Five Quadrants

There is a significant difference between meaningful, insightful participation in a class and arrogant bloviating in an attempt to impress and lord over one's peers.

I first encountered this style of speaking my freshman year in a small class about essay writing. The class was mandatory for all new students, which meant that there was a diverse mix of kids from the engineering school, the nursing school, the liberal arts school, and the business school. Though, it would probably be more accurate to state that seventy-five percent of us went to a reasonably enjoyable school named Penn and the rest attended The Joseph C. Wharton School of Business
at the University of Pennsylvania.

During one of the introductory lectures, a Wharton student unleashed what can only be described as Executive Voice. Executive Voice is best described as a booming baritone with each word articulated so well that you can hear both Os in the word "tool". I imagine that using this voice makes the speaker feel like some combination of John Kennedy and JP Morgan, since the Voice is invariably accompanied by a straightened posture and puffed-out chest.

Executive Voice is also accompanied by a lot of mathematical or legal jargon. Most "Executives" seemingly believe that the rest of us are impressed and intimidated by this, and that it cements the Executive's preeminent position in any group. It leads them to say things like "dude, if there was no sign that explicitly states that you can't vomit in the dorm supply closet, or if the door was open, then you have material cause to fight this! Let me sit in on the disciplinary meeting, I'm taking a Legal Studies class right now."

So, long story short, Mr. Kennedy-Morgan decides to ask our professor to detail how we will be graded in the upcoming semester. Of course, this is an undeniably legitimate question. Most of us would use simple, direct phrasing. He begins by saying "Let's say our grade is split into five quadrants…"

And so, an unending source of amusement was found. To be clear, I have some friends in Wharton that take eight classes per semester and others who can explain fixed income convexity in terms simple enough that I almost understand them. But, there are others who pathetically hide behind vocabulary and act superior for having done so.

I have decided to chronicle their exploits in a running series based on one of my favorite blogs, which can be found here. Hubris in Washington and hubris in Philadelphia are close enough. The first installment:

While discussing a moral issue in an ethics class:

"I believe that there really isn't a question here. You take into account each variable and assign it an importance factor. Then, you take the weighted average of your analysis and make the decision."

Yeah, nice work champ. By the way, what discount rate do you use when you calculate how much I will love your mother in 2012?

"I think you've got to just suck it up, get off you're a**, and get out there. I respect the fact that you have emotions, but I think you need to get over yourself and get back to work."

Again, this was in the context of a moral discussion in an ethics class. Our friend here decided to play Corleone card and try to prove how much of a ruthless capitalist he was. The "you" this person was referring to is a character who had gotten laid off on a Friday afternoon, meaning that it was impossible to do anything until Monday morning, at the earliest. But Scarface McGodfather decided that its far more impressive to cast aside all semblance of rationality and appear as cold as possible. Also note the usage of the speech construct "I repect the fact that X, but here's why I don't respect that at all".