I have noticed that alot of people think the majority of people are stupid based on the things they read online or maybe even experience in real life but I think that there is better explanation than just assuming people are stupid.
A common example people bring up to show that other people are stupid is mentioning how a lot of people believe in conspiracy theories ( such as Qanon or Flat earth) and point out how they are objectively false therefore the people that believe it are stupid.
However when you examine these beliefs in more depth there is obviously some amount of internal logic that is used to justify these beliefs to themselves and others in the group.
You can go to flat earthers forum and they can give huge amounts of “evidence” about how light shouldn’t be visible after 50 kms if the earth was round or how in Qanon there are probably people who have whole boards detailed with connections between how and where democrats participate in satanic rituals but my point is that all conspiracy theories tend to form one cohesive narrative like a collective story that are building.
To be able to make a story that is this detailed it definitely required some amount of forethought and reasoning to make it so everyone in the group reaches the same collective understanding.
This then might lead you to ask why are people susceptible to these ideas and what makes them stick. Well I think that it boils down to three different things.
- Our collective feeling that things aren’t going well
- Our general distrust in current authorities
- Our collective belief that an authority is good/necessary
When you look at how people tend to be influenced into accepting these beliefs it also follows this same general pattern.
- People feel that some part of their life isn’t going well and that current institutions aren’t helping them anymore.
- A guru/influencer shows up and offers advice (sometimes good advice) to fix their problem
- People then start trusting these gurus/influencers and seeing them as authorities
- Finally these people take what these gurus/influencers say at face value and build internal lore for their community that makes sense to them given that they accept what the new authority says as fact.
If you want to tackle the root of what makes people susceptible to these ideas you have to tackle those three things or else people will fall into those same traps just with different authorities saying different things.
Also as a semi-related point there are a million and one things that an individual can choose to focus on and become knowledgable about so whilst some people spend that mental capacity on understanding tech or politics others spend that mental capacity on flat earth theory or UFOs.
Main point:
So all of this is to say I think that people aren’t stupid and that we should not treat them as they are such instead if we understand that they are capable of complex reason but they are starting with different base knowledge it’ll be easier to empathize with others. Also if we want society to be less susceptible to this we need to fix one or all of the three things I mentioned that makes us susceptible.
It’s anecdotal, but every Qanon individual I meet is definitely dumb as shit.
Edit: I live in Idaho so I have met a lot of them.
Would you say that they at least can be smart in other areas though. Like personal hobbies that they have?
Honestly it’s hard to say since their entire personality usually revolves around QAnon or to a lesser extent their beard. Can someone be smart about their personal hobby of bearding?
If it requires alot of domain knowledge and skill why not?
Hell, barbers exist! I’m sure there are hobbyist barbers out there, right?
I once knew a guy who did beard modeling on the side - pretty cool dude actually, but def not a QAnoner haha
I think your fundamental premise is flawed, as the believers of conspiracy theories are rarely involved in building the backbone framework. Its usually a con man who knows exactly how to convince those who want to believe that the things they don’t understand are just proof of their brilliance, if you shine an oblique light on it.
Can con men grift intelligent people? Sure.
Do con men prefer dupes? Ya huh.
Someone that is intelligent in one area can be ignorant in another so fooling people can just be a matter of subject area.
Also a con man can convince an individual at first but for it to be reinforcing there needs to be a community of people that are reinforcing the ideas and in that process build ontop of what the con man introduced.
You seem to be suggesting that lots of people aren’t stupid, they’re just gullible. I’d argue that the end result is the same.
Hey I find myself naturally gullible, and I don’t appreciate this reduction.
98% of gullible people do though, that’s just science. What’s your problem?
The end result is the same but the solution would be different.
Surely the solution is the same for both - developing the ability to think critically?
If you say that someone is stupid it seems you are suggesting that something is fundamentally off with their ability to reason (ie intelligence). If it is a fundamental problem like that then developing the ability to think critically would do diddly squat. In that scenario (If everyone was stupid) the best and only thing you could do would be to ignore them and dismiss their views.
Edit: I am not completely sure in this comment so I am just putting that out there.
Yeah, just spitballing here myself. Critical thinking is a skill though, it can be developed by almost anyone.
Think of it this way - humanity is a giant mass of people all ripe to be conned, ripped off, and robbed by people who are marginally smarter than average, but also amoral and nasty. It could be scientology, an email from a Nigerian prince, or the cult of Trump, it doesn’t matter. If critical thinking can be taught then that’s a defense against the manipulators and scammers, the only defense that works.
The flip side is that you can’t use reason to talk someone out of a bad position when they didn’t use reason to get into it in the first place.
I find this argument persuasive but I think it’s incomplete. I can’t complete it, but here’s what I like about your rhetoric:
When I fell for right-wing crap, I was snapped out of it when their debate opponent showed them to be spineless, cowardly, and hypocritical. He didn’t say they were, rather used a… tactical approach. To get me to snap out of it and make the conclusion myself.
I especially like the argument that we are all ripe to be conned and critical thinking education can help save us. This mimics the strongest pro-sex education argument. It can prevent abuse.
And on “you can’t use reason” - I’ve recently come across the idea that you can’t logic your way out of mental illnesses, and logic can actually add to the problem. This is… probably also relevant to those who are tricked by this.
Your thoughtful response made me think you’d get a lot out of a guy named Adam Curtis, he makes documentaries for the BBC. This is a good one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzqDMnUG4kk
It’s long, because he’s covering a lot of ground and pulling together a lot of different threads but holy fuck it’s worth the time.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=VzqDMnUG4kk
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
Thank you, I’m glad to watch it and see.
Nah. People are indeed stupid.
However when you examine these beliefs in more depth there is obviously some amount of internal logic that is used to justify these beliefs to themselves and others in the group.
No there isn’t. It looks like logic, but it isn’t. They work backwards, rationalizing conclusions they arrive to emotionally so they can retrofit arguments to justify it, and their “evidence” as you put it is always either full of holes or outright non-falsifiable. There are always glaring flaws in their reasoning but you can’t reason them out of it because the point was always to support their preconceived notions by any means necessary. Because they’re that fucking stupid. Your entire premise is wrong.
You’re going the extra mile to show empathy to people that most likely won’t exercise it with you and will gladly kill you if you belong to one of their hated groups.
I couldn’t care less that they’re intelligent. In fact, that would make it worse. They’re part of what’s wrong with the world, and they refuse to do better even when faced with evidence and reasoned arguments that their intelligence should suffice them to understand.
I have zero fucks to give for such people.
Since this was a post about acknowledging the good in others and how that should be thought about more I intentionally withheld my beliefs on how I personally deal with those people, but in reality I am not against intentionally disengaging and avoiding those people in certain scenarios. What I am trying to get across is that the animosity shown towards them (even though it can be justified) is making the problem worse not better. And strategic empathy can make a lot of difference.
FYI: yes I belong to atleast one of those hated groups
Edit: removed unecessary period.
It doesn’t matter if you treat people who believe in conspiracies with decency because they will imagine fake slights against you and use them to justify their hate anyways.
And I fundamentally disagree that people are smart generally anyways. Just because they can parrot a flawed line of reasoning they read online doesn’t make them smart. Especially when those lines of logic fall apart when challenged and cause their believers to cling even tighter
strategic empathy can make a lot of difference.
Only if you find a person for whom empathy also works. Otherwise, is lost effort.
And if you belong to a hated group, then you’re willingly turning yourself into a martyr. In spite of all the bullshit religions teach about it, that’s not something good.
Start with who you can and work from there.
The animosity shown towards them (even though it can be justified) is making the problem worse not better.
This falls into basically the same trap that climate change has been in for decades. PR campaign to make individual people feel bad about a problem that is ultimately created and made worse by the very small number of people in power. Nothing we can do will make it better. The people in power are actively trying to make it worse, because it helps them strengthen their power. But convince the individuals at the bottom that it is their fault and that they can fix it if they just wanted to, and suddenly none of the focus is on the real problem.
Those people are stupid. It is getting worse. That is how the powerful want all of us to be.
I can’t tell if you are agreeing or disagreeing with my previous comment but as for the power structures I view people that have these beliefs as the people that are at the bottom and that people that benefit from these beliefs (CEOs, Governments, etc.) as people at the top.
Therefore the action that people can be taking to make things better is building bridges with the people at the bottom in smart and targeted ways.
I don’t think I entirely agree with your point here and don’t fully understand what you are trying to say as it seems like you went on a bit of a tangent at the end there.
As for people not actually being stupid I tend to agree. If you could objectively test the inner working of their brain you would likely find that it is working just fine. They still have the ability to process language, spatial awareness and all that good stuff that makes a person smarter than most other creatures on Earth.
But due to some cognitive dissonance there is some tidbit of information their minds absolutely can not reconcile that leads to seemingly weird conclusions to a person that doesn’t share the fundamental understanding of that same information. All of humanity would probably run into this same problem if aliens suddenly appeared and explained the way things really are despite it being completely at odds with everything we know to be true.
If I were to simplify it I’d say people aren’t stupid just because they have incorrect beliefs. Even the incorrect beliefs that people do have tend to have internally coherent reasoning.
Conspiracy theorists tend to refute your position. They can hold simultaneously mutually contradictory beliefs.
Mutually contradictory beliefs can happen because we don’t have infinite attention. I can agree with something today and three years from now agree to something else that might be contradicting to that old belief. If it is never pointed out and is not relevant to that individual then those beliefs don’t get challenged and even if they do they are soon forgotten because they are not reinforced by not facing those conflicting beliefs together alot or because their social circle doesn’t reinforce thinking about the contradiction.
Edit: wording
No, they will actively hold mutually contradicting beliefs and spout them back and forth, and refuse to back down on them when it’s pointed out they contradict each other.
That is not the same as changing your mind after a few years and new information coming along.
Ex falso quodlibet. Start with any false statement and you can coherently and logically reason anything from it. That doesn’t make these conclusions correct… (the implication would be technically correct, but that’s not the same as the conclusion being correct).
So arguing they’re not stupid because they can logically reason is kind of stupid in itself, because these people still believe wrong facts to be true
People aren’t stupid, but they are gullible and susceptible to grift. Belief in others is a powerful thing
So all of this is to say I think that people aren’t stupid and that we should not treat them as they are such instead if we understand that they are capable of complex reason but they are starting with different base knowledge it’ll be easier to empathize with others.
We’ve reached a point in society where reasoning with people on the fringe is basically a huge fucking waste of time. These people don’t want their mind changed on any subject and are some of the most steadfast examples of belief perseverance you’ll run into. Literally providing evidence contradicting their point of view hardens their resolve in their false opinions.
Life’s short man. You do you but I’m not giving these people an once of respect or a moment of my time.
Oh, well. I told my Q older sister she was an idiot and I didn’t want to speak to her anymore about two years ago because she devoted herself to insulting me and saying I was going to pay for not following her nonsense about stockpiling I can’t remember what for the reset or something or other. I guess I should have told her she was intelligent but delusional and I didn’t want to speak to her anymore. In the end, I don’t think there’s much of a difference here in the day-to-day business of dealing with Q people who get in your face with this nonsense. They have the potential to be annoying, hurtful, and unwanted in my personal and social life.
Sorry that happened to you. You might be interested in the QAnon Anonymous podcast. They tracked the phenomenon when it was active and continue to track and study contemporary conspiratorial movements. I understand a lot of people in your situation email them to say that they better understand what happened to their loved ones from listening to their show. Or, maybe that’s not appealing for you because of the same reasons. Anyway, I like it and think they do a great job. It’s entertaining as hell if sometimes a little horrifying.
I’m glad it’s helpful to you to listen to it. I learned about the cult when family members started acting “funny,” watched some documentaries, probably listened to that podcast, and read up on the phenomenon. Now, over 2 years later, I’m what you might call “over it.” At some point I just accepted the loss of those people and moved on. Everyone’s experience with this is unique because, if you have to eliminate them from your life, it’s like they died, so it’s a grieving process that’s complex because it’s “like they died” but they’re very much still alive. I’ve gone through that and come out the other side. The topic here, about whether or not they are “stupid,” is interesting, but it’s an exercise in navel gazing. If some deranged person who has become absorbed by a cult starts being abusive to you it’s up to you to get out of that situation, hopefully with help from supportive friends and family. At that point, it’s not healthy to stick with them and keep listening to their delusions. These people can be dangerous on rare occasions and I think a few news headlines speak for themselves. To ponder their level of intelligence, to me, does not seem to be productive or practical. It’s interesting as an academic exercise, but it doesn’t add much to people’s every day struggles with this social problem. There’s also the factor of looking at colloquial language for what it is. When I make a mistake, I call myself “stupid.” Am I referring to my IQ? No.
it’s like they died
I’m so sorry that this happened to you, once again. This is something that I think I’ve heard others say and I wouldn’t wish it on anyone. I’ve said many times that I’m grateful that neither of my parents were on facebook during the lockdowns, thus sparing me. I wish you all the best.
Stupid people are really important for companies. Their growth strategy is to market it to them, the gullible and the stupid.
I don’t think you’re wrong.
I like to look at this through the cult lens though, (because that’s the process outlined in your 4 bullet points, that’s how you get sucked into a cult.) With that, it’s not a matter of empathizing with the people in the cult so much as I don’t want the cult to exist in the first place to suck people in.
I think I personally call people stupid as a frustration outlet, usually after surrendering them to their own hopelessly staunch position. I try not to do this to their face though, because for all I know that’ll just make them double down again. Cognitive dissonance is a hell of a drug, and insults tend to only make it stronger.
I think the majority of people are at least ignorant, but it’s mostly ignorance of the consequences of whatever action or topic is at hand. Most people don’t know most things, so logically, most people must be ignorant of most things. The trick is realizing that I am also no exception: I also don’t know most things. From that, I can extrapolate how a cult leader or cultish ideology may feed on my paranoias to create cognitive dissonance within me. (One thing I can’t figure out how to mention is that loneliness as well as feeling lost plays a major part in this process)
I guess the point of my rambling is that while empathy is good as a starting position, I think those under the hypnotization of cognitive dissonance need to be shown the dissonance so that they can snap out of it when they choose to (gently, though, certainly don’t call them stupid). This is overly simplistic and doesn’t cover anything like the issue of leaving false beliefs involving getting rid of entire social circles formed around and maintained by the false beliefs though.
Tldr; I don’t think you’re wrong, but I think this is only 1 side of the entire issue. I think the entire issue spans cult like recruitment and maintenance tactics, at the very least, if not more that I haven’t covered here.
I like how you went into more detail about how to break these patterns. Which is starting with what they already believe and showing the contradictions. I gave you an upvote.
I generally agree with the sentiment, but it’s not going to stop my gut reactions when people start talking things that I find ridiculous. Yes there’s a thought process there with some kind of logic and reasoning… but if you think the earth is flat, your logic and reasoning isn’t very good. Which is just a nicer way of saying someone is stupid lol. I don’t think the majority of people are stupid at all, I look at it like a bell curve and therefore the bulk of us are pretty average intelligence.
To your point though and along the same lines, I like to keep this in mind- a hunter/gatherer living 10,000 years ago has never seen a cell phone, has limited communication skills, math skills, no real concept of how big the earth is or that the sun is a star, by most measurable standards they probably peaked at the intelligence that a child has today. Don’t quote me, this is all just generalizations. But they lived every single day of their lives thinking and self aware, problem solving and innovating. What sort of knowledge about their world did they have that has been lost along the way? One thing we do know- they knew how to live in harmony with the planet, even if it was the only option. Even if we think we know, essentially none of are are willing to give up the conveniences that make our modern lifestyles possible, so knowing is irrelevant anyway. What else might they have known that we intellectually superior beings today are clueless about?
What does the person living on the street for 10 years know about the world that the stock portfolio manager doesn’t? Something, I’m sure, even if you and I might find it useless.
That’s well said, but I think you’re forgetting about something: it’s one thing to judge a guy based on his beliefs. But it’s his attitude, how he explains his position, how he discusses it is entirely another pair of galoshes, so to speak.
Imagine a guy, who calmly explains that he was doing some research and based on sources he finds credible, he rejects the theory of evolution. You’d probably find such a discussant, and a discussion with him enjoyable, possibly fun, perhaps even enough to revise a few ideas of yours.
Now imagine a guy, who, with fiery eyes and in semi-coherent manner calls you names and insults you the moment you observe that the evolution is real. “Okkkkkkkkk…”
The fact is, that whether we come from the world of pure faith, or follow cold scientific model, at some point we all have to put our trust that some axioms given to us by other people are, well, “axioms” - things we don’t question, that we take for granted. In reality, there are no axioms. Just some approximations we can’t deny. Yet.
I agree that it is easier to engage with someone if they aren’t shouting you down all the time but sometimes that attitude in and of itself can come from beliefs that individual has. For example if a person is christian and they believe that all gay people are choosing to be sinners therefore they are choosing to be bad then it makes sense that they would act more hostile to people that are gay.
That behaviour isn’t justifiable and shouldn’t be accepted but that is also a tactic that gurus/influencers can use to isolate the people in those groups. You convince them of something that makes them act hostile towards a specific group in turn isolating them even more.
And as for the scientfic model yes it is true that there are axioms that we put our trust in but it isn’t done unreasonably. A key idea in science is to trust but verify. This means that you can be concious in who you trust in and it is never absolute.
Do flat-eathers actually exist?
It looks to me it’s something so incredibly rare that we only hear about it because the internet amplifies the voice of that one crazy person so much that the entire world starts to hear it. I would be really surprised if there are even 1000 of them.
My ex girlfriend’s mother once started a fight about this at the Thanksgiving dinner table. I don’t know how many of them are out there, but they definitely exist.
Some of the conventions draw close to 1000 on their own, world wide the number must be greater.
I think this is a good mindset to have. Dismissing every conspiracy/dissenting opinion as “crazy” just serves to further alienate and radicalize the people who believe them.
From what I’ve seen, there’s usually an intuitive (but misguided) reasoning behind conspiracies. Like, it’s easy to call everyone who’s worried about 5G a senseless fucking idiot, but 5G signals are literally microwave radiation. It’s not that much of a stretch to assume they could be harmful. They just miss the part about the power of the radiation not being strong enough to do any damage.
