A couple weeks ago, I asked for suggestions on Brit panel shows, after enjoyed @qikipedia and @WILTY_TV. And a lot of people recommended @taskmaster, which it took me a little while to like, and now I love. However, after 8 seasons...a serious thought came to me...

Curious if I’m right or just imagining a pattern that isn’t there.

For those who aren’t familiar with the show, Taskmaster has a group of funny people do a series of ridiculous but often clever tasks for points, toting them up at the end of the season for mostly goofy prizes.

Like, pop the most balloons with no tools, or recreate a video game using random crap from a shed.

And while some tasks have an element of skill, either athletic or mental, many are more specifically about creative and/or unorthodox thinking. Many have a trick to them.

Okay, this bit is interesting.

Even though the ‘ceompetitors’ are mostly funny people, like comedians and actors, quite a few have serious academic or vocational credits. There are law degrees, a couple actual medical doctors, et cetera.

‘Competitors,’ sorry for the typo.

Anyway, each season has at least one clear intellectual, usually someone with a very high educational background.

And I have a question about that.

Almost without exception, the people with those Hugh level educational backgrounds seem to do the worst on the show.

In season eight, the most hopeless player is a former doctor, a general practitioner, and a celebrity mostly known for being a brilliant quiz participant.

Damn, sorry, ‘HIGH’ levels of education. I am the typo queen tonight.

In any case, it happens again and again, to the point where it seems a pattern. The most educated, whom we would most likely label upon meeting as the ‘smartest, get absolutely creamed.

They routinely get dominated by other players...but more interestingly, they often seem to just be completely inadequate at seeing inventive solutions to the tasks given them.

In short, they seem to stay inside the box.

I find this raises a lot of interesting questions. Scratch the surface, is Taskmaster unexpectedly presenting an interesting question about how people think differently?

And if so, does it mean certain types of thinkers drift towards higher learning, or...

...does higher learning somehow teach them to approach problems differently?

Why do they tend to follow the rules more explicitly, with less creative solutions?

On the one hand, it’s just a game show, but after ten seasons, patterns emerge, and this one seems a bit counter-intuitive.

Or it could all be tat.

Thoughts?

I am 100% pro-advanced learning, by the way, in case that isn’t;t in evidence.

Ps. I am informed that the example I used was sadly diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease just hours before appearing on the show. Good on him for keeping his fantastic sense of humor under those circumstances.

Also, I wasn’t talking about one person, but a seeming trend.