things it helps a lot, especially business, law, and medicine. You can still go other places and get the same result but its easier at Ivies.

>But what seems to have mattered more than anything, was that I have a degree at all.
Yeah this is true although a degree is worth more from better schools.

>high school grades
They are important until you reach college at which point they are so irrelevant and nobody cares. They get you one time benefits in college and almost nothing else.

The rest of your post seems to be some internal soliloquy shit so I'll let you do that.

Are you planning on going for a PhD?
I was in the same situation as you and essentially spiraled down into just drinking all the time when it came to apply to grad schools and kinda fucked myself.

This took me a long time to realize, but decision making is an integral part of intelligence. If you have a 120 IQ and end up being a 28 y/o neet because you couldn't formulate proper life goals and make, or make positive moment-to-moment decisions, you are retarded.

>120IQ
>intelligent

Sure, it's more than most normies, but hardly anything to brag about

It's meaningless either way. What really matters is the ability to get things done, and hopefully any actually smart but lazy person will grow up and realize this.

>or is that just an excuse brainlets use to justify their failure
yes

It can be either. Some people are genuinely smart, but are too indifferent to commit or are easily bored. Because of that, they don't put forth the needed effort, even though they can do well. At the end of the day, grades aren't a reflection of intelligence, and many people who fail just get bored or procrastinate a bit. Many fuck around in high school, then actually study in college to do very well. It takes some kind of realization or fear of failure/being a retail wage slave. Others are genuinely dumb and have and ego on top of it, preventing them from being honest and admitting they can't do well in the class, even if they try.

"Capable but lazy" is a better, less pretentious way if saying it

>tfw dumb but lazy

>tfw to scared to try because I don't want to know how retarded I am

You know those people go home and fucking study their asses off right?

>you can't do well in calculus 2 without studying hard

I've met plenty of your type, so desperate to see themselves as smart that they couldn't accept that anyone else is just naturally better

Tfw not smart, but also lazy.

:(

That's clearly wrong even just because most people who aren't 28 year old neets are clearly retarded, religious, spiritual, satisfied in their utter meaningless lives and jobs, etc. So much bad logic in this thread, you're extremely unintelligent

Wrong

It has been shown by studies that the more your intelligence deviates from the norm, the less successful you tend to be in life. Life in a modern society is designed for average people, not intelligent ones

We actually exist, but nobody believes we do anymore.

I didn't do an ounce of homework in multivariable and just learned everything through osmosis in lecture. Easily got an A while many other kids failed horribly.
I'm an engineering student and I don't give a damn about my coursework or my grades, I prefer to spend my time doing research with my professors and designing/building cool things with the various clubs I'm apart of. It isn't that I'm lazy, it is that there are many other things that I'd much rather work hard at than school so I use my natural intelligence to coast by with no effort at all. I believe this is the same for pretty much any individual who falls under the same umbrella as me; their passions supersede arbitrary bullshit like homework and studying, and their inherent mental abilities allow them to focus all of their time and effort on said passions rather than having to work hard in school like those of average capabilities.

>smart
>lazy

pick one

[Citation needed]

I'm not smart but lazy, I am smart AND lazy.

I'm suspecting my laziness actually contributes a lot to my smartness. Having a lot of idling time means having a lot of time for knowledge to sink in, and for my brain to form connections I wouldn't otherwise see. It makes the occasional instances where I actually do some work way more efficient.
I often feel like I make progress twice as fast as other people while only putting in half the effort.

Though, if you're using "smart but lazy" as an excuse as to why you're not accomplishing anything, you're not doing it right.

In my case the laziness stems from fear of failure. I've skipped a year in elementary school due to school being too easy, it still was after the transfer. I use resources efficiently but remember almost nothing - mainly "Where can I get this information if I need it?"

MD/PhD in neurosurgery 4th year, still it's hard for me to sit down and give undivided focus on anything. Guess I'll keep at it, seems that the sparse frames of productivity in otherwise endless laziness are enough.