The basic assumption bothers me

IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #93,762

4/2/03 12:25:55 PM

The basic assumption bothers me

mostly because I don't think it's true. I think the actual condition is something that could be interpreted as "dumbth" (to borrow a phrase from Ashton) but I've never believed anything is that simple.

The idea that a group is somehow exempt from its own criticisms isn't really a new phenomenon, though, and I don't really expect people to go around admitting their imperfections...

"We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?"
- Edward Young

Post #93,867

4/2/03 6:47:21 PM

Idiocy is relative

Set your standard for intelligent behaviour high enough, and virtually everyone will fall below it. Set it low enough, and your average chicken qualifies is brainy.

Moreover, the above misrepresents the situation substantially. Effective definitions of intelligence are contextual - different people are smart in different contexts. And different people apply a different context to judging intelligence, leading to different measurements of the abilities of various people.

When the effective definition of intelligence used is, "Can understand and discuss things in my interest areas," then by virtue of the fact that most of us are pretty specialized, most of the world looks like idiots. (This approach sometimes leads to groupthink.)

When the effective definition of intelligence used is, "Agrees with me," then people look like idiots again, and you are very prone to groupthink. Applying this concept of intelligence is why so many programmers are surprised to find out that there are very capable programmers across the entire spectrum of religious belief. (I have met programmers who are amazed that atheists really can be capable of logical thought, and others who are amazed that devout Christians can reason.)

And so on, and so forth. With most people thinking that most people are idiots. (Albeit they come to that judgement differently.) They may disagree on who is an idiot, but they agree that most are.

Whatever definition is chosen, most people of my aquaintance who are intellectually active have a standard for basic intelligence that includes being able to read competently if you had the opportunity to learn. And since over half of adults in the US are functionally illiterate despite theoretically having the opportunity to learn (the same is true for Canada BTW), they tend to agree that those people are idiots. Which means that they can agree on how to classify most Americans - and that classification is "idiot".

It could be argued that they are wrong to use that definition that concludes that. But that doesn't change the fact that they do think that way. And they generally don't think that it is bad to think that way - indeed it is easy to get most of them to admit thinking this way.

So let me sign off in idiocy...

Ben (believed by many to be an idiot)

"good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not"
- [link|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html|Stefano Mazzocchi]

I strongly support his right to espouse stupid ass ideas - (boxley) - (52) - March 29, 2003, 12:27:26 AM EST

Calling it "stupid ass ideas" is being generous. - (a6l6e6x) - (44) - March 29, 2003, 12:46:10 PM EST

Wishing death upon anyone is despicable, however, .... - (mmoffitt) - (43) - March 29, 2003, 03:24:03 PM EST

"Muricans in general" - (cwbrenn) - (42) - March 30, 2003, 11:11:48 AM EST

For the pedantic of us. - (mmoffitt) - (41) - March 30, 2003, 04:09:40 PM EST

60% support the war in exactly the same way??? - (cwbrenn) - (40) - March 30, 2003, 07:33:13 PM EST

if it means anything british support for the war is 84% - (boxley) - March 30, 2003, 07:45:36 PM EST

Nice rant. - (inthane-chan) - March 30, 2003, 07:51:20 PM EST

"A few of them out there"? - (mmoffitt) - (33) - April 1, 2003, 07:51:21 AM EST

Majority? And you know this how? - (cwbrenn) - (7) - April 1, 2003, 10:59:39 AM EST

Re: And you know this how? - (mmoffitt) - (6) - April 1, 2003, 08:30:29 PM EST

Beg your pardon :) - (cwbrenn) - (5) - April 2, 2003, 09:01:53 AM EST

With apologies ... - (mmoffitt) - (4) - April 2, 2003, 09:04:51 AM EST

LOL - (cwbrenn) - (3) - April 2, 2003, 10:56:10 AM EST

Sheesh - (admin) - (2) - April 2, 2003, 11:00:16 AM EST

Sorry :) - (cwbrenn) - (1) - April 2, 2003, 12:21:21 PM EST

Ha! :-D -NT - (admin) - April 2, 2003, 12:33:15 PM EST

I don't agree - (deSitter) - (24) - April 1, 2003, 08:36:19 PM EST

Look closer, grasshopper. - (mmoffitt) - (23) - April 1, 2003, 08:44:19 PM EST

Aye - (deSitter) - (10) - April 1, 2003, 08:49:37 PM EST

And how many did she needlessly kill to get there? -NT - (mmoffitt) - April 1, 2003, 08:55:12 PM EST

What really bothers me about this: it is racist. - (mmoffitt) - (8) - April 2, 2003, 07:25:23 AM EST

Hey Ross, I'm still waiting for an answer. -NT - (mmoffitt) - (7) - April 2, 2003, 11:00:33 PM EST

dont listen to right wing talk radio much do ya - (boxley) - (2) - April 2, 2003, 11:08:25 PM EST

I try to avoid it. - (mmoffitt) - (1) - April 2, 2003, 11:13:43 PM EST

naw, its the size of the audience that makes you jitter -NT - (boxley) - April 2, 2003, 11:22:20 PM EST

Re: Hey Ross, I'm still waiting for an answer. - (deSitter) - (3) - April 3, 2003, 10:05:44 AM EST

Re: had no business in a combat zone. - (mmoffitt) - (2) - April 3, 2003, 10:20:53 AM EST

Trouble is.. - (Ashton) - (1) - April 3, 2003, 10:12:04 PM EST

Great quote yourself. - (mmoffitt) - April 4, 2003, 12:29:32 PM EST

problem with an all vol army is hessianism - (boxley) - (11) - April 1, 2003, 10:37:30 PM EST

Here's a free clue: don't bet your savings on that. - (Brandioch) - (2) - April 1, 2003, 11:21:10 PM EST

heres a free clue - (boxley) - (1) - April 1, 2003, 11:45:11 PM EST

"...support them as you would garbagemen." - (Brandioch) - April 2, 2003, 01:12:50 PM EST

That's great box. - (mmoffitt) - (7) - April 2, 2003, 07:27:52 AM EST

so auswitz camp guards and allied airmen are the same? - (boxley) - (6) - April 2, 2003, 04:43:39 PM EST

Heh. - (mmoffitt) - (5) - April 2, 2003, 05:10:43 PM EST

I know but the columnist is a bonafide demoleft -NT - (boxley) - (4) - April 2, 2003, 07:40:34 PM EST

Democrat != Left. Sorry to disappoint. -NT - (mmoffitt) - (3) - April 2, 2003, 10:39:21 PM EST

self described card carrying liberal member carter admin -NT - (boxley) - (2) - April 2, 2003, 10:46:20 PM EST

Again, Carter != Left. - (mmoffitt) - (1) - April 2, 2003, 10:53:02 PM EST

nononononono communists all :-) -NT - (boxley) - April 2, 2003, 10:57:03 PM EST

A note on your last comment - (ben_tilly) - (2) - April 1, 2003, 10:04:07 PM EST

The basic assumption bothers me - (cwbrenn) - (1) - April 2, 2003, 12:25:55 PM EST

Idiocy is relative - (ben_tilly) - April 2, 2003, 06:47:21 PM EST

on your last comment about iwetheyers and idiots - (boxley) - April 1, 2003, 10:41:17 PM EST

I wondered how long it would take... - (rcareaga) - (6) - March 29, 2003, 04:30:58 PM EST

Billion, not trillion. -NT - (pwhysall) - (2) - March 29, 2003, 02:46:33 PM EST

But, who's counting? :) -NT - (a6l6e6x) - March 29, 2003, 03:16:26 PM EST

Quite right - (rcareaga) - March 29, 2003, 04:10:33 PM EST

"fatuous"? I don't think so. - (mmoffitt) - (2) - March 29, 2003, 04:17:49 PM EST

Re: "fatuous"? I don't think so. - (rcareaga) - (1) - March 29, 2003, 04:28:52 PM EST

Agreed - it's the equivalent of one backpack with Molotov - (Ashton) - March 29, 2003, 05:48:54 PM EST

Do we really have to hide from da cops in da oven, Muggsy?
93 ms