How can you fool people and make them think you’re smarter than you actually are?

I get traffic in the company of people who know a lot more than I do. I don’t want to be smarter, I don’t want to seem stupid.So I keep my mouth as much as possible and listen or rather absorb everything they say. In addition, I do ask questions for my ‘ imaging ‘, so I honestly admit that I know less about the subject and therefore ask questions for this reason. It has happened more than once that someone said ‘ Gosh now that you are asking that question, I realise that I do not know exactly the answer either. That is what we have to find out! ‘

For that reason, I am often invited to topics that I do not know anything about!It often does give some kind of pressure to my side. As if it is expected that I will find ‘ something ‘ for them every time they can go on again. I think to myself ‘ I just go blind in it all the times (of course I read I want to be on the subject but more blind in expectation) and I trust that it goes well. ‘

So far that works fine.Or you think I’m smart, no idea, at least the idea is that I can contribute something. That is positive.

There is a real clever trick for them, which they really all will kick in, but don’t tell them, so all the others: just don’t follow along though!

Well we are just here.The newspaper. We take a good newspaper (such a difficult one), and we read the headlines. Just the headlines. We do this daily, and we try to understand what is happening in the world. If something captivates us, we also read the article. We listen to the radio daily, to the news and comments on it, so we also read more articles, so we can get more of it. And well it comes: you don’t have to fool people at all, because you get REALLY smarter.

Next time: the library.

Time after: Dealing with your own arrogance.

Do not.That does not keep you full. Sooner or later you fall through the basket.

Why would you?Be faithful to your own expertise and acknowledge those of others, be prepared to listen. I have a fairly broad interest and often talk about a lot, if I find it interesting enough.

By nature I tend to use academic jargon, which I sometimes spice up with the language of the street.This is not to impress, but simply sometimes more convenient to convey notions concisely.

But if I notice that someone on some aspect has more to know about whether his vision can communicate better or at a level that I cannot approach, then I find it no problem to take back some gas: every thing.

By saying little, but making sure that you say what, it really is a rake remark. So just talk about where you really know what to do.That suggests that you are someone who knows what he is talking about, and not a soaking major.

Being silent or asking questions is often much more valued than always having the highest word (“He listens to you at least”).

Betweters are seldom found sympathetic, whether they are right or not!

Start a religion.

Do what the experts do: Psychobabbel, Technobabbel, Juridibabbel etc.It is often not your understanding on which you are being assessed, but your vocabulary. Attentive people are easily punctured by this but the average Dutchman does not.

Unfortunately, this principle is generally known and a lot of abuse is being made.Sometimes intentionally and with nasty intentions, such as when a salesman talks about technical details that z/he doesn’t really understand, as a intimidation tactic or as an attempt to get more professional about it.

In Politics one does this often and so it is a useful skill.

While other people say what they know you look questionable, but you keep your mouth.

‘ I have already formed my opinion, but do not want to influence the discussion ‘.

Of course you have no opinion, which you have never had, you just don’t know which side to lick with.

‘ I cannot say anything about it now. ‘ You know nothing at all, but everyone thinks you are well aware.


If you are a teacher and you have not prepared the substance well then you can give a test work.The main question: ‘ Write what you know about the subject that I have not deepened. ‘ Even better an open circle conversation, because then you do not have to read the test works, but if you sit with the hangover of the previous evening, then a test work is the easiest way to get the class quiet.


The police use the illusion of omniscience as questioning technique.It collide is the remark “confess, because your colleague has already made a full statement.” You can use pieces of knowledge to conduct a talking suspect, so that he is going to say everything you don’t know yet. For this reason, a lawyer always advise to say nothing at all.


A ‘ prophet ‘ or ‘ soothsager ‘ can also get a lot of information from you in a ‘ neutral ‘ conversation.How did she know all that, you think afterwards. She just struck a blow to it, on the basis of the impression you make on her. Misses have been corrected immediately and you have colored neutral remarks.

I don’t think it should be that hard.The difference in people’s intellectual ability is so great that a smarter person should easily succeed in convincing a less clever person that the first is smarter. Look at the evolution in the US.
I have no problem with that in itself.What I do have a problem with is in the way that you taste yourself something. Surely you know of yourself that you are not SO clever?
I compare it zo芒 鈧劉 n bit with orgasm feizing.Who are you the most for? You partner芒 鈧?娄 or yourself?

Leave a Reply