People are twice as smart as they talk, three times as smart as they write

I used to think that the point of editing was to eliminate all of the poor writing from an article so only strong arguments remained. It wasn’t until I started writing this blog that I began to appreciate how much good content routinely gets cut from the final product. Ideas will get cut if they detract from the focus of the piece, if there’s no logical place to put them anymore, some are even cut because they’re too interesting and merit their own separate post. I even cut a good line from the end of this paragraph because it wasn’t the appropriate sentence to close a paragraph with.

Of every post I write, I estimate that I cut two good lines for every one good line that makes it into the final piece.What this means is that if you’re reading a piece of writing that you think is pitched at your level, the writer had to be three times smarter than you to have written it. Similarly, I noticed that when I was speaking, I would only say about half of the clever stuff I wanted to say which meant anyone talking to me was probably twice as smart as I think they are.

This is, perhaps, why the internet is so full of assholes who think they’re the smartest person in the room. If you have a look at the comment section of almost any piece of content, at least half the comments tend to be some snide implication that the commenter is smarter than the author. Next time you read something, mentally assume that the author is three times as smart as they appear and think of how you would respond then. All I can say is ever since I started doing that, I’ve not only been far calmer, I’ve learned much more too.

The logic seems flawed to me, in that it equates focused with clever. You can be one without the other. Of the two, I'm definitely more clever than focused. I think the value a person contributes is usually the other way around. (Which is why my focus for this year is 'be more focused'.)