Book Smarts vs. Street Smarts

An interesting topic. Unfortunately, I don't know where to begin. Discuss.

The really smart people have both.

I think that ends the thread.

Shortest. Thread. Ever.

Gold Star for Bobby.

Then why the divide between the two?

Some are better at each than others. I think book smarts are naturally granted, and street smarts come from experience. A moron with a bit of experience is still a moron, and a genius without experience will find himself unprepared for real life situations.

I wonder, though, is it possible to attain one by using the other?

The whole distincton only seems to come up when people are antagonizing those they see as having "book smarts." It all just reeks of anti-intellectualism to me.

To a degree I guess, learning about hypothetical situations with book smarts can better prepare you for the actual experience, while actual experience can teach you the knowledge otherwise gleaned from being studious.

I always thought the book smarts/street smarts distinction drew a line between intellectual pursuits and not, not between theory and experience. For example, experience isolating snail neurons and recording action potentials is "book smarts," while knowing how to beat up the guy trying to mug you is "street smarts." So yes, I agree that this usually is used to ridicule the "book smarts" people, and is generally pretty anti-intellectualist.

I prefer to consider it a divide between knowledge gained from actually doing something, and knowledge gained about doing something, without actually doing it.

I've seen people dismiss street smarts as stupid and a waste of time, so it goes both ways.

I think very few people would consider my experience in isolating snail ganglia "street smarts."

Care to explain? **is intrigued**

I don't think it really can be a divide between practical and theoretical experience. It's all about what the subject is. I mean, when I'm done with my degree I might have bags of practical experience at some things - like driving a car, knowing how to handle animals without being trampled, surgery - but drop me in an unfamiliar city and tell me to find my way home and I will still be out of my depth.

I think it can be summed up like this: Street smarts is knowledge and experience about how to survive, book smarts is knowledge and experience about how to thrive. Street smarts would be knowing self-defense, first aid (especially what you can do on yourself), whom to trust, what to say and when, ways to minimize risks and maximize safety, how to cook, how to bargain, how to detect BS and scams, etc. Book smarts would be stuff you learn in school and college, that could potentially help you improve quality of life for everyone.

I knew I should have finished that Sternberg book. Well, here's a Wikipedia article on his triarchic theory of intelligence. It separates analytical (book smarts) from practical (street smarts) intelligence, along with a third type of intelligence, creative/experiential. Practical intelligence denotes your ability to adapt to your environment and change your environment to fit you, among other things.

lol

EDIT: From my experience, people refer to "Street smarts" as "how to survive in a ghetto/avoid getting mugged" or some other shit.......:/

This thread OP made seems to be a 'Knowledge vs Experience' thread. MODS CHANGE THE TITLE.

edited 30th Jan '11 11:52:02 PM by BalloonFleet

I would prefer the thread title to stay as it is.

edited 31st Jan '11 1:35:32 AM by SandJosieph

FUN FACT: There are actually two "to know" verbs in French. "Savoir" indicates analytical knowledge, the possession of a fact. For example, "I know the number of stars in the sky." "Connaitre," on the other hand, indicates familiarity, the possession of experience. For example, "I am familiar with that district of Paris." THE MORE YOU KNOW.

Both are great to have in my opinion. Exhibit a in my life: Cooking water every single time in a pot but ignoring the water cooker right next to it.

^^ I'm reminded of "grok".

While some might see book and street as basic 'intelligence versus survival mode' it is a bit more complicated than that, I believe.

If one were to have a pure version of each type of smart, the two people would be like this:

Street— unable to do research, unable to retain information learned second hand, but able to figure things out by themself, able to start from the ground up and learn from their own mistakes, and be able to (to use a metaphor my dad made) able to realize that a banana turned upside down is still a banana and can still be peeled the same way (understanding, not memorizing), if they know how to peel it in the first place, that is.

Book — unable to handle a foreign element, unable to deviate from what was spoon fed, memorized how to peel a banana and is able to do it immediately, but unable to do it once it's turned upside down, able to take the lessons of others and be able to use that to their advantage, able to be more empathic due to having an access to a wider range of opinions.

I always thought it reverse of what you just said. A street smart person learns the local street culture, its specific mores and actions, but never ever thinks about how it works and just follows it blindly. You peel a banana exactly this way with no understanding of why.

On the other hand, an academic with book smarts, would learn why you peel a banana that way, though never done it before and understands how to morph the problem because they know why you do something. So when you actually get them to peel a banana, they don't do it very well but if you turn it upside down, they still know how to do it.

EDIT: But really, I think the dichotomy is... made up. Street/Book smart is a matter of where you learn your information, not how or even a definition of your type of intelligence. If I grow up in a middle-class home and then go off to post-secondary education, I'd be considered mostly "book smart". Whereas if I grew up in a ghetto having to evade gangsters and live my life like that, I'd be considered "street smart". But if you were throw the same two people in the reverse situations, they could be just as intelligent in either environment. How intelligent you are isn't measured by whether you have street or book smarts, if Einstein never got a chance to go to school, he'd be a brilliant "street smart" kid.

edited 31st Jan '11 8:47:43 AM by breadloaf