The Science of Stupidity

[RMK 3]

There’s an excellent article on the study of stupidity in New Scientist Magazine this month. It initially notes that most scientific study has historically focused on the high-end extremes of intelligence, but little work has been done on the other extreme (stupidity) due to it previously being deemed of little value and it just wasn’t deemed a “professional” area of study.

The full article is not available on the web yet (it’s this month’s magazine) however it presents some interesting findings. Applicable to the ramblings of posters, not just here on SC, but on any web forum, is the use of cognitive shortcuts such as evolved biases “heuristics”. In brief, those of limited intelligence rely more heavily on developed mental stereotypes to process and understand information. They create strongly held stereotypes and then attempt to fit information (which they can’t really comprehend) into a more binary understanding. The result is that they see things only in “white & black” instances without interpretation of anything in between. Framing any topic or discussion as liberal/conservative in an absolute mindset is just such an example. Another example would be the “stupid” person’s ability to only understand a simple linear process with only one input (when in practice & reality there are a myriad of inputs which are variable).

"Pain is the best instructor, but no one wants to attend his classes"

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

In brief, those of limited intelligence rely more heavily on developed mental stereotypes to process and understand information. They create strongly held stereotypes and then attempt to fit information (which they can’t really comprehend) into a more binary understanding. The result is that they see things only in “white & black” instances without interpretation of anything in between. Framing any topic or discussion as liberal/conservative in an absolute mindset is just such an example.

That's not stupidity, that's laziness. There's a lot of smart people here that do that (from both directions). If it's not laziness, then it's just purposefully obtuse and antagonistic.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[RMK 3]

The article goes on to note a difference between IQ (intelligence quotient) and an additional measure RQ (rationality quotient). Using both together, for an individual, whereby they show a high and low score of each respectively would explain the many “smart people doing stupid things” examples.

However, your note in relating the use of heuristics only to laziness is wrong. For many it is all they have – they are (for lack of a more succinct term) stupid.

"Pain is the best instructor, but no one wants to attend his classes"

[Andy9o8 0]

If your point is that some people fall back on repeating sound-byte slogans fed to them, as a substitute for their own genuine analysis and discourse, in large part because that's the best they've got and likely can ever come up with, then I agree.

[rehmwa 2]

Nope, everyone is either lazy, or they agree with my side.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kallend 1,672]

Quote

Quote

In brief, those of limited intelligence rely more heavily on developed mental stereotypes to process and understand information. They create strongly held stereotypes and then attempt to fit information (which they can’t really comprehend) into a more binary understanding. The result is that they see things only in “white & black” instances without interpretation of anything in between. Framing any topic or discussion as liberal/conservative in an absolute mindset is just such an example.

That's not stupidity, that's laziness. There's a lot of smart people here that do that (from both directions). If it's not laziness, then it's just purposefully obtuse and antagonistic.

Not necessarily. Was Cato the Elder lazy? Stupid? Or just a good advocate for his cause?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Niki1 1]

Quote

Quote

reply]

That's not stupidity, that's laziness. There's a lot of smart people here that do that (from both directions). If it's not laziness, then it's just purposefully obtuse and antagonistic.

To be ignorant is not a sin. That just means you haven't learned something yet. To willfully remain ignorant is stupid.

If "two heads are better than one," for smart people, can two stupid people togerher be more stupid than either one? I think yes they can.

Most of the things worth doing in the world had been declared impossilbe before they were done.
Louis D Brandeis

Where are we going and why are we in this basket?

• Quote

[lawrocket 3]

In the battle between ego and reason to control a person's thoughts, words and actions - bet on ego.

Intelligence has little to do with it. Ego has plenty to do with it.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[jakee 1,271]

Quote

In the battle between ego and reason to control a person's thoughts, words and actions - bet on ego.

Intelligence has little to do with it. Ego has plenty to do with it.

And your reason for saying that is?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[lawrocket 3]

Why would a person refuse to acknowledge a contrary fact? We are not robots.

Changing one's mind actually can require acknowledgment of being wrong. It also requires respect for other viewpoints and a willingness to hear them.

It's not stupidity. It's dogma and ego plays a pretty big part in it.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[jakee 1,271]

Quote

Why would a person refuse to acknowledge a contrary fact? We are not robots.

How do you decide what is a fact?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

Why would a person refuse to acknowledge a contrary fact? We are not robots.

How do you decide what is a fact?

Does it make you feel warm and fuzzy and matches all your pre-conceived notions about people you've never met in person?

That's a good start. Seems to work here.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

Why would a person refuse to acknowledge a contrary fact? We are not robots.

How do you decide what is a fact?

By either reviewing the evidence and the credibility of it. For example, it has been alleged that I was born on a certain day. I have also been told that I was given a name. While my parents had a long and storied history of lying to me about such things as the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus I still have a high degree of confidence regarding my date of birth and name such that I have adopted it as fact. We tend to do things like this all the time.

Now, if someone was to claim that I was born in Kenya and was given a different name, I may take issue with that. Why does the person care in the first place? Think of the sort of egocentric asshole who would even make such a suggestion.

Now typically I could say that my birthdate and place of birth are nobody's business. But in order to settle it I show her my birth certificate. But egocentric narcissistic dickhead disputes the veracity. The question then becomes "why?"

I personally think that it's not stupidity. Rather there are egocentric narcissitic assholes at work.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[jakee 1,271]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Why would a person refuse to acknowledge a contrary fact? We are not robots.

How do you decide what is a fact?

By either reviewing the evidence and the credibility of it.

And what happens when you don't understand the evidence, don't how how to evaluate it or don't know how to find it?

Quote

For example, it has been alleged that I was born on a certain day. I have also been told that I was given a name. While my parents had a long and storied history of lying to me about such things as the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus I still have a high degree of confidence regarding my date of birth and name such that I have adopted it as fact. We tend to do things like this all the time.

Now, if someone was to claim that I was born in Kenya and was given a different name, I may take issue with that. Why does the person care in the first place? Think of the sort of egocentric asshole who would even make such a suggestion.

Now typically I could say that my birthdate and place of birth are nobody's business. But in order to settle it I show her my birth certificate. But egocentric narcissistic dickhead disputes the veracity. The question then becomes "why?"

I personally think that it's not stupidity. Rather there are egocentric narcissitic assholes at work.

I think you've started talking about something else

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[champu 1]

Quote

The article goes on to note a difference between IQ (intelligence quotient) and an additional measure RQ (rationality quotient). Using both together, for an individual, whereby they show a high and low score of each respectively would explain the many “smart people doing stupid things” examples.

I haven't seen the article, but from my knowledge of IQ tests I would guess that the IQ and RQ tests are essentially both imperfect measures of the same thing that happen to yield varying results because they each have unique biases.

[lawrocket 3]

[Reply]nd what happens when you don't understand the evidence, don't how how to evaluate it or don't know how to find it?

[RMK 3]

It isn’t an article on IQ metrics; it’s an article on the study of the thought processes of those of limited/low intellect.

However, since you ask, most people when referring to IQ tests think or refer to the Stanford–Binet test and scale. There are at least 16, probably over 20 differing tests and scales. For example, admission to Mensa, requires taking a mix of at least 4 differing tests with at least one of the tests being fully non-culturally biased (i.e. it’s all pictures/graphics). You must score in the top 2% of the population and if you fail, you cannot retry the exams for at least 5 years.

For this purpose, it doesn’t really matter the exact numbers; we are discussing those on the low side of the bell curve distribution.

"Pain is the best instructor, but no one wants to attend his classes"

[Skyrad 0]

Quote

They create strongly held stereotypes and then attempt to fit information (which they can’t really comprehend) into a more binary understanding. The result is that they see things only in “white & black” instances without interpretation of anything in between.

Well that would explain why so many people around here bang on about 'good guys and bad guys'.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[jakee 1,271]

Quote

[Reply]nd what happens when you don't understand the evidence, don't how how to evaluate it or don't know how to find it?

Then put my ego aside and say "I don't know."

[Southern_Man 0]

I work with folks with Intellectual Disabilities. There is a vast body of literature about them including research on cognitive process. I'll be interested to see this full article when it is available and see what is different from what is already known.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

They create strongly held stereotypes and then attempt to fit information (which they can’t really comprehend) into a more binary understanding. The result is that they see things only in “white & black” instances without interpretation of anything in between.

Well that would explain why so many people around here bang on about 'good guys and bad guys'.

the other option for Speaker's Corner is that's just the amount of time people are willing to put into a post for a bunch of strangers

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[RMK 3]

Just to be clear, the article and subsequent comments here are all referring to those of lower intellect, but full functioning members of society; not where there is a full disability or retardation – that should never be made light of.

The lower end of the data set discussed here are fully functioning and can perform tasks such as having reading/writing abilities to the extent of being able to fill out a conceal/carry permit form or an NRA membership application. (My bad, did I type that out loud)

"Pain is the best instructor, but no one wants to attend his classes"

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

[Reply]nd what happens when you don't understand the evidence, don't how how to evaluate it or don't know how to find it?

Then put my ego aside and say "I don't know."

And what happens if that starts applying to the majority of discussions / events that are happening around you?

[Skyrad 0]

Quote

Just to be clear, the article and subsequent comments here are all referring to those of lower intellect, but full functioning members of society; not where there is a full disability or retardation – that should never be made light of.

The lower end of the data set discussed here are fully functioning and can perform tasks such as having reading/writing abilities to the extent of being able to fill out a conceal/carry permit form or an NRA membership application. (My bad, did I type that out loud)

Quote

In brief, those of limited intelligence rely more heavily on developed mental stereotypes...

Quod erat demonstrandum.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[jakee 1,271]

Quote

You have just provided an example of the topic.

I could have said that to you after any one of your posts thus far in the thread, I thought a discussion would be more interesting. Don't be a dick, it doesn't suit you.

Quote

Quote

And what happens if that starts applying to the majority of discussions / events that are happening around you?

Answer - I don't know.

You don't know how you would react in that scenario? Then you don't know it's all about ego for everyone. You are also absolutely not unintelligent, so using your own thought processes as a basis for how unintelligent people are likely to think in certain situation makes very little sense - especially as a rebuttal for a study that actually has looked at how unintelligent people think.

You might argue that being so keen to reject the evidence out of hand in favour of your own preconceived notion is evidence in favour of your preconceived notion of ego being the driving factor but that would not be correct. No one is saying that smart people don't use black/white shortcuts as well (and quite possibly because of ego in many cases), just that slow people are likely to be forced to use more of them if they want to have a feeling of being able to properly comprehend the world around them. I don't think that's neccessarily egotistical, it's natural. Human beings have a very strong drive to make sense of the world around us (even stupid humans are very, very clever by nature's standards) and as the modern world becomes more complex that task gets ever more difficult.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?