What does “reasonably intelligent” mean? Does it mean someone who might not be a brilliant genius, but can grasp high-level concepts well enough if they work at it? Or does it mean someone of only average or below-average intelligence who cannot grasp complex thoughts without a lot of outside help? Basically, does this mean an IQ of say 120-130, or an IQ of 90-100?
I think I’m smart and lazy, but might be willing to switch if I knew exactly what I was getting into. Mostly I wish I could get rid of the insights that allow me to see through the sham that is the Protestant work ethic. (I agree with Beware of Doug’s hypothesis on that.)
I’m smart and lazy as well. I don’t know which is better, probably the hard-working thing. I’d just as soon sit on my couch reading or writing in my notebook than be at work or accomplish anything. Hell, I’m at work right now and I’m not accomplishing anything. I did make coffee though…
I’m smart and lazy. I’d rather it be the other way around.
All my life, I’ve seen people who weren’t half as smart as me get promoted, get the big bonus, get the recognition, etc. Now don’t get me wrong, I’ve always been solidly entrenched as The Guy We Want Around If Something Unexpected Happens. But it’s always been clear, I wasn’t cut out to be the Head Honcho.
So I always lost out to the Hard Working Guy. The Hard Working Guy always beat out the Smart but Lazy, the Brilliant but Temperamental, the Great at Playing Office Politics and the Keeps Things Running but Not Good With People employees.
The reasonably intelligent hard worker will figure out a way to a way to benefit from the smart but lazy.
This thread made me think of a woman I once worked with who was very smart but incredibly lazy. We worked in a lab where we did testing and processing of hundreds of samples a day. The woman came up with numerous ways to more efficiently process our workload. I always knew that she was motivated by laziness, but she sure managed to streamline the procedures and reduce everyone’s workload with no reduction in quality. There’s a lot to be said for brilliant but lazy.
Programming is also the realm of the lazy, that’s why we no longer use machine code.
As for the answer, It’d depend on where my talents lied. Despite my answer above, in the IT industry, and even moreso in business, and the law, and most other high-powered professions, being hard working but only reasonably intelligent gets you the big bucks, since you can always copy the right answers from other people, then pour the sweat equity into them to claim them as your own.
Whereas in other, still highly paid professions, you can’t have that excuse since they focus more on personality. Those professions being entertainment figures and competitive sports figures (whether than sport be trivia, poker, or pro sports.) These professions take a lot of hard work to gain all the skills/memorize the minutiae, but they also require raw talent (and you need to be naturally smart to excel in many sports.) Raw talent, especially brainpower, is more important in these. Unfortunately, my intellectual skills do not lie in entertainment or sports.
In life in general, not in the workplace? It’s a tough call, but considering that being even the slightest bit dumb can get you killed or swindled, I’ll take smart and lazy.
I guess I’m a mutt here - reasonably intelligent but lazy. I am skilled and knowledgeable though, so I have a good income, but not a lot of responsibility beyond the projects that I work on, due to my lack of hard work. But that’s ok. It’s sort of on purpose.
I wouldn’t say I’m terribly ‘smart’ because I truly suck at math and languages. I do have a certain amount of musical talent but had little drive to make it in the industry. ‘Not working up to his potential’ was my teachers’ mantra all through school, although I did do well overall with minimum effort. I could have done much better.
Career-wise I’d benefit from being more hard-working but it’s not like I need more money, and I’d rather do hands-on stuff than be in management, so it’s hard to see that much of a benefit. I could use some social skills, though. I suck at making small talk (and suck more at looking like I enjoy it), engaging in witty repartee, and tend to be a wallflower.
You can’t just walk the walk. You gotta talk the talk. Otherwise, you’re threatening to the organization and the “work ethicists” in it. Any outfit needs a solid base of them to keep things going on a daily basis. The tradeoff is that they don’t have much respect for others who don’t share the work ethic. They need to feel sure that people like them are in control.
You raise a very good point that you have a secure niche in your outfit due to your particular abilities (crisis management, I take it). That may be about the best a smart/lazy type can expect. (Part of me says you’re lucky not to have been backstabbed by ambitious mediocrities who resent your type on general principle.)
What are you going to do with top money, anyway? Join a freaking country club? Smartness isn’t exactly de rigueur in that context. What about promotion? The underlings would chafe with the lazy guy in charge - you could never set an example for the go-getters.
Maybe from 9-5 it’s their world and you just live in it. But there are some very special things about the smart/lazy world that they, with their Lexus LS400s and Hickey-Freeman suits, will never be able to share with you.
Better to be reasonably intelligent and hard working. Actually I’ll go one step further: you can be flat out stupid and a hard worker and do better than someone smart and lazy.
I have relatives that never finished high school that have done well. Why? They are not afraid to adapt to their surroundings. If they live in a city where construction is the thing, they’ll do construction. They use what God gave 'em: the ones I’m talking about are all good with their hands. Need a porch built? They can do it without even drawing up a plan. They’ll haul themselves out of bed at 5am and go pull a 12 hour shift. Ok, so maybe they haven’t read a real book in 10 years and don’t know the capital of New Zealand. They pay their bills, though, and their kids have everything they need.
On the flip side, I have relatives that have multiple college degrees, high IQs that have read everything worth reading and are pretty much destitute. Why? They won’t adapt. One relative, for example, could have been a schoolteacher. She did her student teaching, hated it and swore she’d never go into a classroom again. Instead, she did what she enjoyed, never mind that it didn’t pay anything. It’s all well and good to want to do what you enjoy doing, but when you have a family to think about, sometimes you’ve gotta do what you don’t want to do. 35 years after that one decision, she’s pretty much screwed financially. Her brains haven’t done anything for her. She would have been better off being a complete idiot who was willing to take any good paying job regardless of how much she hated it.
As for me, I’m naturally smart but lazy but the past 5 years have knocked a lot of that out of me. When I graduate and get a real job, I’m holding on to it for dear life no matter how much I hate it. I would rather be stressed out over having a jerk boss than stressed because I can’t pay my bills.
IMHO
Anyone who is lazy isn’t nearly as smart as he/she thinks.
Someone dumber that dog poo can work hard, learn much and get ahead and have more than you will at the rate your are presently headed.
Get off your lazy butt and get moving!
I am smart though lazy. Obviously not as smart as I think (thanks, spingears, great point). I’d rather be hard-working and reasonably intelligent. I haven’t done too badly out of my smart/lazy combination; I think it’s time to see what smart/not-quite-so-lazy will do for me.
I definitely tend toward smart and lazy. Somehow, though, I ended up with a pretty strong work ethic. I don’t like looking for work, that’s for sure, but I’ll definitely take care of the work I have and do a good job with it ('course, sometimes part of the work to be done is looking for more work :smack:).
But when work doesn’t need to be done, watch out, 'cause I’m lazy as can be (just take a look at my apartment for proof).
So in summary, I’d rather be smart and hardworking, but given the options I’ll take smart and lazy.
Tellingly enough, that’s when I’ve tended to get into the most trouble with work ethicists: when there’s nothing much that needs doing. “Anyone can be good in a crisis; it’s the day-to-day that’s the killer.” (Chekhov, I think…?)
Maybe that’s the ultimate test of loyalty and “character”. Will you be there when I don’t need you? Will you go the extra mile just because I say so? Will you be a selfless instrument of another’s will, serving the organization as one should serve God?
I guess this is as good a time as any to commend Anxiety Culture to the attention of my fellow neo-lazyists. Food for thought, some of it anyway.
Another smart and lazy, though sometimes I wish I had a little more motivation, just to get things done. I do get them done, just at the very, very last minute, and I’m getting worse. So sometimes, I do wish I was hard-working but not so smart.
Then again, going through high school with a bunch of reasonably intelligent but hardworking people, I have to say, it was nice to always be the first to get my work done. And yes, we were making comparable grades, theirs only slightly above mine. But they earned it.
