Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

greaterwrong.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 307 posts

Re: Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

#101

Post by TallGuyShort »

henrikschroder wrote: post #97
grenoire wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there is too much information around for the average person to filter and process and digest. All three are important parts of living in a society and it looks to me like even with e.g. economic issues alone, it's just very hard for (to be fair) anybody to keep up. In turn, people reach out to conspiracy theories to simplify the world around them with obvious answers and explanations. My theory, sort of.

There was research last year that showed that cynicism is a way for less intelligent people to protect themselves from being taken advantage of. Basically, if you know you're not smart enough to figure out if other people are genuine or out to scam you, defaulting to assuming that all strangers are lying is a winning strategy. The same kind of logic fuels conspiracy-minded people. The one thing they all have in commo…

That makes a lot of sense. I'd be curious for a link or reference to that research if you remember any details.

Re: Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

#102

Post by mistermann »

grenoire wrote: post #42
TallGuyShort wrote: post #32

I've engaged a few flat earthers to actually listen to their arguments and show them my own evidence that it's real (locating amateur radio satellites using data shared by people around the globe and demonstrating the doppler effect on them). The response strikes me as being indicative of mental illness. And I don't mean that as an insult - I mean that when confronted with that they're clearly irrational. And somethi…

I think there is too much information around for the average person to filter and process and digest. All three are important parts of living in a society and it looks to me like even with e.g. economic issues alone, it's just very hard for (to be fair) anybody to keep up. In turn, people reach out to conspiracy theories to simplify the world around them with obvious answers and explanations. My theory, sort of.

I think many neurotypical people suffer from the same information overload, in that they treat mainstream media news the same way that many conspiracy theory enthusiasts treat their "news": zero skepticism (someone I trust said it is true, so I will accept it as true, regardless of the quality of or existence of evidence).

Now obviously there's a significant difference in degree of accuracy between the two worlds, but then one shouldn't forget that they're not dealing with equally difficult stories to investigate, or have access to the same investigative resources. Regardless, the same illogical behavior can be observed in both types, and an overload of complexity & information sounds like a very reasonable explanation.

Re: Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

#103

Post by thotsBgone »

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #47
wobbegongz wrote: post #37

In the past people believed in lots of stupid things like "god exists", "the poor deserves its situation and the rich has earned its situation", "hatred toward blacks, Jews, neighbor country, homosexuals, handicapped and many more", "kings are good and democracy bad", "the strong country has a right to invade the week country", "the rich are evil and the poor saints" and so one. So I think the idea that stupidity has…

> "the strong country has a right to invade the week country" Indeed they do. But not the month country. I mean, maybe they have the right to, but it'd be foolish. And invading the year country would be outright suicide.

Go back to reddit zoomer.

Re: Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

#104

Post by koyote »

Flankk wrote: post #7

> I am acquiring greater wisdom with age as I ought, but the average age of the typical person I encounter stays the same so they cannot keep up. I’m noticing the contrast increasing but misattributing it. My money is on this. You wouldn't typically argue with a kid, but on the internet you probably are.

I agree and I'd like to go further:

If you're out and about and a person comes up to you and shouts about how the world is controlled by goats in cow suits, your brain will quickly assess the trustworthiness of this person. Is the person wearing clothes? Is the person rambling/coherent/visibly intoxicated? Are the person's eyes shifting around/manic looking? Does the person smell weird? (I am making up random examples, but I am sure there are many things that every person will look at to gauge trustworthiness).

Most of the above goes out of the window on the internet. Even the shouting part does not usually manifest itself into a website comment (ALL CAPS is less offensive than someone actually shouting in your ear/many people don't know the connotation).

Re: Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

#105

Post by mdorazio »

grenoire wrote: post #42
TallGuyShort wrote: post #32

I've engaged a few flat earthers to actually listen to their arguments and show them my own evidence that it's real (locating amateur radio satellites using data shared by people around the globe and demonstrating the doppler effect on them). The response strikes me as being indicative of mental illness. And I don't mean that as an insult - I mean that when confronted with that they're clearly irrational. And somethi…

I think there is too much information around for the average person to filter and process and digest. All three are important parts of living in a society and it looks to me like even with e.g. economic issues alone, it's just very hard for (to be fair) anybody to keep up. In turn, people reach out to conspiracy theories to simplify the world around them with obvious answers and explanations. My theory, sort of.

I think this theory is missing a component: the erosion of respect for experts. It at least seems like pre-internet, when people didn't understand the world around them they would default to trusting what scientists/doctors/researchers told them was true. But today, we've gone so far down the disinformation "fake news" rabbit hole that a large portion of the general public, at least in America, just straight up doesn't trust what actual experts have to say on many topics.

Re: Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

#106

Post by ravitation »

wobbegongz wrote: post #37

In the past people believed in lots of stupid things like "god exists", "the poor deserves its situation and the rich has earned its situation", "hatred toward blacks, Jews, neighbor country, homosexuals, handicapped and many more", "kings are good and democracy bad", "the strong country has a right to invade the week country", "the rich are evil and the poor saints" and so one. So I think the idea that stupidity has…

I think this is undoubtedly a relatively large contributor to the perception of modern stupidity.

Additionally, I read it as part of some of the written hypotheses, but, upon rereading, I don't know that the exact conditions are captured particularly well in any of them.

Re: Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

#107

Post by Nasrudith »

java-man wrote: post #2

It is a fun read. But what we really need (to convert this to science) is to measure the objective metrics. For example, measure the number of articles in [insert social network name] for claims that contradict established scientific laws (let's say, physics). I know it'll be more difficult to do for economy or sociology, but at least with physics we might have a large body of well established and experimentally conf…

I suspect articles would be where you would go for "bullshit" as perhaps slightly more rigoriously quantifiable - stupidity is more a "in the wild thing". Generally bullshit is defined as a lack of concern for the truth vs what sounds good and supports the desired goal. A few axioms/metrics for "bullshit" for example:

1. Counts of unironic/unacknowledged logical fallacies - discussing psychology of loss aversion wouldn't be an example or even a strategic examination of loss aversion's performance and concluding it say has a niche. But stating it is better to not make an additional $10k without extra work or opportunity costs and pay a higher marginal tax rate on it? Flagged. 2. Claims which when examined closely are vacuous (having no meaning). 3. Unsupported claims which upon closer examination do not justify assertions but merely reassert more furiously. 4. Evasive chosen definitions that refuse to stay consistent as either specific or general in classifications.

One gap with it is a matter of hypotheticals and implications - even a theoretical model contrary to reality can be a demonstration against a hypothesis.

A fuzzier/snarkier example at a field level is a "SCI/Gen test" where even experts cannot distinguish noise from data indicates a lack of knowledge - although in a more positive sense it could just be a field's complexity being high such as description of a drug which interacts with proteins. I am no expert in it but given some infamously whimsical names they might not realize that a drug's complex organic compound that binds to the "Romero" prions wasn't a real specific subtype of prion without looking it up - let alone that the drug wouldn't bind with it let alone without unacceptable side effects.

Re: Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

#109

Post by contravariant »

Raphmedia wrote: post #56

I would be curious about what is the author's definition of the word "stupidity"? "Lack of judgment"? "Lack of knowledge"? "Unintelligent"? "Mental slowness in speech or action"? Perhaps, "Lack of education"? In a lot of the points, the author uses "smart" as the opposite of "stupid". Smart is also a vague word that comes up with multiple definitions such as "having or showing a high degree of mental ability", "styli…

It's disappointing how many examples in this thread are about lack of knowledge (or even just disagreeable beliefs).

If intelligence is taken to be about manipulating the world around you then this is to some extent connected to the ability to obtain and verify knowledge but the ability to act upon that knowledge is far more important. True stupidity is almost by definition self-defeating.

While I will admit that some supposed signs of stupidity whole 'flat earth' movement is catastrophically misguided, it is a bit sad to see people dismiss it with arguments that are somehow even worse than the ones given by the people who have somehow convinced themselves the earth isn't spherical (often with quite sophisticated, but wrong, arguments).

Re: Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

#110

Post by henrikschroder »

seanalltogether wrote: post #62
TallGuyShort wrote: post #32

I've engaged a few flat earthers to actually listen to their arguments and show them my own evidence that it's real (locating amateur radio satellites using data shared by people around the globe and demonstrating the doppler effect on them). The response strikes me as being indicative of mental illness. And I don't mean that as an insult - I mean that when confronted with that they're clearly irrational. And somethi…

I would not be surprised to learn that flat earth theories started as satire online, but it slowly turned into a theory for people who didn't know any better. I would also not be surprised to learn that QANON simply started out as trolling and morphed into the weird following it now has.

In the case of q-anon, that is exactly what happened. 4chan trolls were throwing spaghetti at the wall, seeing what would stick. Q-anon happened to stick, and off the rails it went.

There's been a bunch of people who have had "control" over Q in the past few years. The current Q, Jim Watkins, is thankfully the laziest and most boring of them, and hopefully the entire thing fades away after the election.

Post reply on HN