Do You Think People Are Stupid?

[Vigile]

I think the USA is in much deeper shit than we are.

 

I actually live in Russia, but am just in Estonia temporarily. The Russian system of government is far more corrupt than the US, and while I don't like it, it's my semi-educated opinion that there isn't much that can be done about it. Americans, and perhaps Canadians too are raised with a can-do attitude and people who say something can't be done are seen as pessimistic. I've yet, however, seen a reasonable argument from those who hope to engage in real change today or any examples from a historical perspective where the balance of power has ever been removed from the ruling elite in any meaningful measure on a broad scale basis other than the French revolution (which I'll discuss more below).

 

So, in the interim, I have a pragmatic outlook and what I see is that despite massive levels of corruption and the fact that in the Russian oligarchy and US plutocracy, people today have more options available than they have at just about any other time in history. The average Russian today has it far better than he/she had it just 10 short years ago and certainly 20 and 50 years ago.

 

The average American is also better off than he/she was at the turn of the last century. You can point to a brief era following WWII where America had a stronger middle class, and yes, since the 80s it has been eroding (this needs to be addressed) yet life is far from intolerable.

 

It's my argument that an armed revolution would in fact change a tolerable, if imperfect situation into a vastly intolerable situation for the majority of people.

 

I hate it when I hear things like: "There is not enough love in the world, that's why there's wars." "People are greedy, that's why the poor have nothing to eat.

 

I agree peacenik types carry with them a fool's notion, but I would argue that wars are driven almost exclusively in response to the ruling elite's attempt to control resources. All other reasons, given or imagined are secondary to this. If you study the history of war objectively I believe this is supported virtually without exception. War is about power and power isn't handed over to the average Joe even in situations like the Russian revolution, which was based on this very ideal (giving the power to the proletariat) which ended up taking the power from the king and handing it over to the elite nomenklutura who ruled with totalitarian force.

 

In the US, the revolution was fought primarily over taxes, which at the time was an issue of the land owners. Following the war the winners replaced the king and began extracting taxes of their own in order to control resources (see Whiskey rebellion as one example).

 

Today we are told wars are designed to spread democracy, yet it's clear to any reasonable observer that they are instead just ways to shore up natural resources, which unlike technology, are zero sum from an economic perspective.

 

The root of the problem is: the banking system is corrupt, the political system is corrupt, the military system is corrupt, the medical/pharmaceutical system is corrupt, not the people, the SYSTEMS. Corruption is built into the system.

 

I don't disagree with anything you say here. I only disagree with the methods you propose to address the problem. In the past we have addressed these types of issues with anti trust laws, among other things. In American history, this has worked like a pendulum, where plutocrats gain too much influence, blow up the economy, creating enough impetus for the average person to get pissed off enough to elect and pressure their leaders to address the problems. Over time, those with money (aka real power) push back, deregulate themselves, wealth becomes more and more unequally distributed and life less and less tolerable to the point the people once again push back and demand balancing measures.

 

The French revolution was probably the best example, despite how bloody and corrupt it turned out to be, of a situation where force met with philosophy evolving into something that equaled real progress in the form of enlightenment thinking and the laws and constitutions that were built on that philosophy. IMHO, this philosophy is still valid, even if it is losing force in modern society. To regain momentum toward progress, this, again IMHO, needs to be restored through a democratic process.

 

I don't believe modern day revolutionary types are high minded, but rather foolish and selfish and those crazy and desperate enough are more of the mind that supports dominionist type philosophy, which is a regression, not progress. Even if it were feasible to seriously challenge the strength of the American military on US soil (absurd IMO) coalitions of those willing to even try would be mostly made up of xian nut job types and power hungry assholes who would imagine a system that would result in conditions of the human spirit far far worse than anything suffered by your average Joe today.

 

Pragmatically, you and I and we as individuals can do ok in this world as it is and imagination that we can change it is something of a savior complex (believe me, I'm not immune to this, I'm just aging and see it as less and less reasonable as I age).

 

I could be way out in left field, and am willing to engage others in their ideas, but I think that needs to start with a description of how they think things will/should play out. I've outlined the challenge we all face here. How do you imagine a revolution would correct things that currently are?

 

Just know that if real revolution ever does gain a foothold, I'll be off on a deserted island somewhere avoiding it all. I think most willing to die for a cause are more often than not deluded by foolish ideals and those willing to kill for a cause more often than not cause more suffering to the innocent than they ever do the object of their contempt. I want no part in it.

 

Break some eggs to make an omelet philosophy has caused more human suffering than anything else man has ever come up with. Those who appeal to it are either evil or just not the pointiest pins in the cushion IMO.

[Vigile]

A truly amazing book about the futility of revolution, among other things most important in our human existence, if you haven't read it (everyone should read it once in their life IMO - Biblical Genesis has nothing on Marquez):

 

http://www.amazon.co...z/dp/0060929790

 

As an aside, the fact that today we have books so exceedingly more profound than the bible should be a major hint the bible is not inspired by the creator of the universe.

ZOMG I've been meaning to read that. His Love in the Time of Cholera was one of the most profound books I've ever read. It affected me far more than the Bible ever could have. But one can hardly fault the Bible for being irrelevant to so many people. It's got shit for editing and whoever did its fact-checking needs to be keelhauled. It's like a shared-universe anthology that none of the authors actually discussed before they got to writing. There are loads of fiction books that I find more profound and affecting than the Bible, consequently; any fiction book with a cohesive plot will fare better than the Bible on the readability scale no matter what its other flaws might be!

 

If you read it, I'd be very interested in your impression. I'll have to try and get a hold of Cholera. I've been meaning to read it for years too.

[Margee]

A truly amazing book about the futility of revolution, among other things most important in our human existence, if you haven't read it (everyone should read it once in their life IMO - Biblical Genesis has nothing on Marquez):

 

http://www.amazon.co...z/dp/0060929790

 

As an aside, the fact that today we have books so exceedingly more profound than the bible should be a major hint the bible is not inspired by the creator of the universe.

 

Here's a great summary I found of the book. I am going to look this over with a cup of coffee later. Thanks Vigile.

 

http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/solitude/

[micksherlock]

Do you think people are stupid? I was reading this very short article and I have to admit he could be right? Are we dummies? What do you think?

 

Quote: '' Heck, we’re not even smart enough to figure out good solutions for problems that we have been trying to resolve for thousands of years; such as famine prevention, political corruption, stable economies, balanced budgets, good education for all our children, healthcare for everyone, social security, etc.

 

Humanity is so stupid that I am surprised that civilization has survived for so long. Unfortunately higher education and advanced technology has not helped us to completely solve any of our problems, so we need to somehow make ourselves significantly smarter.''

 

The article: http://www.philforhu...are_Stupid.html

 

I would not say, stupid, but I would say, ill.

[Vigile]

Looks like an accurate summary Margee, but from a quick read, it doesn't capture the essence of the book. It's like reading about chocolate. You have to taste the chocolate to fully appreciate it.

[Margee]

Just know that if real revolution ever does gain a foothold, I'll be off on a deserted island somewhere avoiding it all. I think most willing to die for a cause are more often than not deluded by foolish ideals and those willing to kill for a cause more often than not cause more suffering to the innocent than they ever do the object of their contempt. I want no part in it.

 

you know a lot of history Vigile. I don't. History and politics, I have avoided like the plague because I knew it would break my heart for the human race to know how things have been done, so I put on my 'blinders' for many years. I've only become interested in all of this in the past few years. I really thought I had seen enough when I was searching and searching for the truth about the christian bible. I had to read about lot of horrible things and torture (that are still implanted in my brain) that the human race has inflicted on one another.........to bring me to the place where I am semi-comfortable believing that I won't go to a litteral place called 'hell'. I still don't understand how we as humans can be so smart and intelligent and still very naive when it comes to 'converting' people to anything!! We truly can get brainwashed easily.

 

I do not have a lot of education.. I dropped out of school in grade 9 and became a hairdresser at a very young age. I didn't do well in school because the topics I was forced to learn, did not interest me back then. I probably would have been diagnosed with ADD if I was in school in this generation. I didn't want to sit all day - I was happier when I was creating. I still think the education system has to change for personalities like mine. Simple 'vocational' schools seem to be a thing of the past. To enter Cosmetology today,(beauty school) you must have grade 12 with a good amount of 'marks' and a wonderful attendance record. I had none of that. I hooked off school so much that they had to come chasing after me to get me to finish grade 9. True story. Now, today, I actually try to understand physics!! Crazy!!

 

Anyway, I find history today to be very sad, but exciting (in a way) and I love to read about how the world actually ended up the way it has. I would love to know a few more things before I die.

 

I often wonder....could it have evolved without all the blood? And how?

[Vigile]

I do not have a lot of education.. I dropped out of school in grade 9 and became a hairdresser at a very young age.

 

My best friend dropped out in 10th grade. What he lacks in education, he makes up in common sense. He can be prone to conspiracy theory, but he's a smart guy and usually works his way through it given enough time.

 

 

Now, today, I actually try to understand physics!!

 

That's me too. I didn't study it in school and what little I learned only confused me. I find the subject fascinating today and eat up documentaries that explain the concepts in terms I can understand. I wish it came easier to me.

 

I often wonder....could it have evolved without all the blood? And how?

 

I don't believe its part of human nature in terms of every individual. However, when humans are in groups, a small number of them want to corner the market and use tribalism against the unsuspecting rest of the group to get their way in the world. I'm not sure this will ever change unless we evolve or develop resources that are truly renewable. As it stands now, scarcity of resources is a growing issue and the development of weapons of mass destruction makes for an ever volatile combination. IMHO

 

What I do know is I personally don't have to play along.

[JadedAtheist]

It depends who you are comparing people to I guess. Obviously people are smarter than anything else on this planet, at least as far as we know. I hate to boast, but I do have an above average IQ (I'm talking official tests, not this online test bullshit). Not amazingly above it, but nevertheless it's above. So, when I look at people I find it almost unbelievable that we were able to do the things we do. It makes me think society leeches off the intelligence of a select few because most people that I see have trouble using the technology that others have invented, let alone inventing something new.

[Vigile]

It makes me think society leeches off the intelligence of a select few because most people that I see have trouble using the technology that others have invented, let alone inventing something new.

 

Ortega y Gasset argued that true scientific progress is in the hands of a relatively tiny number of scientists who are at the cutting edge and that removed, all human progress would regress.

[JadedAtheist]

I certainly think that to be the case, Vigile.

[Guest Xtech]

...I didn't do well in school because the topics I was forced to learn, did not interest me back then. I probably would have been diagnosed with ADD if I was in school in this generation. I didn't want to sit all day - I was happier when I was creating...

 

Margee so much of our lives is kind of luck of the draw, forces beyond our control, and dependent on circumstances. If there is a lingering feeling of being ashamed of your past or something, I hope it will one day pass. I suspect it gives you pleasure to know that kids nowadays who are diagnosed with ADD are treated with so much more kindness and realistic expectations. ADD runs in my family so I am well acquainted with it. It's so encouraging to see how education is changing now - for example, for kids who are NOT content to sit there and listen, as lectures go digital, those squirmy wormies can put them on the iPod and go for a walk or something while they listen and learn.

 

As to your original question, people are only people. We are stupid and we are brilliant we are cruel and we are kind. We all have our limitations and talents. Ideologies are by nature misanthropic. Religions often teach how people are flawed and stupid or sinners and therefore need to buy the Kool-Aid the religion is selling. It took me a long time to purge that poison from my system. People really do the best the can with what they can.

 

Wishing you, and all of us, the best, XT

[Denyoz]

The root of the problem is: the banking system is corrupt, the political system is corrupt, the military system is corrupt, the medical/pharmaceutical system is corrupt, not the people, the SYSTEMS. Corruption is built into the system.

 

I don't disagree with anything you say here. I only disagree with the methods you propose to address the problem.

 

You're probably referring to when I wrote: "we have to get together and overthrow the bastards." and "I think there is a real need for a revolution."

 

I have to agree with you. I hate violence, and if ever there was an outbreak of violence in my city, I would probably be the first one to grab my wife and kids and drive as far away as I can. But I also hate to see so many people unaware of what's going on and who hide under the carpet as soon as someone speaks out.

 

So, ok, I would define revolution this way: A sudden, vast change in a situation, in the way of thinking and behaving.

 

"Overthrowing the bastards" doesn't have to be by physical force, but by some other means, like maybe scaring the shit out of them. Like what happened in the Philippines in 1986. Millions of civilians walked out in the streets of Manila and within days, the dictator President Ferdinand Marcos fled. It was a massive nonviolent revolution that led to the restoration of the country's democracy. There was no bloodshed.

 

The problem nowadays is that we can't pinpoint the person responsible for the mess we're in.

[Vigile]

The root of the problem is: the banking system is corrupt, the political system is corrupt, the military system is corrupt, the medical/pharmaceutical system is corrupt, not the people, the SYSTEMS. Corruption is built into the system.

 

I don't disagree with anything you say here. I only disagree with the methods you propose to address the problem.

 

You're probably referring to when I wrote: "we have to get together and overthrow the bastards." and "I think there is a real need for a revolution."

 

I have to agree with you. I hate violence, and if ever there was an outbreak of violence in my city, I would probably be the first one to grab my wife and kids and drive as far away as I can. But I also hate to see so many people unaware of what's going on and who hide under the carpet as soon as someone speaks out.

 

So, ok, I would define revolution this way: A sudden, vast change in a situation, in the way of thinking and behaving.

 

"Overthrowing the bastards" doesn't have to be by physical force, but by some other means, like maybe scaring the shit out of them. Like what happened in the Philippines in 1986. Millions of civilians walked out in the streets of Manila and within days, the dictator President Ferdinand Marcos fled. It was a massive nonviolent revolution that led to the restoration of the country's democracy. There was no bloodshed.

 

The problem nowadays is that we can't pinpoint the person responsible for the mess we're in.

 

I'm right there with you then.

 

I just posted this. I think you'll find it interesting: http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/51579-you-are-free-to-prosper-and-pursue-happiness/

[BMandeville]

I don't think people are any more stupid than any other animal. I think, as learned, critically-thinking individuals, it's easy for us to look down our collective nose at those whom we see as the uninformed masses, but my understanding is that humans are biologically inclined to be impulsive and seek pleasure, and those behaviors, while conducive to survival, are generally not the most intelligent. Survival favors action, and those who act rather than ponder in a fight-or-flight situation have at least half a chance at survival, and those genes are thus passed on. I would say that as an atheist, it's tempting for me to think of theists, ideologues, and conspiracy theorists as being woefully stupid, but I have to remind myself that it's really more about a mental deference to base instinct instead of critical thinking, and I bear in mind that I know plenty of brilliant theists and plenty of stupid atheists. Thinking critically is not innate, and as I said before, not especially favored in terms of evolution, so what we think of as "stupid" and "intelligent" might well be equated with "impulsive" and "calculated."

[Galien]

Yes, I do think we are stupid because we don't like taking responsibility but prefer to blame others. We are stupid because we let finance constraints stop up from doing what is morally right. We are stupid because we are selfish and greedy and we just won't stop. We teach our children to be self involved greedy little consumers then wonder why they are assholes. We continue to use biological and scientific excuses for our assholery, and we do everything but the right thing because the guy next door does it, over and over and over again We refuse to look inside and admit it is ourselves that is the problem.

 

We are STUPID alright.

[VacuumFlux]

Yeah, people are dumb. We're highly intelligent animals, but we've created a whole cultural environment that we're not well adapted to (in the genetic sense; civilization and desk jobs and all that are very recent on an evolutionary timescale). So many of our instincts have become counter-productive to modern life.

 

Even intelligent people do dumb things sometimes. There are lots of people on the planet. So statistically, it's not unreasonable to run into more than one person doing something dumb every day of our lives, even if people in general are fairly smart. I remind myself of this quite often when I'm driving down the road and see other drivers do weird things that either don't seem to make any sense or are dangerous to themselves or others. It's better shrug and think "wow, people can be really dumb!" instead of getting angry and feeling personally offended.

 

Then there's specializations. We've got way too much stuff to know. I keep hearing that it's worse now than in the distant past when we all lived in tribes, but even then, I bet one caveman was better than the others at making arrowheads, another was the best tracker in the tribe.... I often watch people who are unskilled at something that I'm good at and think "wow, that was dumb!" But then I watch myself learning new skills, and I sure do a whole lot of dumb things before I get good at something. I probably do dumb things every day without realizing it, and just haven't run into the right bit of information to have learned how to do it better.

 

As for the political discussions going on, well, some people are just "good" at having a lack of empathy combined with a love of power. Many of the rest of us (I'm definitely in this category) just want to have ok lives and see politics as an annoyance and distraction from living life. I've only started trying to care about politics out of a sense of obligation, and some mild annoyance when idiotic laws get in the way of me doing something that I want to do that won't hurt myself, other people, or the environment. I keep looking at the laws and trying to figure out what problem the idiots were trying to fix, and feeling like they may have had good intentions but the implementation just makes things worse. One of my cynical friends tells me the laws were never meant to "make things better" in the way I expect them to, and that many of the laws are just power grabs by intelligent but malicious people who are fully aware of the repercussions. I'd rather believe in incompetence than malice.

[Deva]

It is a very complex society we live in. On any given day, I see actions by people that I would certainly classify as "dumb". I realize I am far from knowing everything myself but "common sense" sure isn't very common.

[BMandeville]

I disagree on the ubiquity of common sense; I think the reason it's so common is because it usually doesn't make all that much sense.

 

 

[Vigile]

I disagree on the ubiquity of common sense; I think the reason it's so common is because it usually doesn't make all that much sense.

 

Agree. It usually ignores less than obvious, but vital factors. Those who revel in it are often blowhards.

[BMandeville]

I hope my own rhetorical version of the Common Sense Cliche didn't come off as snarky. I tend to see those phrases as unproductive and employed last-minute as an appeal to a thoroughly inappropriate authority, usually to bolster a political or theological argument, and I somewhat egotistically think my reversal to be a clever, though equally cliche, rebuttal to common sense rhetoric. The term is used so often that it can usually slip by without proper definition. I realize this was not the intent of the person who used it; I just think cliches like that are somewhat empty and often used disingenuously to psychologically bully an ideological opponent.

 

I agree with the poster above, common sense can pretty much be reduced to herd instinct and a tacit submission to the process of comparing one's actions to those of the thundering horde where they are evaluated not according to their moral superiority or utility, but rather for their conformity to contemporary thought, mainstream ideology, or socially acceptable instinct, and I don't think conventional wisdom is sufficient justification for a given action.

[florduh]

Thomas Paine didn't have such a low opinion or definition of Common Sense.

 

Common sense is what's lacking when a mother leaves her baby in the car while she runs into the store for a minute. Common sense tells us not to piss into the wind. It's an often maligned survival instinct. It is "sound and prudent judgment based on a simple perception of the situation or facts."

 

It is Occam's Razor working in daily life.

[Vigile]

Sure, but common sense also said Europe would be better off it it tightened its belt in the middle of the financial crisis when in fact austerity sent their economy into a tail spin. Common sense says that this pill my friend gave me is harmless because I took it and it didn't hurt me. Common sense tells us that Muslims blow up buildings because 17 of them did just that. Common sense tells us that dancing makes it rain because the last 3 times we danced it rained shortly after.

 

I like your common sense though F, it's uncommon. Paine didn't strike me as particularly profound however, but I've only read his propagandist literature, not the book by that title.

[florduh]

Sure, but common sense also said Europe would be better off it it tightened its belt in the middle of the financial crisis when in fact austerity sent their economy into a tail spin. Common sense says that this pill my friend gave me is harmless because I took it and it didn't hurt me. Common sense tells us that Muslims blow up buildings because 17 of them did just that. Common sense tells us that dancing makes it rain because the last 3 times we danced it rained shortly after.

An opinion tainted by agenda or confirmation bias, or just plain wrong information, is not what I understand common sense to be. You imply that using what most call 'common sense' will lead to a wrong conclusion or bad outcome. I disagree. True common sense is an informed assessment based on experience and logic.

[Ro-bear]

Perhaps stupidity is les to blame than inability or unwillingness to set aside selfish considerations for the greater good. In other words, we can't work together because we can't agree on what to do and how to do it.

[Vigile]

Sure, but common sense also said Europe would be better off it it tightened its belt in the middle of the financial crisis when in fact austerity sent their economy into a tail spin. Common sense says that this pill my friend gave me is harmless because I took it and it didn't hurt me. Common sense tells us that Muslims blow up buildings because 17 of them did just that. Common sense tells us that dancing makes it rain because the last 3 times we danced it rained shortly after.

An opinion tainted by agenda or confirmation bias, or just plain wrong information, is not what I understand common sense to be. You imply that using what most call 'common sense' will lead to a wrong conclusion or bad outcome. I disagree. True common sense is an informed assessment based on experience and logic.

 

The problem here is there are different definitions of common sense and the lines between them are murky.

 

Not every example I provided is based on logical error. It's perfectly logical, for instance to assume that if Europe is in a crisis it should reign in the spending. And why not, a family that is running out of money at the end of the month each month would do better to reassess its budget. Where common sense fails in this instance is in the complex details that make up large economies.

 

There are many similar paradoxes in life that require greater than average education and experience to recognize, yet those who rely on what they call common sense often stand in the way of what needs to get done. I can think of many examples where 'common sense' represents common ignorance, causing many to take positions that just make them come across as uneducated blow hards. At the risk of bringing out the blow hards, Affirmative Action, e.g..