http://time.com/4937675/how-to-fix-american-stupidity/
Many of you would agree with this article by a philosopher. Yet ... most of you claim that philosophy is BS. Why is that?
Can you fix stupid?
That falls very much into my response on your other post. Once someone has convinced themself and they make it a point so that everyone knows their point. They simply cannot admit they are wrong. Too painful, too emotional.
I love this quote from the article:
Let me be clear: By “stupidity†I do not mean a lack of knowledge, education, skill or savvy. Stupidity is not the same as ignorance or incompetence or folly (although it often leads to foolish behavior). I do not mean it as some immature, all-purpose playground insult. Stupidity is a kind of intellectual stubbornness. A stupid person has access to all the information necessary to make an appropriate judgment, to come up with a set of reasonable and justified beliefs and yet fails to do so. The evidence is staring them right in the face but it makes no difference whatsoever. They believe what they want to believe. Not only do they have no good reasons for thinking that what they believe is true â€" there are often good reasons for thinking that what they believe is false. They are not acting in a rational manner.
I have thought this for a long time now. I used to think that the vast majority of this country was simply ignorant. And ignorance can be fixed by simply supplying facts. But I have come to realize that the majority of this country are stupid. Those of my family understand what I mean when I say something like--The SFA's are at it again! SFA=Stupid Fucking American. They are growing; witness Trump and the fundamentalist religious (of any and all religions). Stupid--can't be fixed.
The majority of humans are stupid.
Psychology evolved to favor socialisation before the concept of objective truth. Therefore most people will adopt convictions that allow them to sit in good standing among their peers, even in the face of overwhelming evidence.
Quote from: Gilgamesh on September 15, 2017, 08:44:15 PM
The majority of humans are stupid.
Psychology evolved to favor socialisation before the concept of objective truth. Therefore most people will adopt convictions that allow them to sit in good standing among their peers, even in the face of overwhelming evidence.
And what is 'objective truth'????
It is a description that portrays objective reality as it is.
Point is, socialisation was more advantageous to our survival than were truths.
Quote from: Gilgamesh on September 15, 2017, 09:52:04 PM
It is a description that portrays objective reality as it is.
Point is, socialisation was more advantageous to our survival than were truths.
I would suggest that socialization is partly finding 'truths' for that particular society. There are no objective nor universal 'truths'.
Quote from: Mike Cl on September 15, 2017, 08:54:51 PM
And what is 'objective truth'????
When Sagan agrees with Tyson ;-) Two braniacs can't both be wrong ;-))
Quote from: Gilgamesh on September 15, 2017, 09:52:04 PM
It is a description that portrays objective reality as it is.
Point is, socialisation was more advantageous to our survival than were truths.
Since objective reality is merely the opinion of elite braniacs ... how is that better than the opinion of the majority? Elitism much.
Quote from: Mike Cl on September 15, 2017, 11:21:53 PM
I would suggest that socialization is partly finding 'truths' for that particular society. There are no objective nor universal 'truths'.
Hmm ... apply this to your own statement ...
"There are no objective nor universal 'truths'." ... so this statement isn't true, and is therefore false. Which means that there are objective or universal 'truths'. Right?
Quote from: Baruch on September 16, 2017, 12:04:33 AM
Hmm ... apply this to your own statement ...
"There are no objective nor universal 'truths'." ... so this statement isn't true, and is therefore false. Which means that there are objective or universal 'truths'. Right?
When you learn how to read, Baruch, you will find out that that is not what I said. The truths in quotes hearkened back to what had been said in the statement I was referring to.
And you know damn well what my point was. At times, you are simply tedious.
Quote from: Baruch on September 15, 2017, 06:30:47 AM
http://time.com/4937675/how-to-fix-american-stupidity/
Many of you would agree with this article by a philosopher. Yet ... most of you claim that philosophy is BS. Why is that?
Well, using you as an example...
Quote from: Mike Cl on September 16, 2017, 09:00:49 AM
When you learn how to read, Baruch, you will find out that that is not what I said. The truths in quotes hearkened back to what had been said in the statement I was referring to.
And you know damn well what my point was. At times, you are simply tedious.
Yes, truth ... per society. So it was true, in Nazi Germany that Jews were enemies. It was true in Jim Crow South that Blacks were lazy? Really.
Quote from: Baruch on September 16, 2017, 09:15:00 AM
Yes, truth ... per society. So it was true, in Nazi Germany that Jews were enemies. It was true in Jim Crow South that Blacks were lazy? Really.
Comeon, Baruch. You are talking stereotypes, not truths. For societies the truths are not labeled as such, but usually called laws or mores. But you know that.
Quote from: Mike Cl on September 16, 2017, 09:00:49 AMAt times, you are simply tedious.
He does seem to start a lot of threads where instead of using his intellect to "enjoin us" prefers to devolve into petty jokes that dismiss his own thread. Tis unfortunate because though we "think" he has great intellect he prefers to defer to "candy is dandy"
Quote from: aitm on September 16, 2017, 09:56:10 PM
He does seem to start a lot of threads where instead of using his intellect to "enjoin us" prefers to devolve into petty jokes that dismiss his own thread. Tis unfortunate because though we "think" he has great intellect he prefers to defer to "candy is dandy"
Yes, I agree, that does seem to be the case.
Quote from: Mike Cl on September 16, 2017, 10:10:44 PM
Yes, I agree, that does seem to be the case.
I don't start many strings. If I start my own (rather than, here is some candy) ... I get crickets. Why bother? And if you want posturing, read Cavebear ... more intelligible than Ibn, but just barely ;-)
Quote from: aitm on September 16, 2017, 09:56:10 PM
He does seem to start a lot of threads where instead of using his intellect to "enjoin us" prefers to devolve into petty jokes that dismiss his own thread. Tis unfortunate because though we "think" he has great intellect he prefers to defer to "candy is dandy"
Even though he knows good and well that liquor is quicker.
Quote from: Unbeliever on September 17, 2017, 02:28:53 PM
Even though he knows good and well that liquor is quicker.
Exactly. I had a order of pot sticker and a glass of white zinfandel, in the Irish pub across form the theater last night, before attending the show.
Quote from: Baruch on September 17, 2017, 07:56:48 AM
I don't start many strings. If I start my own (rather than, here is some candy) ... I get crickets. Why bother?
The point my friend, is you are obviously intelligent and I, and others , enjoy your thoughts, but when we engage you tend to quickly dismiss with humor any discussion. I, for one, willingly admit I do not have the learning that you do and many times would like to hear you out, but you squash your own threads too early, and I might add, you also tend to squash other threads a mite earlier than they should be. What say we all work on that? Give us a little less skittle and a little more cream eh? I think we would all enjoy that.
i will try.
Quote from: Baruch on September 17, 2017, 07:56:48 AM
I don't start many strings. If I start my own (rather than, here is some candy) ... I get crickets. Why bother? And if you want posturing, read Cavebear ... more intelligible than Ibn, but just barely ;-)
I'm pleased you consider me more intelligent than Ibn. I am surprised though. I don't generally post long rambling theistic nonsense, usually give reasons for my posts, and stick mostly to facts.
I invite you to give examples of my "posturing". Go for it, I'm eagerly waiting to see what you come up with.
If you can. And if you can't, an apology would be nice.
Quote from: Cavebear on September 19, 2017, 03:02:26 AM
I'm pleased you consider me more intelligent than Ibn. I am surprised though. I don't generally post long rambling theistic nonsense, usually give reasons for my posts, and stick mostly to facts.
I invite you to give examples of my "posturing". Go for it, I'm eagerly waiting to see what you come up with.
If you can. And if you can't, an apology would be nice.
First you state something that is true, then you try to connect it to the claim, as if it disproves it. Very much like Drew ;-)
Your posturing is primarily your egotism. But I can't blame you, I have an ego too.
Quote from: Baruch on September 19, 2017, 10:23:40 PM
First you state something that is true, then you try to connect it to the claim, as if it disproves it. Very much like Drew ;-)
Your posturing is primarily your egotism. But I can't blame you, I have an ego too.
I didn't see an example of my "posturing" in your post. Put up or shut up...