I've an established theory that most people will try to pull you into a small sub-set of a field or area that they're an expert in, and then beat you silly with their knowledge.

This is particularly brutal if they're ego-centric and doing it to depress upon you "how smart they are".

I've seen this with quite a few "smart" people.

There are two aspects to this:

1) talking "smart" - use of phrases, language, and ideas that aren't obvious, or using terms that are part of "smart"

2) small areas of their own knowledge that you are unlikely to know.

Examples:

friend would pull me into quantum string theory (M-brains, whatever) where they'd memorized certain details of it--they weren't particularly smart on quantum string theory, but I had zero knowledge. They'd keep turning the topic into these areas despite group's conversations not going that way naturally.

another casual friend pulled me into the "A Tribe Called Red is so good" when I started gushing about my appreciation of multi-syllabically rapping styles of lyrical rappers that I liked. They were essentially regurgitating a critic's article on the topic.

Some internal Microsofters a few decades ago would describe that there was internal smart-speak for "smart" identifying people. The same is true in most contexts.

I like to just go along with it, and get them to teach me. Accept the idea that they are the expert, and place them into a teacher position. If you disagree with a statement being made, don't be adversarial, steelman their arguments and try get them to explain to you why they are making the statement they are making. Either you ignite their passion, or they avoid you because you are weirdly too enthusiastic about a mechanism they may have been using to overpower you.

I had an math professor (NOT the one I am referencing in another comment) that was ego-centric and would often respond to my incessant questioning with demoralizing (and sometimes flat out rude) responses. I just acted completely oblivious to the social faux pas and his avoidance/adversarial tendencies eventually turned into a much more productive relationship. I received the only A in the class (he publicly posted everyone's grades).

That's a fair point, and I think you're giving a good example of a certain context of established-expert wrt beginner and how to treat it.

FWIW, I had a friend indicate that because (tenured?) teaching positions are such high demand, that the available candidates can be significantly high caliber. So that might have played into why the math professor was adversarial initially.

The area I've found the depress-to-impress used was usually in peer contexts and didn't have any teachable outcomes, unfortunately. They're regurgitating material that they have better familiarity with, but probably unable to ad-lib off their "beat path".

That makes sense. I think this specific professor also wanted to do research and perhaps disliked teaching, but was required to do it. I could be misinterpreting though.

With the peers thing I just view it as we all have our pathologies, and some people just feel the need to be perceived as smart (usually some kind of insecurity). Sometimes it can just be too much though and you can get the feeling that you are walking on eggshells around them, perhaps not to trigger a judgement of you on their part.

I use a trick I learned from my math advisor. I just say "I'm sorry, I'm kind of stupid, what does it mean? Like, what does it do?". Sometimes they will overcorrect and REALLY dumb it down, but if you can show a higher level insight, they usually pick up on it and adjust. You can direct the conversation away from abstractions and specific details and more towards first principles.

Plus... intellectuals often like to feel smart, so you have an opportunity to pump their ego a bit :)