> Smart people are a minority and on average find themselves in a conversation with less smart people.
Only assuming that all people are equally likely to interact with one another. Which I doubt is strictly true, given that those cases in which I've actually interacted with everyone from an age group (e.g. military service) are strikingly different to the daily interactions I have. I would imagine people in places where opinions actually matter (such as the workplace) mostly interact with people of somewhat similar background and smarts, though obviously with different fields of specialization.
But even within groups of more-or-less equally smart people, the choice of topics to be assertive about and the style of argument are still factors that make people seem arrogant, so I do agree with you. But I would attribute it more to choice of topic and style of argument rather than "smartness". As you said, the definition of "smart" is problematic and potentially circular.
Comments
> Smart people are a minority and on average find themselves in a conversation with less smart people.
Only assuming that all people are equally likely to interact with one another. Which I doubt is strictly true, given that those cases in which I've actually interacted with everyone from an age group (e.g. military service) are strikingly different to the daily interactions I have. I would imagine people in places where opinions actually matter (such as the workplace) mostly interact with people of somewhat similar background and smarts, though obviously with different fields of specialization.
But even within groups of more-or-less equally smart people, the choice of topics to be assertive about and the style of argument are still factors that make people seem arrogant, so I do agree with you. But I would attribute it more to choice of topic and style of argument rather than "smartness". As you said, the definition of "smart" is problematic and potentially circular.