Say you have a really smart guy and a guy who thinks he's smart. Which one has the higher ego that translates through in social interactions and his disposition? The guy who is legitimately brainier but rarely validated for his smarts or the average guy who is actively praised?

What's the difference between these two people in this scenario? Feedback loops via external validation. Most likely the really smart guy was never told he was smart being a social recluse, or, he was actively bullied for being smart, being told he isn't really smart at all and rather than reasoning, he emoted and held this idea as true. He does well in tests, scores high grades and etc, but because he didn't have the correct social feedback he doesn't develop an enormous ego out of his talent.

Now the average guy who thinks he's smart, but is average, was always told he was smart by his parents, family and a following of loyal peers, he's not really that smart, he's of average intelligence, but he is far more assured of himself and believes on a metaphysical level that he is quite smart. He gets lower scores than the overachieving smart guy, but he does well enough to have "evidence" that he is smart, essentially the bit of smartness he does have is INFLATED and made a big deal out of, creating someone who thinks they're some kind of genius when really they're not.

Now in reality, the smart guy is more intelligent than the average guy. Socially, the average guy communicates he is smarter with his attitude than the brainy guy. The brainy guy has little external validation of his intelligence, just test scores, which doesn't yield a strong positive feedback loop for him. The average guy with good family and social group does get a strong positive feedback loop for his average "C grades" and therefore gets the validation required to supplement ego growth, which eventually manifest as personality traits and a confidently intelligent charm.

Conclusion: average guy thinks he's a genius, smart guy due to lack of validation assumes he can't be that smart, if he was, more people would praise him and he'd have some kind of status for being so smart, but he doesn't, so reasoning with emotions and ego, he incorrectly concludes he is not that smart contrary to the fact he gets straight A's. On one level, he knows he's smart, but socially, he doesn't feel smart. This is all about social conditioning, not objective truths, when you're dealing with people's feelings and perceptions.

It's the dunning kruger effect in play, the dumber you are, the more likely you are to have a superiority complex as you emote a sense of smartness rather than reason you are smart: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Now extrapolate this idea to women. The less pretty she is (to a point at least, even rationalisation has a problem if you are disfigured or look abhorrent), the more likely she is to have a superiority complex about her appearance. More attention = higher ego, regardless of whether she's uglier than the 10 or not, to her ego that's irrelevant, if a woman is rewarded more for being an 8 than she is rewarded for being a 10, she'd rather be an 8. With many guys being too pussy shit to hit on a 9 or 10 "she's out of my league dude!" the 6-8's get validated more than the 9-10s.

What's the point of being a 10 if being a 10 brings less romantic opportunity and attention than being an 8 does? What's the point in having a 180 IQ and being a social outcast if people with 110 IQ are accepted by society and feel better about themselves? I'm not saying being a 10 or having an ultra high IQ always results in ostracisation, but WHEN IT DOES, it explains why such individuals have much weaker egos, whilst their inferior "average" counterparts do not.

Ultimately it's all emotional, exceptional talent becomes a burden when it impedes on one's happiness via the social hierarchy. The assumption that more talent in something equals more happiness is incorrect if that talent doesn't yield the correct social feedback to the individual. Plenty of super-intelligent guys out there who would give anything to be alleviated of their understanding. Plenty of 10's who in their jealousy, would kill for the attention that the average 7 or 8 gets.

People form self-perception and ego in the absence of personality disorders from social feedback, women are especially fallible to this, but men are at no exception. The reason I chose men and intelligence as a point of comparison is because men often have the same narcissism for their intelligence as women hold for physical beauty. Obviously some men are narcissistic of their looks (the ones who always got told they were hot) and some women are narcissistic of their intelligence (the ones who always got told they were brainy), but the general trend is the inverse.

There could be a correlation between narcissism (where people derive their ego from) and gender dependant sexual strategy, for example, men are expected to be providers, the smarter a person is the better a provider they are perceived to make. This would explain why the trend in males is to be narcissistic about intelligence as the idea they are smart ensures their reproductive success. With women, their value is derived from how desired they are, the more desired she is, the better a provider she can attain for herself and any children she has, thus a narcissism about her physical beauty and the idea she is seen as beautiful helps ensure her reproductive success.

Obviously, there are 10's who know they're 10's and there are smart guys who know they are smart, however in the absence of such behaviour Dunning Kruger explains their lack of narcissism whilst simultaneously explaining unwarranted narcissism with the average and mediocre of the populace.

Food for thought. Discuss, criticise etc.