|Geeks and Nerds|
Title text: The definitions I grew up with were that a geek is someone unusually into something (so you could have computer geeks, baseball geeks, theater geeks, etc) and nerds are (often awkward) science, math, or computer geeks. But definitions vary.
The words "geek" and "nerd" are both commonly used to describe people who are looked down upon due to being too intelligent and not socially conventional enough. Distinction between the two varies, but it commonly involves differences in range of interests, depth of interests, choice of hobbies, social capability, if you play sports, and so on.
The title text gives Randall's personal definitions: geeks are people passionately into something to a greater extent than casual hobbyists, while nerds are analytical logic-oriented people, often with underdeveloped social skills.
The comic makes the argument that if you care a lot about the distinction between a geek or a nerd, then you are most likely too invested in the result to not be either a nerd or a geek. But although one who maintains this distinction strongly could be a linguistics geek merely expressing their general interest in words/expressions, given the more pressing controversies linguistic geeks have to deal with, the strong interest one might have in the words "geek" and "nerd" is probably due to simply being a
- [There is a two-circle Venn diagram; the circles are labeled and there is text in the intersection.]
- Left circle: Geeks
- Right circle: Nerds
- Intersection: People with strong opinions on the distinction between geeks and nerds
add a comment! ⋅ add a topic (use sparingly)! ⋅ refresh comments!
If you look at the etymology of the words it is pretty easy to figure out what they mean. Or maybe used to mean, people have the annoying habit of changing the meaning of words. Tharkon (talk) 02:03, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
- No, a geek is Glenn's word for a zombie. A nerd is one pieces in the candy box of Nerds. Cflare (talk) 14:58, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Doesn't the title text show Randall has a strong opinion in the distinction, and therefore qualifies as both? 220.127.116.11 12:22, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
- I'm sure Randall is good enough to qualify for both distinctions, as would most of those that post anything here... But he just grew up with these definition and states that they may vary. This would not be acceptable if you had strong opinions on the subject, so I would say no to the reason you state that he should qualify. ;-) --Kynde (talk) 20:33, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
The definition in the alt-text does not agree with the picture. In the picture neither geeks nor nerds are a subset of the other; in the definition being a nerd implies also being a geek. This comment might be both, but that's why we're here, isn't it? Lii (talk) 18:12, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
I see the joke as implying that those who have a strong opinion would likely think of themselves as belonging to one category, and would be offended by those who fail to see much difference and would apply the other label just the same. Randal is joyfully thus offending them by saying that the other label would apply to them in any event.
Furthermore, as the sets are labelled, the *only* people who are both nerds and geeks are those who think the two categories are different. Consequently, those who actually do belong to only one of the two groups; are the ones who do not have a strong opinion that there is a difference. Mountain Hikes (talk) 00:49, 23 December 2015 (UTC)