The article was The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity, by Carlo Cipolla

I wouldn’t apply Cipolla’s classifications to human beings because they are unjust, impractical, and largely nonsensical.

They are unjust because they lead us to observe the results of certain acts, apply utilitarian considerations, and use them to judge the intelligence of the actor, as if the intelligent cannot make mistakes, and so on. One could never know whether a situation will be better or worse beforehand, in any case, so expecting people to understand the situation before it occurs is to believe in omniscience.

It is impractical because, using Cipolla’s graph, one would have to record every act a person makes in a lifetime in order to determine whether one is stupid or intelligent.

It is nonsensical because one can occupy all categories at once. If someone makes his own and another’s situation worse with one act and better with the next, he is, accordingly, both stupid and intelligent.

Those who would utilize this method in order to discriminate against other human beings would lead me to classify him as stupid.

It is not what I laid out. It is a satirical piece yet I found it interesting.

As a hypothetical problem it is still a problem. Cornering it as an extreme idea by viewing it in its extremities only is certainly one way of ignoring the problem.

I was actually trying to sneak in that what he is really talking about (underneath) is more or less about plain bad luck framed as Stupidity.

Either way I find the overarching idea to be a nice leveller as usually the pompous fools of the world act like they are ‘superior’ due to positioning (IQ/status/religion) and this kind of view would hit them the hardest of all as they’d have to question their own ‘Stupidity’/‘Intelligence’.

There is no test to take. You just have to look at what you’ve done and the effects they’ve had on you and those around you. I think that is a healthy thought to have overall (whether or not you like what you see!) :)

I understand, Im not calling you down about offering this topic. Im not taking the step Clarke is where he jumps to conclusions about your position or character. I would have told him to fuck off too. Unfortunately I think there is some merit to the comparison he made, I just dont think you were suggestion concentration camps. Like I said though, there isnt much distance to get there from what youre suggesting.
If you’ll recall Ive always been someone who understood the thought experiment style topics you’ve introduced.
I find them interesting and useful, so please read my comments with that in mind.
Anyway, what about better education? Wouldn't that be the best way to stop people from being stupid? Not education in the sense of academia but teaching people the merits of living “smart” (still think its an odd set of definitions re smart/stupid but for the sake of discussion) so they understand its better to be constructive over destructive, to lift yourself and others up rather than down or as stepping stones to your own exaltation.

I am talking about this at the highest degrees of status/power/influence rather than across the entire social strata simply because those that are stupid and in possession of greater status/power/influence can cause untold damage to themselves and many others whilst remaining oblivious to the fact. — I like sushi

Good to know.

I have to dig into history for those people -- we have historical examples.

Im not taking the step Clarke is where he jumps to conclusions about your position or character. I would have told him to fuck off too. — DingoJones

No "e" on Clark. I jumped to no conclusions about his position. He was pretty clear on what he proposed - taking away people's assets and removing them from their positions in society. That's what we did to the Japanese-Americans during WW2. We sent them to concentration camps.

Also, I made no reference to @i like sushi's character. Now you are jumping to conclusions.

Anyway, what about better education? Wouldn't that be the best way to stop people from being stupid? — DingoJones

It appears you haven't bothered to read the OP either. The premise is you CANNOT change how many people are Stupid.

I read it. I disagree with that premise. That you cannot change how many people are stupid hasnt been established.
In the OP it states “education” in its current form. Agreed. Lets talk about changing the form? (Which I did state in my post, speaking of not reading things…)

Ok bye :)

I was actually trying to sneak in that what he is really talking about (underneath) is more or less about plain bad luck framed as Stupidity. — I like sushi

:fire: :fire: :fire:

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. — Robert J. Hanlon (Hanlon's Razor)

Never attribute to stupidity that which is adequately explained by bad luck. — I like sushi - (insert your name) Razor

Good one!

Give me your surname if you don't mind and you can have a rule of thumb named after you. You'll join the likes of William of Occam (Occam's razor), Christopher Hitchens (Hitchens' razor)n you already know Robert J. Hanlon (Hanlon's razor), etc. What say you?

Give me your surname if you don't mind and you can have a rule of thumb named after you. You'll join the likes of William of Occam (Occam's razor), Christopher Hitchens (Hitchens' razor)n you already know Robert J. Hanlon (Hanlon's razor), etc. What say you? — TheMadFool

Don't forget T Clark's razor - When you are trying to decide which of two otherwise equal bottles of wine to purchase, buy the one with the twist-off cap.

Don't forget T Clark's razor - When you are trying to decide which of two otherwise equal bottles of wine to purchase, buy the one with the twist-off cap. — T Clark

:grin: :up:

"Never underestimate the power of human stupidity " ~Robert Heinlein

:point:

:up:

plus

also

The Psychology of Stupidity, ed. Jean-François Marmion

(addendum)

We can take a person's actions and assess them in terms of gain and loss and judge those actions but people don't usually act as a result of such calculations. What I especially dislike about this idea is this oversimplification of decision making. When I read OP I thought of many things, mental illness, addiction, trauma and so on but perhaps that is taking things out of context. Maybe the best thing to talk about is the "seven deadly sins". Pride, lust, sloth, vanity, greed, envy and gluttony, I think all seven are at the heart of much of our "stupid" behaviour. It's not necessarily that we don't know or that we don't realise, but that we're weak. Everyone is dealing with their own unique circumstances, this topic is complicated, simple conceptualisations make simple solutions look far smarter than they really are.

We can take a person's actions and assess them in terms of gain and loss and judge those actions but people don't usually act as a result of such calculations. — Judaka

I think you missed something. He was saying that Stupid people are unpredictable whereas everyone else you can figure out roughly what their motivations are.

It is not, as many here seem to take it, some rule of life to live by that explains everything there is to know about every facet of human behavior. It is an interesting take on what people call Stupid and Intelligent.

The harrowing point behind what he is saying is that there is no cure for this kind of Stupidity as some people are simply born this way. Whether it is true or not doesn't make it uninteresting. If it is true then avoiding Stupid people seems to make the most sense. I then added that reducing the influence/status/power of Stupid people at the high end of the influence/status/power spectrum would make sense, but they'd also be hard to move as they're Stupid and so unpredictable.

I really don't know if I've met anyone where I thought it was difficult to figure out what their motivations are, nor heard of any activity where it wasn't pretty obvious. As with the seven deadly sins, addiction, mental illness, and any number of other things I could bring up, just because an act is neither beneficial to the actor nor others, doesn't make them enigmatic. It's really clear to me why a drug addict acts to their own detriment and the detriment of others, and many of the things a drug addict might do can be considered really stupid but we know exactly why they're doing it and what their motivations are.

The most basic premises of this conceptualisation are flawed, what about it is so interesting? How can a human act without motivation? Stupid people just wake up and roll a die to decide what they'll do today? It's complete nonsense.

If you don't know from reading I cannot help. Sorry.

You apologise that you can't help with my inability to see the merits of your idea? How gracious of you.

I'll also apologise that I'm unable to see the merits, I must be a bit confused, I'm sure there's something somewhere but I missed it.

The million dollar question is if stupidity is maladaptive, why are there more stupid people than smart people?

I guess stupid is being phased out slowly, in stages? Nature doesn't want to make a scene! :grin: Do you see any signs of that being the case?

Now you are jumping to conclusions. — T Clark

That's the only exercise I do on a regular basis. :grin:

The million dollar question is if stupidity is maladaptive, why are there more stupid people than smart people? — TheMadFool

Everyone is stupid and yet enough of us are also smart enough to keep the species going. So far.

Everyone is stupid and enough of us are also smart which keeps the species going. So far. — 180 Proof

So, in a sense, stupidity hasn't reached critical mass to kickstart the chain reaction of chaos, bedlam and mayhem! How long, do you suppose, before we cross the Rubicon?

It is nonsensical because one can occupy all categories at once. If someone makes his own and another’s situation worse with one act and better with the next, he is, accordingly, both stupid and intelligent. — NOS4A2

I dont find why thats nonsensical. I think although we dont like to admit it, we've all been capable of great harm or great good at some point in our lives. I think his main point was that we had to moderate our stupidity-let it flow softly in some areas, rather than power hosing your way through.

Anthropogenic climate change. :mask:

Anthropogenic climate change — 180 Proof

:ok:

Is there any link between Stupidity and Sensawunda?

The root word stupid, which can serve as an adjective or noun, comes from the Latin verb stupere, for being numb or astonished, and is related to stupor — Wikpedia

.

Definition of "wonder" (vide Google): A feeling of amazement and admiration, caused by something beautiful, remarkable, or unfamiliar.

Synonym of "amazement" (vide Google): astonishment.

Surprise, surprise! (Information theory, Claude Shannon, Entropy)

A sensawunda is good but stupidity is not but in both cases the concerned individual is astonished. Compare and contrast that to :meh: (been there, done that, seen that, heard that, felt that, what's new? ZERO INFORMATION) and :scream: OMG! (LOTSA INFORMATION).