I have seen a few times in the wilds of eugenicist Musk Twitter a hilarious "horseshoe theory" of intelligence and IQ: if you're too smart, in some indefinite way, you double back round to "dumb" or [slur], so a nice safe mediocrity is actually best. I have seen memetic images suggesting that such persons have a peculiar notion about the famous "bell curve" or Gaussian distribution which Charles Murray famously imposed on intelligence: they think it's better to be in the middle, where the curve is nice and high. One time though I saw a tortuous attempt to define some sweet spot off to the right of the mode, but not too far off to be "dumb" again.
It's rather easy to guess why this has happened: too many collisions between the high lords of IQ and people who actually know what they're saying, leading to strings of lost arguments and hurt feelings and consequent grumbling about "woke universities" and such. There's an entertaining tension between the need for the fashy techbro to stay indoctrinated while also strutting their supposedly superior intelligence, and it's led to a curious bipolarity in the community, a resolution of the techbros between two extremes.
Basically, the better any of these people are at mastering some kind of difficult scientific or technical subject, such as programming work or medicine, the more likely it is they're unable to communicate with ordinary human beings. Fashy professionals of this sort tend towards extreme misanthropy, as though it required every erg of their mental powers to do their technical job, so they tend to become hermits with very strange ideas about people. At the other extreme are the persol nle ones who become vigorous evangelists and boosters for technology, the ones who are able to sell their enthusiasm to others. Elon Musk is a conspicuous example. He's good at sounding like a wizard of technology (well good enough for his believers) but if he ever goes into details he's clearly lost. He's not one of the boffins himself. He wanted to be one, though, and that puts some sparkle onto his boosterism.
Hence there's been a peculiar sorting process at work for a few decades, culminating in the rise of persons like Musk and Elizabeth Holmes and Marc Andreessen. They inhabit a system that rewards their own ignorance. The more ignorant you are, the more enthusiastically you can lie and make wild promises. There's no awkward knowledge in the way. Musk can sell technology as magic because to him it IS magic, capable of anything; he doesn't know better and he's not rewarded for finding out.
There's a famous maxim about the doublethinkful nature of right-wing propaganda about the Law. To such people, the Law must bind others but not themselves; the Law protects them but not others. There's a similar state of doublethink in the corporate world about intelligence and technical skill. The boffins who know cannot communicate it to others; the boosters don't know, but they can talk about it anyway. One result has been the AI craze. It's like the AI machines are the ultimate boffins, able to think (well, supposedly) but requiring human agents to praise them and evangelize for them, agents who may vaunt their own intelligence but who clearly are zealous for AI because they need machines to do what they can't.
~Chara of Pnictogen