Stupidity: Difference between revisions

Stupidity (view source)

Revision as of 20:11, 31 October 2023

818 bytes added , 31 October 2023

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,891

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{A|devil|[[File:Cipolla-matrix.png|thumb|center|Stupidity mapped, yesterday.]]}}Italian economic historian and raconteur {{author|Carlo Cipolla}} pinned down [[stupidity]] in his 1976 essay ''Le leggi fondamentali della stupidità umana'' — “the basic laws of human stupidity”. A worthy endeavour, but one from which the world appears not to have learned much in half a century. Which probably tells you everything you need to know.
+{{A|devil|{{image|Cipolla-matrix|png|Stupidity mapped, yesterday.}}}}{{quote|“Do not attribute to ''malice'' things that can just as well be explained by ''stupidity''.”
+:—''[[Hanlon’s razor]]''}}
+{{quote|
+I don’t think it’s just a plain stupidity. There are dignified stupidities, and there are heroic stupidities and there’s such a thing as ''stupid'' stupidities — and that would be a stupid stupidity.
+:—Werner Herzog, ''The White Diamond'', 2004
+}}
+Italian economic historian and raconteur Carlo Cipolla pinned down [[stupidity]] in his 1976 essay ''Le leggi fondamentali della stupidità umana'' — “the basic laws of human stupidity”. A worthy endeavour, but one from which we have learned little in half a century. This probably tells you what you need to know.
-Anyway, Cipolla’s laws of human stupidity boil down, broadly, to the following:
+=== Cipolla’s laws ===
+Anyway, Cipolla’s laws of human stupidity boil down to the following:
-* To be stupid is to harm someone else without personally benefitting. Stupidity results inevitably in net loss. Everyone loses, at a minimum the time taken to listen to the idiot. Bandits, defectors, double-crossers and pillagers may be nasty, but because ''they'' benefit, they aren’t stupid.
+* To be stupid is to ''harm someone else without personally benefitting''. Stupidity results inevitably in net loss. Everyone loses, at a minimum the time taken to listen to the idiot. Bandits, defectors, double-crossers and pillagers may be nasty, but because ''they'' benefit, they aren’t stupid.
 * Stupid people are ''worse'' that bandits. At least ''someone'' derives a benefit from banditry: the bandit.
 * An individual’s stupidity is independent of her other qualities. Tenured brainboxes, that is to say, are no less immune to stupidity as the rest of us.
@@ Line 9: / Line 16: @@
 * We systematically underestimate how much damage stupid people can do.
-Cipolla went on to create one of those simplistic four-box charts beloved of the management layer which, of course, cannot possibly hope to describe the world, but are still an amusing and memorable [[heuristic]], apt for making the world more [[legible]]. The two axes are “benefits to self” and “benefits to world”. The four quadrants are populated by the ''intelligent'', who help others and help themselves; the ''bandits'', who help themselves by harming others, the ''helpless'', who help others without personally benefiting, and the ''stupid'' who basically just get in the way, not doing themselves or anyone else any good.
+Stupidity ''begets'' misattributed malice: if we take it as a given that there are a lot more stupid people than there are malicious people, and that it is stupid to treat as malicious what is as well explained by benign stupidity, then a surfeit of stupidity will naturally give rise to a misapprehension of widespread malice. Which rather well sums up the rancorous world in which we find ourselves.
+Cipolla went on to create one of those simplistic four-box quadrants beloved of the management layer which, of course, cannot possibly hope to describe the world, but are still an amusing and memorable [[heuristic]], apt for making the world more [[legible]]. The two axes are “benefits to self” and “benefits to world”. The four quadrants are populated by the ''intelligent'', who help others and help themselves; the ''bandits'', who help themselves by harming others, the ''helpless'', who help others without personally benefiting, and the ''stupid'' who basically just get in the way, not doing themselves or anyone else any good.
 The [[JC]] doesn’t benefit from this whole rigmarole, which puts him somewhere between ''helpless'' and ''stupid''. Being a glass half-full sort of fellow, I like to think of myself as merely helpless. It certainly feels that way.
 {{Sa}}
 *[[:Category:Archetypes|Archetypes]]
+*[[Occam’s razor]]
+*[[Otto’s razor]]