The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity

Sometimes stupidity is indistinguishable from pure evilness. That's why I believe it's more practical to focus on removing inefficiency instead of corruption.

I suspect that humanities worst moments come from a combination of evil and stupidity, even if that stupidity is just a failure to predict what your actions will actually mean for others.

Some very apt descriptions there, good read. Interesting and pithy lens to view the world through.

One dimension that struck me as missing: What about indifference? Surely there's a difference in quality between say helplessness and indifference, even if it isn't captured in the win/loss-for-me/you framework.

Many behaviours can be explained by indifference, as it's not obviously right or even rational to think of the Total Humanity Utility as a goal-in-itself. There seems to be an assumption of utilitarism hidden there.

Despite this problem the view described here seems to me to shine light on many phenomena of human existance.

I come across this maybe once a year while browsing the internet, and I'm always impressed. The author's ability to get just the right mix of resigned dry wit so he doesn't come across as cocky or a jerk or a defeatist... it's rather incredible.

There's gems in there, too -

> A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses.

Indeed. You can deal with a person who wants to gain, and is comfortable gaining at your expense. They're somewhat predictable, so you can deal with them if you're careful. But the person who is a whirlwind of calamity - making his own life worse and others around - you can't deal with that guy.

The author continues:

> A stupid person is the most dangerous type of person.

And then, and I love this -

> A stupid person is more dangerous than a bandit.

Indeed! Bandits are unpleasant, but usually easily understandable. With appropriate cautions, you might even be able to transact with a bandit for a short time if it's necessary. But like the author says, the man who does stupid things is much more dangerous.

With a bandit, it's possible to assess what you have and where you're at that they might want to take from you, and to take precautions. With the man who randomly breaks things for no reason, no such precaution can be taken because even the most basic, unevaluated, routine action could be bungled leading to bad results for all inclined.

Gosh, I always enjoy reading this piece, even though I've seen it a bunch. I should send it to some people who might have not have read it.

As a basis for a World View and model for conducting one's affairs this is pretty hard to beat. The Second Basic Law and σ in particular also gives plenty of material for more comtemplative moments.