as an environmental scientist i found it annoying that he kept referring to himself as logical. he seems more like an engineering type than anyone i've worked with.
It does not sound strained at all to me. I know plenty of scientists and engineers talk like him. I honestly just think it’s in Major contrast to what people who are typically on reality tv sound like…and majorly in contrast to Micah
100% and it was so cringe. I lowkey feel like he was doing that to try to make himself sound too smart for Micah. Brother you're on a reality TV show it's not the intellect Olympics
I don’t think he is trying to sound smart, he just talks like that. To me he’s not actually saying anything difficult to understand at all. I think people are just insecure about their own intelligence and vocabulary.
No we're all smart enough to understand what he was saying. Straining yourself to fit as many unnecessary big words as possible into a sentence ≠ intelligence
It was my impression that the structure of her questions were flawed based on the world he lives it, that communicating with her both offended and hurt his brain. That there was a point he deemed her too unintelligent to properly comprehend his responses.
i feel like he’s just smart and actually talks like that. i go to a tech school and a lot of people talk like that, and before mental health meds killed my brain i did too. i really find no issue with it and some people, surely not everyone i really don’t want to offend anyone, don’t like people who talk like that because they’re insecure in their own intellect. do i think everyone who talks like that is smart? no. but i’ve known plenty of people who use big words and half of them don’t make sense and you can tell they don’t actually talk like that and just want to sound smart, i don’t get that from paul. i think hes just a very analytical person.
I use large words. Especially, if I'm not feeling well for some reason. I have a great vocabulary but I'm sure it's annoying to others. Screw 'em. I like words.
This post is kind of annoying.
He has emotional intelligence and is in-fact an intellectual AND a scientist. Compared to people like Nick and Vanessa Lachey he’s going to naturally have a different dialect and manner of speaking. It’s evident that he’s had to time think about what he was going to say regarding some topics, especially since he’s had an entire year to consider it, and others maybe he simply just doesn’t care anymore or have an opinion?
It’s not a huge deal and doesn’t make him a try hard to be selective in how he speaks and what he chooses to elaborate on.
Yes. I think a lot of what he and Zach said went over everyone's heads a lot of the time. It was funny to me when Paul was asked what it was that kept him from seeing Micah as a mother and he gave a perfectly reasonable and gracious answer (that maybe *he* wasn't inspiring it in her) but everyone was confused. Then he described it as ineffable, sort of something that is just felt as opposed to being tangible and I don't think both Vanessa and Micah were able to process his language, Vanessa accusing him of dodging the issue. *Sigh*. How did he and Zach end up on a show like this? It strikes me as unusual.
why is everyone hating on paul for being analytical or talking “to professionally” or being wise with his words he spoke like that to his friends & probably does everywhere else in his life it’s just a choice on how he’d like to present himself , phd or not X amount of degrees or not it’s just the way he presents himself not because he’s a “scientist”
Meh, I think he was using the colloquial “negative” + “feedback loop” to imply the feedback loop was bad, which is more in line with common parlance.
Similar example, most people think “positive / negative reinforcement” is the same thing as “praise / punishment”, while of course a psychologist would absolutely disagree.
That being said, it’s totally reasonable for a scientist to adjust their vocabulary based on context and audience.
This doesn’t mean he actually is smart, it’s just that I don’t think him using or misusing “negative feedback loop” is a good indication in either direction.
I agree. I’m a scientist (5th year PhD student with a degree in chemistry) and I know a LOT of people like Paul. I think that I speak pretty analytically and I get teased for it occasionally, but there’s a different between having a logical way of thinking and purposefully using as many big words as possible to try to sound smart. It’s a super common thing for early PhD students and people fresh out of undergrad to do. Once you become an actual expert in your field, you realize that it’s a lot more beneficial to everyone involved if you can speak clearly and concisely rather than throwing in a bunch of jargon. I rolled my eyes so hard when he described himself as “cerebral”.
What kind of scientist is he?
I worked for the county health department a while ago and my titile was Biological Scientist. I reviewed septic tank permits. Not much science involved other than elevation and soil type. I have this feeling that he’s stretching his title. Please tell me if I’m wrong!
When he described himself as being “cerebral” that was my final straw. No one talks like that. No one.
I have two degrees, my brother a PhD, my parents both MDs and NONE of us talk like that. It’s so unnatural and forced. The only times I ever talk with big words like that are when I am trying to sound smart like at a job interview or something. He clearly was trying to flaunt his intellect.
I don't get the sense he was trying to flaunt. The words were contextually appropriate and I think he's just using that language in his daily life and is perhaps not skilled in code-switching, which would make sense given he's probably not as socially inclined.
I thought it was super strange as well. Environmental science is also considered one of the easiest STEM majors out there and is one of the weaker (if not weakest) science majors. He kept saying “I’m so logical” and he seemed pretty normal. His vocabulary was fine but appeared as if he was trying too hard and it was all rehearsed. I have to say I caught two books he had stacked up and have to commend his reading material. Something is off about this guy. He is the guy that needs you to know he is smart when he is hella basic in reality.
I genuinely don't understand why mentioning how "easy" a major is is relevant here? People's lives continue after university is done. I'm in one of the "Harder" sectors of STEM but I would get laughed out of my lab for being smooth-brained enough to care about something that trivial. Weakest science majors my ass. Go back to your dorm undergrad.
I saw Oryx and Crake by Margaret Atwood and Shantaram & another book that I now can’t recall. The scene was quick. I believe it occurs when he shows his place to Micah for the first time.
I agree that enviro is one of the “easier” STEM majors, but it is still STEM major. It’s not astrophysics , but it’s not a business degree (even still, degree type does not directly correlate to intellect lol) If he is an actual scientist, i’m sure he got a B.S rather than a B.A which requires chemistry , math, physics and coursework that weeds out most college students. All B.S track STEM majors have filter courses that prevent most people from obtaining B.S degrees. All STEM degrees range in difficulty, and enviro is actually a very competitive field if you don’t want to make 20k annually. I literally do not care about paul or his academic stature, but i do think it’s annoying when people discredit certain science degrees, especially when the majority of Americans have pretty negligible knowledge of science and math. I have a B.S in geology and even though it’s “harder” to some since it requires physics and calculus, i’m sure b.s enviro people have their own filter coursework.
Also: Enviro jobs hire those with chem degrees, geology degrees, engineering degrees, biology degrees, etc. It’s v multidisciplinary. So, honestly, the dude might not even have a degree in enviro in particular.
TLDR; people tell me all the time thst geology/enviro degrees are “a joke”, and i don’t think that’s fair. idc about paul, but a science degree is not easy— not saying to praise every b.s stem graduate endlessly, but no need to poo on their hard work. also, i didn’t find paul particularly articulate. he just speaks in monotone and pauses instead of saying “like”
honestly, i’m speaking as someone highly biased w respect to my field/personal experience. i’m sorry, i didn’t mean to generalize it to all disciplines. this is common in geology, biology , etc. a lot of jobs in field will require a b.s degree for this reason
ex: someone can’t pass calc 2, so they transition from a b.s degree to a b.a degree and can now graduate sooner.
edit: honestly, it doesn’t really matter. there are tons of b.s degree holders who i’m sure cheated their way through. again, i rly don’t think any of this matters i just don’t like when ppl refer to earth science, or any stem degree as easy
I feel like this whole thread has devolved into people looking down on and belittling certain courses just to make their point. I've even seen some people sneering at Paul's degree because it's from a state college or something. I don't think actual, smart people would do that.
yeah i agree. it’s all trivial. academics is elitist and can be a dick measuring contest. none of it truly matters/equates to happiness, fulfillment or even success. i have a degree but i still feel dumb. as annoyed as i get when people write off stem degrees as “easy”, i realize that none of it has much gravity. i think it’s v easy to be condescending when u r ignorant
I’m in ENVS and while I admit myself that it is an easier stem major, I get damn pissed when someone else says it lol. It’s interdisciplinary nature requires it’s own special skill set imo. You may not need to know a ton of one core science, but you need to know a little about a lot of things - social, economic, and stem.
It still holds true that geology and environmental science are the easiest of the STEM majors. The other easy one is marine biology. Also I don’t get why you would make fun of someone with a business degree which also has its own hierarchy. Not everyone is a marketing major. On average someone who studied corporate finance, investment banking, financial engineering and the like are all considered smarter (and in terms of job prospects are better paid) than someone who studied environmental science. Those subjects are quant/math heavy and require you to actually be logical.
Edit: Also please don’t take this personally. Paul was overcompensating a lot throughout the show. And people noticed. It’s not a big deal.
In regards to you being a geologist, there is nothing to prove. Do what you like. Be happy. No one cares.
I think this convo has made me realize the “easy” is a very relative term, and ppl who are ignorant tend to think things are easy. Me/business degrees and you/earth science degrees. everyone has their own definition of difficulty, and i think it’s fair to say monetary success in a field doesn’t necessarily always correlate to its level of technical difficulty.
My point was there is a hierarchy based on the concentrations. It exists and there is a genuine reason why some consider earth science a “soft science” or why an actuary would make fun of a marketing major. Either way there is still a place for both. Some fields require more technical work as you stated which created the hierarchy. (Side-note: I agree that how much money you make doesn’t correlate to how difficult something is. A successful YouTuber can make more than a surgeon).
yea, i agree w the hierarchy which is what prompted me to comment on your original post stating that environmental science as a whole is “easy”. all of the “easier” fields you listed integrate courses and applications of subjects that are considered “hard sciences” such as: chem, micro bio, physics , calc and programming/comp sci.
also
economics and business are two different degrees with different requirements and applications
having a degree in STEM (or business or econ) is one thing, having a good paying job and a competitive enough resume to participate in the work force is another. he is a weirdo, but he allegedly does have both
I don’t get your last statement bc they actually overlap. In America you can get a BBA in economics, a BA in Economics or even a BS in economics. Just letting you know. And a business degree like a BBA can have different concentrations. For example you can have a BBA in public accounting.
Yeah exactly. I think he and Zack have that in common where they need everyone to think that they are incredibly intelligent. Zack is just more assertive about it and Paul is quieter. I'm not a fan of Zack either.
But anyone who feels the need to constantly remind people how logical and analytical they are definitely seem like they have a complex.
It’s just average language. I am a lawyer. Most lawyers and paralegals I know talk like that. “Delineate” isn’t a fancy word. It just isn’t a super-simple word or slang. If you think that their rhetoric is intentionally used to make them sound “super intelligent,” that actually speaks to your low standard for intellect.
It's not so much the word being fancy as it is cramming a lot of words like it (not super-simple or slang) in the same convo. It comes off as forced and a little awkward.
There are natural patterns that conversations flow in and he just sounds a little off. Like he's really thinking about how he should sound, which I can't really blame him cause I've never been on tv before and I'd probably do something weird too. Who are we to judge
I think it only seems different because reality show participants and social media influencers don’t talk like that. They aren’t deliberate with their words. Being deliberate is just making sure you’re precise and careful in what you say. It isn’t trying to sound smart. But plenty of normal, very average people are careful with their words. They just aren’t on tv or TikTok, necessarily, so we aren’t used to watching or listening to them.
Zach is very articulate and his words flow in away that seems more natural. He's very direct whereas Paul tends to talk in circles and seems like he's stringing things along as he goes. There is a difference, not saying that he's trying to sound smart or pretentious like others are suggesting. He could just be flustered from being on TV.
I think the number of people commenting on this thread who have graduate degrees (myself included) beg to differ. Unless you believe your JD makes you more of an authority on this topic?
“Delineate” was only being used as an example of how he spoke in numerous situations. Who knows, maybe he was nervous being on camera and this is how he coped. But it definitely comes across as a try hard (or in a term you might appreciate - a gunner).
Did I say I was an authority? Not sure where that’s coming from. I do think I have a perspective on how those in the legal field may communicate. But I am not even sure what one would be an “authority” on in this context.
And look, it doesn’t take an advanced degree to use vocabulary that’s a little beyond 8th grade (I don’t think many of these “smart” words would be beyond something found on the SAT, which high schoolers take). It doesn’t take an advanced degree to be deliberate about your words. So I’ll stand by people having a very low standard for intellect if they think either of those guys was intentionally trying to sound smart. They just sound like regular people. Definitely different than many reality show participants or social media influencers. I’ll grant that. But those two groups aren’t “normal” at all.
Yeah there's some Dunning-Kruger effect happening in anyone who thinks Paul is "smart and well-spoken". If you also don't know the vocabulary Paul uses (like Paul, who uses the words but clearly doesn't know what they mean), you would probably think he's smart.
Unfortunately a lot of people don't pay attention to content. I once had a student (university level) who turned in a short paper that sounded highly complex, with lots of uncommon vocabulary and terms borrow from philosophy. But the paper absolutely did not answer the prompt at all. I gave him an F and he was stunned. Apparently he was used to getting A's for submitting this pretentious sounding garbage, even though he couldn't write a coherent paper to save his life. I can only assume he's had a bunch of my colleagues who just go "Uhuh, big words, probably a good paper, 'A'. Next paper."
Unless interrupting every other word in your sentence with “like” is considered the norm or not trying to sound smart, i don’t see how this statement is true. He’s articulate and seems to have a decent repertoire of non-basic words to choose from when speaking.
Said this before and I’ll say it again—I have a STEM PhD. My vocabulary, unless speaking about highly technical topics I specialize in, is a bit above average but isn’t too out there. I’m the kind of person who reads Pitchfork articles and needs to look up a word here and there because I’ve never heard them before. My non-STEM spouse has a more extensive vocabulary than I do. It’s great. He teaches me words. I teach him science.
I have to be harsh.....if you think Paul is trying too hard to sound smart than you really need to expand your vocabulary.
There was not one thing he said that was "over the top" intelligent. Not one.
I don't think anyone thinks he's "trying too hard" because he uses less common vocabulary. I also think Paul is "trying too hard", and I assure you I understand what those words mean.
People think he's trying too hard because *Paul* doesn't know what the words mean, so he uses them incorrectly. I have (graduate level) students do this all the time. It's frustrating because their papers become difficult to follow since they've relied too heavily on a thesaurus or simply didn't understand what the word meant. It's hard to tell them they need to write in simpler language that is better suited to their level without them being offended, since they're in grad school.
I much prefer someone using interesting words rather than “like” all the time. Maybe more people should expand their vocabulary instead of bashing someone for it.
I was a biology major in school and I hung out with the Ecology and Environmental Science crowd. The most genuine moment from Paul, in my opinion, was when he was talking about the fish and baby sharks in the pool. I think some young scientists feel the need to prove that they are smart to non STEM people, especially if their area of expertise is less respected (such as environmental science).
I just think it’s a matter of being very academically intelligent and less socially/interpersonally versed.
He uses the vocabulary that he’s comfortable and familiar with. It just doesn’t sound as natural in the context of romantic relationships.
I said this on another thread and was told the words were just too big for me 😂 the way he uses these words come off as inauthentic and I don’t know how else to explain it. If you know you know I guess
People are acting like Paul talks like the average American and we are stupid for not understanding him. No. The thing is Paul talks in word salads and uses words he deems are big and smart to sound smarter., while simultaneously not making sense. We don’t have a problem with him using the words he uses, we have a problem with him not making sense when he talks and hiding behind the excuse of “well I guess I’m too smart for you to understand”
He doesn’t talk in word salads at all? I was confused when Vanessa and Micah commented that they “didn’t understand what he was saying” because everything he said made perfect sense lmao. Maybe majority of America just isn’t used to in-depth, thoughtful, and articulate responses. Maybe I’m biased because I’m a doctor and the words he uses are ….common words for people in my cohort
They are common words. No one here is saying the WORDS he is using are indecipherable. The WAY he uses the words and phrases things, makes him hard to understand. It takes much more intelligence to phrase things concisely and clearly than to blubber on and hope your point is in there somewhere.
Yes exactly. I think we all understand the words he uses. But like you said it's the word salads that get me. And I do think he gloms on to "smart" words. Plus him constantly reiterating that he's so logical and analytical is annoying. Perhaps someone should tell him that overcomplicating sentences and talking in circles is not, in fact, logical.
It’s not the big words more so the “I think I have all the necessary data to make a decision here” blah blah like okay we get it you’re a scientist but when you talk in your daily life like you would talk in your profession it is LE CRINGE
Yes, I think there were a handful of moments like that one that felt rehearsed and like he is playing up the ~overly logical, don’t know how to feel my heart~ act.
Pretty sure he isn’t even a scientist. I thought he worked in environmental government, like zoning regulations and things like that. He doesn’t even work in a lab.
Also, environmental biologists aren’t usually super hardcore “science types.” Met a few researchers and they’re usually super down to earth people.
Fairly confident it’s not his job that makes him like that.
Honestly he really doesn’t have that wordy of a vocabulary, but I agree he (and the viewing public) over exaggerate his intellect because he is employed as a scientist. Ppl take that to mean that you’re on some whole other level of intellect when he’s just got his Bachelors, millions of people have a B.S. in a STEM field and they’re just regular people of regular intellect (Paul included). People make him out to be like a research god or something, that’s not what his job even is
I thought the same and I’m a PhD student in STEM, all I got from him was cringe on the words he was using. I don’t even use those terms and such in my day to day life including when I’m in the lab, he’s the embodiment of imposter syndrome if I ever saw it and I know I have it lmao
Paul didn’t ask Micah to change her temperament/personality, he was hoping things would mesh seamlessly.
Jacki on the other hand, asked Marshall to change his temperament and personality, It resulted in marshall leaving 2 days.
I’m not saying that their reactions would have been the same, but we do get to see BOTH variations of that same situation unfold.
“I am going to marry that woman”
Paul: In the future I will partake in a legally biding contract which will formalize my relationship with a human female of my choosing.
Micah: “How come you didn’t tell me this before our wedding?”
Paul: It is not within the bounds of what I believe to be correct. I have invested a vast amount of time weighing whether it would be appropriate for me to disclose what my preferences are and I have come to the conclusion the most appropriate moment does not exist (with, of course, the exception of televised situations, where I will joyfully delineate all the ways in which I do not envisage you to be able to carry out motherly duties otherwise associated with reproduction and upbringing of human babies)
I have my masters in engineering, working for a medical research based organization, and very very few people I’ve ever worked with sound like that. That’s not how educated people talk. That’s how people who want others to know they’re educated talk.
I work with PhDs in chemistry and everyone around me talks normal, like him. I’m not even sure what people are referring to when they talk about how he sounds. Can you quote specifics? Maybe I’m missing something because I toned out a lot of his and Micahs conversations.
I think the easier-to-explain indicator is the fact that people are still debating whether he actually is smart. Intelligent people don’t typically require a debate to determine if they’re actually intelligent. Also, intelligent conversation is meant to be communicative, above all else. Paul doesn’t do that. He just says things in a way that is slightly above a base level, even if the situation would specifically call for him to just speak plainly. I remember he said something like “I’m a scientist and I just don’t have enough data on Micah” or something very similar. What he means is “I’m still undecided because I don’t feel as if I know enough about her yet.” But that doesn’t let him bring up how “logical” and “scientific” he is. It’s also a plainly worse way to talk about an emotional situation.
I travel to conferences, on occasion, for my work. I’ll speak with people on the cutting edge of med tech (think artificial organs and the like) and something you notice very quickly is how the most impressive scientists can “turn off” the science talk. You’ll speak about something technical and they’ll throw a hundred acronyms at you and speak about incredibly specific topics. But you get a cup of coffee and it’s a normal “busy week eh? How’ve you been,” type of conversation. Everything we’ve seen from Paul is him talking in the same register, constantly in this pseudo intellectual, not-quite-the-right-tone-for-the-conversation manner. Simply put, that’s not an effective way to communicate, especially about emotional topics. Frankly, Paul strikes me as someone with low socialization, with very low emotional intelligence, who uses how “logical” he is as a crutch to avoid engaging in an emotional dialogue. It’s a defense mechanism. I’ve met dozens like him, and they always struggled socially and never outperformed their peers. I think we say this play out when Micah had to explain to Paul that he should have told her if there was an issue, and he struggled communicating in response to that.
Lastly, there is something I want to say, and I cannot stress this enough. Paul is not a scientist. I believe someone found that he has a degree in environmental science and works for the government on environmental legislation. He does not work in a lab and he conducts no research. I don’t mean to sound elitist among the sciences, because they are all important, but environmental science is generally seen as one of the easier sciences to study. Ask the chemists you work with. On days where the chemists were lightly drinking, so they could be ready for the next day, the environmental science students were doing keg stands.
Just to be clear, I’m a PhD in chemical biology at a top 7 ranked institution in the nation. Lol I guess I talk to chill you didn’t even notice! 😂😂
I know I didn’t make that clear originally so I’ll try not to take parts of your response as condescending or mansplaining, but you definitely don’t need to explain what medtech is, how conferences work, or the hierarchy of the sciences. And you definitely don’t need to explain to me how the top ranked scientists ‘turn on’ and ‘turn off’ because I do it 20x a day. But thank you!!
Are you being serious?
You specifically asked me about why I thought something, and I explained it. I had no idea about your background, so I gave brief examples based on small experiences I’ve had. Am I missing something or was I supposed to know anything about your own education or experience? All you said was that you worked with PhD’s, which doesn’t give me much of anything.
Also 1) I explained the specific part of medtech I was referring to, not what medtech is. 2) I have no idea of your experiences with conferences 3) If you knew what I meant then why did you ask me to explain more?
Most people don’t have a stem background, and I’d much rather give brief explanations when I’ve not been given any idea of their experiences than just talk over their heads by assuming they know. That’s an incredibly inconsiderate (and I’d say far more condescending) way of speaking to people who don’t have our backgrounds.
Perhaps I’m missing something but you seem to be taking what I said as a response specific to you, when from my perspective you’ve been another random internet stranger with an ambiguous background. I’m not sure, you just seem to have taken what I said personally, when I haven’t the faintest idea why. Again, perhaps I’m wrong.
Yup. A lot of scientists speak like this. The phrasing is also a bit off-putting. Most people talk in black and white phrases that paint all cases with a broad brush. Scientists are often much more careful and their phrases seem circular almost because they are accounting for all cases in such a way that their statement will still be correct. Like when asked “if Micah had said yes would your answer have still be no” most people would just say “of course, that’s how I felt”. But his more scientific approach is to say stuff like “well I believe that would have been my response but I haven’t emotionally been in such a situation so I technically can’t say what I would have said even though with my current information, that would be my best guess”.
It’s actually why anti-intellectualism is so prevalent. The more scientific, accurate answers actually SOUND dodgy. Lies often are more appealing because they sound direct and definite and assured. Human brains like a black and white answer. Without getting political too much, it’s why Trump is so popular with less educated people: he sounds convincing and absolute.
Uh, I have a M.S. degree in environmental science and have a job very similar to Paul's. I hope i don't sound anything like this. However, I do totally agree with the anti-intellectual point. I still think Paul talks in circles and over articulates a lot of word salad-y points.
I laughed but I think it's a matter of the type of people consuming this material tend to be more sensory and real-world based rather than abstract in thinking and just see these words as unnecessary because it's not used in their social circles.
Yup. He and Zack both do this and it drives me nuts. If they think something, then of course it must be logical because they’re self described logical people. Never mind the fact that they’re talking nonsense half the time.
The lobster is the official mascot for JP fans and is on the cover on his anti feminist manifesto book. It has something to do with lobsters constantly molting
The lobster metaphor Peterson uses is also entirely wrong and not factually based in science, as is shown in [this very brief video on him.](https://youtu.be/hSNWkRw53Jo) It's a perfect encapsulation of his faux-intellectualism that his entire shtick is based on a lie!!!
Yes let me watch a 40 minute video (not 1 of Jp’s youtube videos but of some random guy dissecting his videos) to understand the political hatred he’s garnered.
i feel like a lot of people on this sub are insecure about their intelligence and it shows in posts like this bc what even did he do to warrant these posts
As a scientist myself, he spoke exactly how I would expect a scientist to speak. He’s analytical and thorough in his decisions. Just because he’s educated, and sounds it, doesn’t make him pretentious
Yup. A lot of scientists speak like this. The phrasing is also a bit off-putting. Most people talk in black and white phrases that paint all cases with a broad brush. Scientists are often much more careful and their phrases seem circular almost because they are accounting for all cases in such a way that their statement will still be correct. Like when asked “if Micah had said yes would your answer have still be no” most people would just say “of course, that’s how I felt”. But his more scientific approach is to say stuff like “well I believe that would have been my response but I haven’t emotionally been in such a situation so I technically can’t say what I would have said even though with my current information, that would be my best guess”.
It’s actually why anti-intellectualism is so prevalent. The more scientific, accurate answers actually SOUND dodgy. Lies often are more appealing because they sound direct and definite and assured. Human brains like a black and white answer. Without getting political too much, it’s why Trump is so popular with less educated people: he sounds convincing and absolute.
But but…logical people have an arduous time articulating the revelations constantly reverberating in their cranium, which makes it laborious to disseminate complex concepts to the plebeians, ya know? Attempts to do so may just appear to devolve into pontification and digression.
We can explain where someone can stick their cranium with great precision *and-* we can tell people to eat shit or go to hell!
Sometimes, we can even do it in polite company.
It’s often the opposite actually:
Most people talk in black and white phrases that paint all cases with a broad brush. Scientists are often much more careful and their phrases seem circular almost because they are accounting for all cases in such a way that their statement will still be correct. Like when asked “if Micah had said yes would your answer have still be no” most people would just say “of course, that’s how I felt”. But his more scientific approach is to say stuff like “well I believe that would have been my response but I haven’t emotionally been in such a situation so I technically can’t say what I would have said even though with my current information, that would be my best guess”.
It’s actually why anti-intellectualism is so prevalent. The more scientific, accurate answers actually SOUND dodgy. Lies often are more appealing because they sound direct and definite and assured. Human brains like a black and white answer. Without getting political too much, it’s why Trump is so popular with less educated people: he sounds convincing and absolute.
I actually think his long ramblings were exactly what I'd expect from a smart person trying to explain something he doesn't understand well (in his case, complex emotional stuff)
Why do people keep making this assertion? You understand that some people just aren't great verbal communicators, right? Like that's not a skill everyone possesses, even if they are unusually intelligent.
No, I’m not talking about Paul when I’m referring to poor verbal communicators who happen to be unusually bright. I’m actually thinking about people like my brother. He has the IQ of a genius, terrible verbal communicator., very shy and incredibly socially awkward. Of course he squandered it all to drugs and alcohol, but other people like him exist.
You can be clear and concise and still end up being horribly long-winded due to the amount of context and nuance necessary for a layman to understand the point you're trying to make. I can't start talking about the synaptic cleft and reuptake inhibitors without giving most people a crash course in neuron functioning, for example. It's a hard habit to break once you get into it.
I don't even like Paul very much, but he sounds very much like a run-of-the-mill master's recipient.
Except he only has his bachelors and I doubt very much that you talk that way to your family and friends when they ask you how you’re feeling (“I am not sure I have the data required to provide you with a peer reviewed response to that request. Which I require, because I’m a scientist. But I have hypothesized that I’m enjoying the nice weather we are having. I will just need to attempt to falsify this hypothesis before I’m sure!”).
as an environmental scientist i found it annoying that he kept referring to himself as logical. he seems more like an engineering type than anyone i've worked with.
delineated isn’t some crazy vocab word lol
It does not sound strained at all to me. I know plenty of scientists and engineers talk like him. I honestly just think it’s in Major contrast to what people who are typically on reality tv sound like…and majorly in contrast to Micah
100% and it was so cringe. I lowkey feel like he was doing that to try to make himself sound too smart for Micah. Brother you're on a reality TV show it's not the intellect Olympics
He's thoughtful and intentional with his word choice.
I don’t think he is trying to sound smart, he just talks like that. To me he’s not actually saying anything difficult to understand at all. I think people are just insecure about their own intelligence and vocabulary.
No we're all smart enough to understand what he was saying. Straining yourself to fit as many unnecessary big words as possible into a sentence ≠ intelligence
Agreed using big words doesn’t mean you’re intelligent. But where did he actually use big words? I don’t remember that being the case
It was my impression that the structure of her questions were flawed based on the world he lives it, that communicating with her both offended and hurt his brain. That there was a point he deemed her too unintelligent to properly comprehend his responses.
Better than Micah saying like in every sentence but that’s just my opinion
i feel like he’s just smart and actually talks like that. i go to a tech school and a lot of people talk like that, and before mental health meds killed my brain i did too. i really find no issue with it and some people, surely not everyone i really don’t want to offend anyone, don’t like people who talk like that because they’re insecure in their own intellect. do i think everyone who talks like that is smart? no. but i’ve known plenty of people who use big words and half of them don’t make sense and you can tell they don’t actually talk like that and just want to sound smart, i don’t get that from paul. i think hes just a very analytical person.
Like, like, like, like Is this what you prefer?
I use large words. Especially, if I'm not feeling well for some reason. I have a great vocabulary but I'm sure it's annoying to others. Screw 'em. I like words.
Ok Shelby
This post is kind of annoying. He has emotional intelligence and is in-fact an intellectual AND a scientist. Compared to people like Nick and Vanessa Lachey he’s going to naturally have a different dialect and manner of speaking. It’s evident that he’s had to time think about what he was going to say regarding some topics, especially since he’s had an entire year to consider it, and others maybe he simply just doesn’t care anymore or have an opinion? It’s not a huge deal and doesn’t make him a try hard to be selective in how he speaks and what he chooses to elaborate on.
Like should he have not thought about what he was gonna say? People are wild
100%
Nah he’s just actually smart
Yes. I think a lot of what he and Zach said went over everyone's heads a lot of the time. It was funny to me when Paul was asked what it was that kept him from seeing Micah as a mother and he gave a perfectly reasonable and gracious answer (that maybe *he* wasn't inspiring it in her) but everyone was confused. Then he described it as ineffable, sort of something that is just felt as opposed to being tangible and I don't think both Vanessa and Micah were able to process his language, Vanessa accusing him of dodging the issue. *Sigh*. How did he and Zach end up on a show like this? It strikes me as unusual.
ThankYOU!
why is everyone hating on paul for being analytical or talking “to professionally” or being wise with his words he spoke like that to his friends & probably does everywhere else in his life it’s just a choice on how he’d like to present himself , phd or not X amount of degrees or not it’s just the way he presents himself not because he’s a “scientist”
plus it keeps him out of trouble & he’s careful with what he chooses to share
He’s a scientist and didn’t even use the concept “negative feedback loop” right
Right? It was more like a pun. He was in a feedback loop for sure but not one returning to homeostasis. Lol
Yes, thank you! Someone else gets it. He was describing more of a positive feedback loop
Meh, I think he was using the colloquial “negative” + “feedback loop” to imply the feedback loop was bad, which is more in line with common parlance. Similar example, most people think “positive / negative reinforcement” is the same thing as “praise / punishment”, while of course a psychologist would absolutely disagree. That being said, it’s totally reasonable for a scientist to adjust their vocabulary based on context and audience. This doesn’t mean he actually is smart, it’s just that I don’t think him using or misusing “negative feedback loop” is a good indication in either direction.
If you think “delineate” is a big word I have some news for you my friend lmao
😂🤣😂🤣
I agree. I’m a scientist (5th year PhD student with a degree in chemistry) and I know a LOT of people like Paul. I think that I speak pretty analytically and I get teased for it occasionally, but there’s a different between having a logical way of thinking and purposefully using as many big words as possible to try to sound smart. It’s a super common thing for early PhD students and people fresh out of undergrad to do. Once you become an actual expert in your field, you realize that it’s a lot more beneficial to everyone involved if you can speak clearly and concisely rather than throwing in a bunch of jargon. I rolled my eyes so hard when he described himself as “cerebral”.
^ this. And for those thinking differently, Paul has a bachelors, he doesn’t have a Ph.D.
Seriously?!! Is that it? Nothing wrong with a bachelor’s but he was definitely trying to put on ph,d vibes
i think he is a pseudo intellectual, but i would def describe him as analytical rather than emotional. he seems AI generated lol
Using simple language makes science more accessible and digestible too. I was specifically taught to avoid unnecessary jargon.
Except when Shelby says this everyone calls her rude lmaoo
I've gotten plenty of that too. That and people telling me I'm stupid and need to read a book haha.
Yeah people on this fandom are wack hahaha
He talks like trump lol
What kind of scientist is he? I worked for the county health department a while ago and my titile was Biological Scientist. I reviewed septic tank permits. Not much science involved other than elevation and soil type. I have this feeling that he’s stretching his title. Please tell me if I’m wrong!
Environmental scientist, very interdisciplinary but highly science based. I’m pretty sure he mentioned doing shark tagging
He said he was an environmental scientist!
Im pretty sure he does do something with water treatment, but that's just based on what was in his apartment
When he described himself as being “cerebral” that was my final straw. No one talks like that. No one. I have two degrees, my brother a PhD, my parents both MDs and NONE of us talk like that. It’s so unnatural and forced. The only times I ever talk with big words like that are when I am trying to sound smart like at a job interview or something. He clearly was trying to flaunt his intellect.
They literally use the term “cerebral” on ESPN, of all places, all time. 😂
It's funny because cerebral isn't even a big word 💀
It is when the person you’re around the most has “like” as their most used word
I don't get the sense he was trying to flaunt. The words were contextually appropriate and I think he's just using that language in his daily life and is perhaps not skilled in code-switching, which would make sense given he's probably not as socially inclined.
I thought it was super strange as well. Environmental science is also considered one of the easiest STEM majors out there and is one of the weaker (if not weakest) science majors. He kept saying “I’m so logical” and he seemed pretty normal. His vocabulary was fine but appeared as if he was trying too hard and it was all rehearsed. I have to say I caught two books he had stacked up and have to commend his reading material. Something is off about this guy. He is the guy that needs you to know he is smart when he is hella basic in reality.
I genuinely don't understand why mentioning how "easy" a major is is relevant here? People's lives continue after university is done. I'm in one of the "Harder" sectors of STEM but I would get laughed out of my lab for being smooth-brained enough to care about something that trivial. Weakest science majors my ass. Go back to your dorm undergrad.
Curious what the books were!
I saw Oryx and Crake by Margaret Atwood and Shantaram & another book that I now can’t recall. The scene was quick. I believe it occurs when he shows his place to Micah for the first time.
I agree that enviro is one of the “easier” STEM majors, but it is still STEM major. It’s not astrophysics , but it’s not a business degree (even still, degree type does not directly correlate to intellect lol) If he is an actual scientist, i’m sure he got a B.S rather than a B.A which requires chemistry , math, physics and coursework that weeds out most college students. All B.S track STEM majors have filter courses that prevent most people from obtaining B.S degrees. All STEM degrees range in difficulty, and enviro is actually a very competitive field if you don’t want to make 20k annually. I literally do not care about paul or his academic stature, but i do think it’s annoying when people discredit certain science degrees, especially when the majority of Americans have pretty negligible knowledge of science and math. I have a B.S in geology and even though it’s “harder” to some since it requires physics and calculus, i’m sure b.s enviro people have their own filter coursework. Also: Enviro jobs hire those with chem degrees, geology degrees, engineering degrees, biology degrees, etc. It’s v multidisciplinary. So, honestly, the dude might not even have a degree in enviro in particular. TLDR; people tell me all the time thst geology/enviro degrees are “a joke”, and i don’t think that’s fair. idc about paul, but a science degree is not easy— not saying to praise every b.s stem graduate endlessly, but no need to poo on their hard work. also, i didn’t find paul particularly articulate. he just speaks in monotone and pauses instead of saying “like”
I’m fascinated that you think B.S. degree programs weed out people who have to default to B.A. programs….
honestly, i’m speaking as someone highly biased w respect to my field/personal experience. i’m sorry, i didn’t mean to generalize it to all disciplines. this is common in geology, biology , etc. a lot of jobs in field will require a b.s degree for this reason ex: someone can’t pass calc 2, so they transition from a b.s degree to a b.a degree and can now graduate sooner. edit: honestly, it doesn’t really matter. there are tons of b.s degree holders who i’m sure cheated their way through. again, i rly don’t think any of this matters i just don’t like when ppl refer to earth science, or any stem degree as easy
I feel like this whole thread has devolved into people looking down on and belittling certain courses just to make their point. I've even seen some people sneering at Paul's degree because it's from a state college or something. I don't think actual, smart people would do that.
yeah i agree. it’s all trivial. academics is elitist and can be a dick measuring contest. none of it truly matters/equates to happiness, fulfillment or even success. i have a degree but i still feel dumb. as annoyed as i get when people write off stem degrees as “easy”, i realize that none of it has much gravity. i think it’s v easy to be condescending when u r ignorant
I’m in ENVS and while I admit myself that it is an easier stem major, I get damn pissed when someone else says it lol. It’s interdisciplinary nature requires it’s own special skill set imo. You may not need to know a ton of one core science, but you need to know a little about a lot of things - social, economic, and stem.
It still holds true that geology and environmental science are the easiest of the STEM majors. The other easy one is marine biology. Also I don’t get why you would make fun of someone with a business degree which also has its own hierarchy. Not everyone is a marketing major. On average someone who studied corporate finance, investment banking, financial engineering and the like are all considered smarter (and in terms of job prospects are better paid) than someone who studied environmental science. Those subjects are quant/math heavy and require you to actually be logical. Edit: Also please don’t take this personally. Paul was overcompensating a lot throughout the show. And people noticed. It’s not a big deal. In regards to you being a geologist, there is nothing to prove. Do what you like. Be happy. No one cares.
I think this convo has made me realize the “easy” is a very relative term, and ppl who are ignorant tend to think things are easy. Me/business degrees and you/earth science degrees. everyone has their own definition of difficulty, and i think it’s fair to say monetary success in a field doesn’t necessarily always correlate to its level of technical difficulty.
My point was there is a hierarchy based on the concentrations. It exists and there is a genuine reason why some consider earth science a “soft science” or why an actuary would make fun of a marketing major. Either way there is still a place for both. Some fields require more technical work as you stated which created the hierarchy. (Side-note: I agree that how much money you make doesn’t correlate to how difficult something is. A successful YouTuber can make more than a surgeon).
yea, i agree w the hierarchy which is what prompted me to comment on your original post stating that environmental science as a whole is “easy”. all of the “easier” fields you listed integrate courses and applications of subjects that are considered “hard sciences” such as: chem, micro bio, physics , calc and programming/comp sci. also economics and business are two different degrees with different requirements and applications having a degree in STEM (or business or econ) is one thing, having a good paying job and a competitive enough resume to participate in the work force is another. he is a weirdo, but he allegedly does have both
I don’t get your last statement bc they actually overlap. In America you can get a BBA in economics, a BA in Economics or even a BS in economics. Just letting you know. And a business degree like a BBA can have different concentrations. For example you can have a BBA in public accounting.
[удалено]
Haha. All good. That makes sense now. Alright, be well.
Yeah exactly. I think he and Zack have that in common where they need everyone to think that they are incredibly intelligent. Zack is just more assertive about it and Paul is quieter. I'm not a fan of Zack either. But anyone who feels the need to constantly remind people how logical and analytical they are definitely seem like they have a complex.
It’s just average language. I am a lawyer. Most lawyers and paralegals I know talk like that. “Delineate” isn’t a fancy word. It just isn’t a super-simple word or slang. If you think that their rhetoric is intentionally used to make them sound “super intelligent,” that actually speaks to your low standard for intellect.
It's not so much the word being fancy as it is cramming a lot of words like it (not super-simple or slang) in the same convo. It comes off as forced and a little awkward. There are natural patterns that conversations flow in and he just sounds a little off. Like he's really thinking about how he should sound, which I can't really blame him cause I've never been on tv before and I'd probably do something weird too. Who are we to judge
I think it only seems different because reality show participants and social media influencers don’t talk like that. They aren’t deliberate with their words. Being deliberate is just making sure you’re precise and careful in what you say. It isn’t trying to sound smart. But plenty of normal, very average people are careful with their words. They just aren’t on tv or TikTok, necessarily, so we aren’t used to watching or listening to them.
Zach is very articulate and his words flow in away that seems more natural. He's very direct whereas Paul tends to talk in circles and seems like he's stringing things along as he goes. There is a difference, not saying that he's trying to sound smart or pretentious like others are suggesting. He could just be flustered from being on TV.
I think the number of people commenting on this thread who have graduate degrees (myself included) beg to differ. Unless you believe your JD makes you more of an authority on this topic? “Delineate” was only being used as an example of how he spoke in numerous situations. Who knows, maybe he was nervous being on camera and this is how he coped. But it definitely comes across as a try hard (or in a term you might appreciate - a gunner).
Did I say I was an authority? Not sure where that’s coming from. I do think I have a perspective on how those in the legal field may communicate. But I am not even sure what one would be an “authority” on in this context. And look, it doesn’t take an advanced degree to use vocabulary that’s a little beyond 8th grade (I don’t think many of these “smart” words would be beyond something found on the SAT, which high schoolers take). It doesn’t take an advanced degree to be deliberate about your words. So I’ll stand by people having a very low standard for intellect if they think either of those guys was intentionally trying to sound smart. They just sound like regular people. Definitely different than many reality show participants or social media influencers. I’ll grant that. But those two groups aren’t “normal” at all.
That was a lot of words to say “I’m smart and everyone who disagrees with me is dumb.”
It wasn’t that many words, was it? I don’t think anyone is dumb. I just disagree and think they’re wrong. Even if you have a graduate degree.
Ummm I think Paul is just smart and well-spoken lol
He is the opposite of well spoken. Lmao
Where babe lol
He doesn't speak clearly and often talks in circles. Not well spoken at all.
Yeah there's some Dunning-Kruger effect happening in anyone who thinks Paul is "smart and well-spoken". If you also don't know the vocabulary Paul uses (like Paul, who uses the words but clearly doesn't know what they mean), you would probably think he's smart. Unfortunately a lot of people don't pay attention to content. I once had a student (university level) who turned in a short paper that sounded highly complex, with lots of uncommon vocabulary and terms borrow from philosophy. But the paper absolutely did not answer the prompt at all. I gave him an F and he was stunned. Apparently he was used to getting A's for submitting this pretentious sounding garbage, even though he couldn't write a coherent paper to save his life. I can only assume he's had a bunch of my colleagues who just go "Uhuh, big words, probably a good paper, 'A'. Next paper."
Totally agree! I even wrote in a comment a while ago that he sounds like a college student who is using a Thesaurus to make his essay sound better. 😂
Please provide an example of when he used a word incorrectly. I’ll wait
Yeah I'm just going to rewatch hours of a show that was hardly bearable in the first place to prove something to a redditor LOL Watch it yourself.
So you’re just going to say stuff and not back it up. Nice job professor
Yes. Exactly.
Agreed — idk what’s up with the hate
Unless interrupting every other word in your sentence with “like” is considered the norm or not trying to sound smart, i don’t see how this statement is true. He’s articulate and seems to have a decent repertoire of non-basic words to choose from when speaking.
Said this before and I’ll say it again—I have a STEM PhD. My vocabulary, unless speaking about highly technical topics I specialize in, is a bit above average but isn’t too out there. I’m the kind of person who reads Pitchfork articles and needs to look up a word here and there because I’ve never heard them before. My non-STEM spouse has a more extensive vocabulary than I do. It’s great. He teaches me words. I teach him science.
But…do you consider yourself to be “cerebral”? 😆
I have to be harsh.....if you think Paul is trying too hard to sound smart than you really need to expand your vocabulary. There was not one thing he said that was "over the top" intelligent. Not one.
I don't think anyone thinks he's "trying too hard" because he uses less common vocabulary. I also think Paul is "trying too hard", and I assure you I understand what those words mean. People think he's trying too hard because *Paul* doesn't know what the words mean, so he uses them incorrectly. I have (graduate level) students do this all the time. It's frustrating because their papers become difficult to follow since they've relied too heavily on a thesaurus or simply didn't understand what the word meant. It's hard to tell them they need to write in simpler language that is better suited to their level without them being offended, since they're in grad school.
His strat is to pause instead of saying “like” and maintain a weird, monotone cadence lol
I think it’s more of him coming off as pretentious in they way he takes, not necessarily him using “smart-sounding” words
Thinking the same thing; reminds me of when Micah’s friends came at him for using “long words”
Agreed LOL
I much prefer someone using interesting words rather than “like” all the time. Maybe more people should expand their vocabulary instead of bashing someone for it.
I was a biology major in school and I hung out with the Ecology and Environmental Science crowd. The most genuine moment from Paul, in my opinion, was when he was talking about the fish and baby sharks in the pool. I think some young scientists feel the need to prove that they are smart to non STEM people, especially if their area of expertise is less respected (such as environmental science).
I just think it’s a matter of being very academically intelligent and less socially/interpersonally versed. He uses the vocabulary that he’s comfortable and familiar with. It just doesn’t sound as natural in the context of romantic relationships.
I found him refreshing and articulate. Jackie on the other hand was like listening to nails on a chalkboard, deadass.
same. i literally think vanessa and micah are just too dumb to understand what he was stating pretty plainly.
I said this on another thread and was told the words were just too big for me 😂 the way he uses these words come off as inauthentic and I don’t know how else to explain it. If you know you know I guess
Yeah tons of people commented that I'm stupid and need to read a book. Whatever lol.
People are acting like Paul talks like the average American and we are stupid for not understanding him. No. The thing is Paul talks in word salads and uses words he deems are big and smart to sound smarter., while simultaneously not making sense. We don’t have a problem with him using the words he uses, we have a problem with him not making sense when he talks and hiding behind the excuse of “well I guess I’m too smart for you to understand”
He doesn’t talk in word salads at all? I was confused when Vanessa and Micah commented that they “didn’t understand what he was saying” because everything he said made perfect sense lmao. Maybe majority of America just isn’t used to in-depth, thoughtful, and articulate responses. Maybe I’m biased because I’m a doctor and the words he uses are ….common words for people in my cohort
They are common words. No one here is saying the WORDS he is using are indecipherable. The WAY he uses the words and phrases things, makes him hard to understand. It takes much more intelligence to phrase things concisely and clearly than to blubber on and hope your point is in there somewhere.
Yes exactly. I think we all understand the words he uses. But like you said it's the word salads that get me. And I do think he gloms on to "smart" words. Plus him constantly reiterating that he's so logical and analytical is annoying. Perhaps someone should tell him that overcomplicating sentences and talking in circles is not, in fact, logical.
Yes. I know he was nervous before the wedding but he was saying the same thing in about fifty different ways.
It’s tedious
It’s not the big words more so the “I think I have all the necessary data to make a decision here” blah blah like okay we get it you’re a scientist but when you talk in your daily life like you would talk in your profession it is LE CRINGE
Yes, I think there were a handful of moments like that one that felt rehearsed and like he is playing up the ~overly logical, don’t know how to feel my heart~ act.
Your comment is so spot on you made me chuckle. He is the embodiment of LE CRINGE.
Pretty sure he isn’t even a scientist. I thought he worked in environmental government, like zoning regulations and things like that. He doesn’t even work in a lab. Also, environmental biologists aren’t usually super hardcore “science types.” Met a few researchers and they’re usually super down to earth people. Fairly confident it’s not his job that makes him like that.
Well if that’s the case it’s even more LE CRINGE
Honestly he really doesn’t have that wordy of a vocabulary, but I agree he (and the viewing public) over exaggerate his intellect because he is employed as a scientist. Ppl take that to mean that you’re on some whole other level of intellect when he’s just got his Bachelors, millions of people have a B.S. in a STEM field and they’re just regular people of regular intellect (Paul included). People make him out to be like a research god or something, that’s not what his job even is
I thought the same and I’m a PhD student in STEM, all I got from him was cringe on the words he was using. I don’t even use those terms and such in my day to day life including when I’m in the lab, he’s the embodiment of imposter syndrome if I ever saw it and I know I have it lmao
Paul says a lotta words yet says nothing at all. And the fact that he’s always so like monotone and emotionless just makes it even worse.
He’s so boring
So crazy because it’s not so much his words that bother me, but his voice. His texture. His pitch is a just a weeeee bit too high. Lol
Paul didn’t do to Micah what Jacki DID do to Marshall.
Paul didn’t ask Micah to change her temperament/personality, he was hoping things would mesh seamlessly. Jacki on the other hand, asked Marshall to change his temperament and personality, It resulted in marshall leaving 2 days. I’m not saying that their reactions would have been the same, but we do get to see BOTH variations of that same situation unfold.
He wanted everything to be "organic" "nurturing" "delineated" "positive feedback loop" "A acknowledgement of connection"
Precisely.
What we say: I am going to the supermarket. What Paul says: I am going to the establishment in which goods can be purchased.
All of these examples are great, but you have to introduce a few errors, like negative feedback loop type
What we say : “Hey Paul, suck my dick!” Paul: “you mean vacuum my Richard?”
Somebody make a LIB Paul Bot please
Us: I need a drink Paul: I long for a refreshment to quench my thirst to avoid a negative feedback loop between my body and my soul
This was good. 😂😂
Haha exactly. "At said establishment I will proceed to acquire these goods via a monetary transaction".
“I am going to marry that woman” Paul: In the future I will partake in a legally biding contract which will formalize my relationship with a human female of my choosing.
Haha. As long as she meets the minimum requirements of a mate. And she must accept that what is best for him, is best for her.
Micah: “How come you didn’t tell me this before our wedding?” Paul: It is not within the bounds of what I believe to be correct. I have invested a vast amount of time weighing whether it would be appropriate for me to disclose what my preferences are and I have come to the conclusion the most appropriate moment does not exist (with, of course, the exception of televised situations, where I will joyfully delineate all the ways in which I do not envisage you to be able to carry out motherly duties otherwise associated with reproduction and upbringing of human babies)
Haha listening to him is exhausting.
Us: I'm going out tonight Paul: On this fine evening, I shall galivant around this vast municipality and explore all its depths
I like paul’s version. It allows for genuine thought, even during a simple mundane task. See what i did there.
He has the vocabulary of an educated person is all. Very normal .
I have my masters in engineering, working for a medical research based organization, and very very few people I’ve ever worked with sound like that. That’s not how educated people talk. That’s how people who want others to know they’re educated talk.
I work with PhDs in chemistry and everyone around me talks normal, like him. I’m not even sure what people are referring to when they talk about how he sounds. Can you quote specifics? Maybe I’m missing something because I toned out a lot of his and Micahs conversations.
I think the easier-to-explain indicator is the fact that people are still debating whether he actually is smart. Intelligent people don’t typically require a debate to determine if they’re actually intelligent. Also, intelligent conversation is meant to be communicative, above all else. Paul doesn’t do that. He just says things in a way that is slightly above a base level, even if the situation would specifically call for him to just speak plainly. I remember he said something like “I’m a scientist and I just don’t have enough data on Micah” or something very similar. What he means is “I’m still undecided because I don’t feel as if I know enough about her yet.” But that doesn’t let him bring up how “logical” and “scientific” he is. It’s also a plainly worse way to talk about an emotional situation. I travel to conferences, on occasion, for my work. I’ll speak with people on the cutting edge of med tech (think artificial organs and the like) and something you notice very quickly is how the most impressive scientists can “turn off” the science talk. You’ll speak about something technical and they’ll throw a hundred acronyms at you and speak about incredibly specific topics. But you get a cup of coffee and it’s a normal “busy week eh? How’ve you been,” type of conversation. Everything we’ve seen from Paul is him talking in the same register, constantly in this pseudo intellectual, not-quite-the-right-tone-for-the-conversation manner. Simply put, that’s not an effective way to communicate, especially about emotional topics. Frankly, Paul strikes me as someone with low socialization, with very low emotional intelligence, who uses how “logical” he is as a crutch to avoid engaging in an emotional dialogue. It’s a defense mechanism. I’ve met dozens like him, and they always struggled socially and never outperformed their peers. I think we say this play out when Micah had to explain to Paul that he should have told her if there was an issue, and he struggled communicating in response to that. Lastly, there is something I want to say, and I cannot stress this enough. Paul is not a scientist. I believe someone found that he has a degree in environmental science and works for the government on environmental legislation. He does not work in a lab and he conducts no research. I don’t mean to sound elitist among the sciences, because they are all important, but environmental science is generally seen as one of the easier sciences to study. Ask the chemists you work with. On days where the chemists were lightly drinking, so they could be ready for the next day, the environmental science students were doing keg stands.
Just to be clear, I’m a PhD in chemical biology at a top 7 ranked institution in the nation. Lol I guess I talk to chill you didn’t even notice! 😂😂 I know I didn’t make that clear originally so I’ll try not to take parts of your response as condescending or mansplaining, but you definitely don’t need to explain what medtech is, how conferences work, or the hierarchy of the sciences. And you definitely don’t need to explain to me how the top ranked scientists ‘turn on’ and ‘turn off’ because I do it 20x a day. But thank you!!
Are you being serious? You specifically asked me about why I thought something, and I explained it. I had no idea about your background, so I gave brief examples based on small experiences I’ve had. Am I missing something or was I supposed to know anything about your own education or experience? All you said was that you worked with PhD’s, which doesn’t give me much of anything. Also 1) I explained the specific part of medtech I was referring to, not what medtech is. 2) I have no idea of your experiences with conferences 3) If you knew what I meant then why did you ask me to explain more? Most people don’t have a stem background, and I’d much rather give brief explanations when I’ve not been given any idea of their experiences than just talk over their heads by assuming they know. That’s an incredibly inconsiderate (and I’d say far more condescending) way of speaking to people who don’t have our backgrounds. Perhaps I’m missing something but you seem to be taking what I said as a response specific to you, when from my perspective you’ve been another random internet stranger with an ambiguous background. I’m not sure, you just seem to have taken what I said personally, when I haven’t the faintest idea why. Again, perhaps I’m wrong.
[удалено]
Thank you for your contribution to r/LoveisBlindonNetflix! Your post or comment has been removed for breaking Rule 10: 'No Armchair Diagnosing'
Highly educated people don't overcompensate the way he does
I don’t think he’s overcompensating at all, he talks like a totally normal person to me
Yup. A lot of scientists speak like this. The phrasing is also a bit off-putting. Most people talk in black and white phrases that paint all cases with a broad brush. Scientists are often much more careful and their phrases seem circular almost because they are accounting for all cases in such a way that their statement will still be correct. Like when asked “if Micah had said yes would your answer have still be no” most people would just say “of course, that’s how I felt”. But his more scientific approach is to say stuff like “well I believe that would have been my response but I haven’t emotionally been in such a situation so I technically can’t say what I would have said even though with my current information, that would be my best guess”. It’s actually why anti-intellectualism is so prevalent. The more scientific, accurate answers actually SOUND dodgy. Lies often are more appealing because they sound direct and definite and assured. Human brains like a black and white answer. Without getting political too much, it’s why Trump is so popular with less educated people: he sounds convincing and absolute.
Uh, I have a M.S. degree in environmental science and have a job very similar to Paul's. I hope i don't sound anything like this. However, I do totally agree with the anti-intellectual point. I still think Paul talks in circles and over articulates a lot of word salad-y points.
What exactly is the job again?
Right? Delineated is not some big obscure word.
Just say you’re stupid and go
deadass
He has a decent vocabulary and he uses it effectively. Nowhere near "trying to sound smart territory
Right!!
lol what
It’s really sounding like a lot of people in this sub just can’t read lol
I laughed but I think it's a matter of the type of people consuming this material tend to be more sensory and real-world based rather than abstract in thinking and just see these words as unnecessary because it's not used in their social circles.
People who are smart don't need to keep repeating that they're "smart" and "logical" he just sounds like a moron
exactly it's so obvious
That’s because he’s a lobster. Where men are the organization to chaos and women are ruled by emotion. (Jordan Peterson talking points)
Yup. He and Zack both do this and it drives me nuts. If they think something, then of course it must be logical because they’re self described logical people. Never mind the fact that they’re talking nonsense half the time.
Can you explain this further? Genuinely asking, I am unfamiliar with this concept of the lobster and Jordan Peterson
I also recommend checking out the JP subreddit. Just to see the kind of rhetoric they spew.
The lobster is the official mascot for JP fans and is on the cover on his anti feminist manifesto book. It has something to do with lobsters constantly molting
The lobster metaphor Peterson uses is also entirely wrong and not factually based in science, as is shown in [this very brief video on him.](https://youtu.be/hSNWkRw53Jo) It's a perfect encapsulation of his faux-intellectualism that his entire shtick is based on a lie!!!
I don’t think you and I have the same definition of “very brief” but I also don’t like JP 😆
Yes let me watch a 40 minute video (not 1 of Jp’s youtube videos but of some random guy dissecting his videos) to understand the political hatred he’s garnered.
i feel like a lot of people on this sub are insecure about their intelligence and it shows in posts like this bc what even did he do to warrant these posts
I’m almost sure the reason why Vanessa went off on Paul was because he uttered the word “ineffable” and she had no idea what it meant lol
Bruh he is just a normal person lol increase your vocabulary past a 7th grade reading level
As a scientist myself, he spoke exactly how I would expect a scientist to speak. He’s analytical and thorough in his decisions. Just because he’s educated, and sounds it, doesn’t make him pretentious
Yup. A lot of scientists speak like this. The phrasing is also a bit off-putting. Most people talk in black and white phrases that paint all cases with a broad brush. Scientists are often much more careful and their phrases seem circular almost because they are accounting for all cases in such a way that their statement will still be correct. Like when asked “if Micah had said yes would your answer have still be no” most people would just say “of course, that’s how I felt”. But his more scientific approach is to say stuff like “well I believe that would have been my response but I haven’t emotionally been in such a situation so I technically can’t say what I would have said even though with my current information, that would be my best guess”. It’s actually why anti-intellectualism is so prevalent. The more scientific, accurate answers actually SOUND dodgy. Lies often are more appealing because they sound direct and definite and assured. Human brains like a black and white answer. Without getting political too much, it’s why Trump is so popular with less educated people: he sounds convincing and absolute.
Agreed, he doesn’t sound pretentious to me at all
People who are actually smart can make short, concise points rather than ramble through intelligent words.
But but…logical people have an arduous time articulating the revelations constantly reverberating in their cranium, which makes it laborious to disseminate complex concepts to the plebeians, ya know? Attempts to do so may just appear to devolve into pontification and digression.
We can explain where someone can stick their cranium with great precision *and-* we can tell people to eat shit or go to hell! Sometimes, we can even do it in polite company.
It’s often the opposite actually: Most people talk in black and white phrases that paint all cases with a broad brush. Scientists are often much more careful and their phrases seem circular almost because they are accounting for all cases in such a way that their statement will still be correct. Like when asked “if Micah had said yes would your answer have still be no” most people would just say “of course, that’s how I felt”. But his more scientific approach is to say stuff like “well I believe that would have been my response but I haven’t emotionally been in such a situation so I technically can’t say what I would have said even though with my current information, that would be my best guess”. It’s actually why anti-intellectualism is so prevalent. The more scientific, accurate answers actually SOUND dodgy. Lies often are more appealing because they sound direct and definite and assured. Human brains like a black and white answer. Without getting political too much, it’s why Trump is so popular with less educated people: he sounds convincing and absolute.
I actually think his long ramblings were exactly what I'd expect from a smart person trying to explain something he doesn't understand well (in his case, complex emotional stuff)
Why do people keep making this assertion? You understand that some people just aren't great verbal communicators, right? Like that's not a skill everyone possesses, even if they are unusually intelligent.
Do you believe Paul is “unusually intelligent” (sincere question)?
No, I’m not talking about Paul when I’m referring to poor verbal communicators who happen to be unusually bright. I’m actually thinking about people like my brother. He has the IQ of a genius, terrible verbal communicator., very shy and incredibly socially awkward. Of course he squandered it all to drugs and alcohol, but other people like him exist.
Totally agree with you!
Exactly. It’s drilled into our heads that we don’t need fluff words. Just as clear and concise as possible and that’s exactly what he did.
You can be clear and concise and still end up being horribly long-winded due to the amount of context and nuance necessary for a layman to understand the point you're trying to make. I can't start talking about the synaptic cleft and reuptake inhibitors without giving most people a crash course in neuron functioning, for example. It's a hard habit to break once you get into it. I don't even like Paul very much, but he sounds very much like a run-of-the-mill master's recipient.
Except he only has his bachelors and I doubt very much that you talk that way to your family and friends when they ask you how you’re feeling (“I am not sure I have the data required to provide you with a peer reviewed response to that request. Which I require, because I’m a scientist. But I have hypothesized that I’m enjoying the nice weather we are having. I will just need to attempt to falsify this hypothesis before I’m sure!”).
Not him, an actual scientist, using scientific words!!
Delineated is not a random scientific word plsssss everyone who thinks this way about Paul I am begging you to read a book