“In the real world society does NOT neatly break down between
The good.
The bad
and
The smart.
It DOES, however, most certainly break down between
The good.
The bad.
and
The stupid.
And it is here a moral case for evil exists.”
“In the real world society does NOT neatly break down between
The good.
The bad
and
The smart.
It DOES, however, most certainly break down between
The good.
The bad.
and
The stupid.
And it is here a moral case for evil exists.”
Paul Joseph Watson comments on an example of the stupid:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-4GkdupfTw
Oh, to be an rich elitist SJW, eh?
Paul Joseph Watson comments on an example of the stupid:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-4GkdupfTw
Oh, to be an rich elitist SJW, eh?
Good one Cappy, when I’m pondering along the same lines I tend to put the stupid percent at 90, but that’s probably a little high. I’m raising a small child and I wrestle with my influence… should a person grow up to be honest and good and kind and considerate, or should we learn some predatory survival skills from the likes of the mafia or bikers or public servants? So far, if I say to my kid “what’s rule #1?” the instant reply is “Don’t.Get.Caught.” so you can see which way I’m drifting.
Ah yes, the intellectual yet idiots (IYI). They seem smart sometimes, especially when they get us to pay for their privilege:
“What we have been seeing worldwide, from India to the UK to the US, is the rebellion against the inner circle of no-skin-in-the-game policymaking “clerks” and journalists-insiders, that class of paternalistic semi-intellectual experts with some Ivy league, Oxford-Cambridge, or similar label-driven education who are telling the rest of us 1) what to do, 2) what to eat, 3) how to speak, 4) how to think… and 5) who to vote for.”
But the problem is the one-eyed following the blind: these self-described members of the “intelligentsia” can’t find a coconut in Coconut Island, meaning they aren’t intelligent enough to define intelligence hence fall into circularities — but their main skill is capacity to pass exams written by people like them. With psychology papers replicating less than 40%, dietary advice reversing after 30 years of fatphobia, macroeconomic analysis working worse than astrology, the appointment of Bernanke who was less than clueless of the risks, and pharmaceutical trials replicating at best only 1/3 of the time, people are perfectly entitled to rely on their own ancestral instinct and listen to their grandmothers (or Montaigne and such filtered classical knowledge) with a better track record than these policymaking goons.”
The Intellectual Yet Idiot is a production of modernity hence has been accelerating since the mid twentieth century, to reach its local supremum today, along with the broad category of people without skin-in-the-game who have been invading many walks of life. Why? Simply, in most countries, the government’s role is between five and ten times what it was a century ago (expressed in percentage of GDP). The IYI seems ubiquitous in our lives but is still a small minority and is rarely seen outside specialized outlets, think tanks, the media, and universities — most people have proper jobs and there are not many openings for the IYI.”
The IYI pathologizes others for doing things he doesn’t understand without ever realizing it is his understanding that may be limited. He thinks people should act according to their best interests and he knows their interests, particularly if they are “red necks” or English non-crisp-vowel class who voted for Brexit. When plebeians do something that makes sense to them, but not to him, the IYI uses the term “uneducated”. What we generally call participation in the political process, he calls by two distinct designations: “democracy” when it fits the IYI, and “populism” when the plebeians dare voting in a way that contradicts his preferences”
https://medium.com/incerto/the-intellectual-yet-idiot-13211e2d0577#.pbipdn1dg
I used to tell acquaintances etc the 5-5-90 rule.
In any organization, 5% are the lazy opportunists who spend their time and resources figuring out how to look busy and grab perks.
5% are the innovators who push society forward be it medical, technical, scientific, financial etc.
the other 90% observe the ‘work to rule’ method;, punch in, do ONLY the minimum to justify their presence, punch out and leave the office behind until next day.
but perhaps now the opportunists have increased their representation at the ‘expense’ of the work-to-rule class.
There’s also the pre-WWII German military policy of classifying every recruit as either stupid or clever and either lazy or industrious.
The stupid and lazy, the vast majority, are the brute labour to be ordered around at all times. The clever and lazy go to the top because they have the peace of mind to make the difficult decisions. The clever and industrious are the management class that get things done. As for the stupid and industrious? They’re dangerous, get rid of them.
The best example of stupidity that I recently heard was that Harvard Students all agreed to the importance of the First Amendment “protection” of Free Speech, but they rejected all hateful speech… But they were confused when told that love speech does not need protection…
\Hammer Stupid!
“The good.
The bad.
and
The stupid.”
The logic of the argument is sound.
I would think words like gullible and lazy are more apt. I know some very intelligent people who blindly go along with the bad guys.
golly, an article that has finally caught up with me on my rants about stupid.
Stradivarius must be asleep or drunk, otherwise he’d be along to tell us that high intelligence is a myth.
I don’t know if Stupid counts for 80%, but I do know that there are a LOT of people out there who resolutely refuse to see the handwriting on the wall about a lot of issues.