How do you define 'stupidity?' | Forum

Accepting consensus reality without skepicism and with no effort put into first hand observation and verification/falsification. In other words,  accepting what people claim (bleat) instead of actively going through the process to ensure the information you have is accurate.

Allowing anyone else to set your frame for you.

Knowingly opting for a counterproductive choice.

@Frater
Do the wise 'fool' or are the less clever just unaware?

@ Hartnell
Your first example = gullible

2nd example = ignorant

3rd...
Exactly what I was looking for. TY.

^ Kudos on that.

@ Frater
You didn't answer my question.
'Don't expect it' implies ignorance. That's not stupidity.

I asked do the wise 'fool,' meaning do wise people deliberately intend to fool the less clever?
Or are the less clever 'fooled' by their own un-awareness, meaning their lack of knowledge inevitably sets them up for being 'fooled.'

Maybe you should define 'fool' in your contextual meaning as well.

Interestingly all of your definitions include other people, implying that if a person is on their own, remote and detached from people and society they can in no way be stupid.

@Hartwell,

'Allowing anyone else to set your frame for you': don't parents do this to their children all the time? Telling someone not to run with scissors say. Is a child stupid if they belief their parent that running with scissors is not a great idea? Are all children by default stupid because they listen to their parents and have baths when they don't want to and go to bed on time when they don't want to?

Also if a person is a student, they will at some point have to take someone's word for something. Say in Science and Engineering feilds, if every student had to discover how something worked for themselves instead of accepting a law of science/outcome of a study, surely that would massively slow down all forms of science and engineering. Also, the people at the heads of their fields would be by your definition stupid as they would be using research and data collected by others and whilst they may check various sources, they wouldn't have redone all of that research themselves.

Well... When my ex-husband and I first got married we went to Vanuatu for our Honeymoon. It was storming on the island so we had to fly around a couple of times which was fascinating - black sky... blue sky... black sky... blue sky! Anyway, we were turning around in the blue sky over the blue water and I looked down and saw the biggest shark I had ever seen it my life. It was fucking huge! I was so excited and I was pressed against the glass and I screamed for my husband and was like,"Look at the size of that shark!" and then I said, "Oh wait... Or is it just the shadow of the plane?" And my husband sits back and gives me the WTF look and states, "It;s the plane... Debby!"

Whoops! My bad... It was hilarious! It just looked like a huge shark swimming beneath the plane (at the speed of a plane... : /  ) and I was so excited - it was only a 737 so half the plane would have heard me. It's a good thing I can laugh at myself. : )

Anyway, that was pretty stupid...

@Kat: "Interestingly all of your definitions include other people, implying that if a person is on their own, remote and detached from people and society they can in no way be stupid."

Not all of them, look again. Secondly, given Satanism's emphasis on individualism vs herd mentality I don't see how the 'implication' can be a surprise at all.

"My brand of Satanism is the ultimate conscious alternative to herd mentality and institutionalized thought. It is a studied and contrived set of principles and exercises designed to liberate individuals from a contagion of mindlessness that destroys innovation." -- LaVey

So on the 'implication' -- like no shit Sherlock.

Re:frame

A (social) frame is anything which sets the context of an interaction and how it's interpreted as well as acceptable behavior for the participants. As they say, "He who controls the frame controls the game." The frame in your first example of the parent and child is a parent-child frame! It's that frame which allows those kinds of interactions at all.

Re: the student. I don't do the research all over again, but I do test to see if the information is accurate. If a chemistry book says that chemical reaction will occur when chemical X and Y are combined, then dammit, I do exactly that to see what happens. Until I test it out and see for myself, I consider it just something someone said, a possibility to try, something suggested but unknown until verified.

@Kat

Here's a better example of not letting someone else set the frame for you.

http://thenarcissistswife.com/...ntastical-delusions/

@Kat
I like your observation that stupidity does not need to include other people. Do you have a defining characteristic to identify stupidity?

@Frater
You successfully found another way to avoid my direct questions, again.

Give something practical I can use; not abstract ideas.
This is a process of identification.

Doing something stupid would imply some degree of knowledge and understanding yet going against that knowledge or understanding for some reason. If you don't have the knowledge or understanding it would fall under ignorance as stated in earlier posts here.

Many a stupid action has followed words like “hold my beer and watch this”, be it in a drunken state while trying for attention or just to outdo a preceding act. There are those who think that they are exceptions to the rule but that falls more under delusional than stupidity, also covered earlier.

There are some times when the understanding and reasoning is hampered by additional sources like a drunken stupor. This is where a person is placed into a situation where they normally might of known better but their faculties fail them due to an added substance or mental issue.

So technically it can't be stupidity unless the person should of known better based on their intelligence, understanding and reasoning.

Many stupid statements happen when people try to redefine facts to fit an outcome they would prefer versus an outcome shown by the facts. Some of these redefinitions are stated as comedy but if a person was to make the statement and believe it, then the statement has lost the comic value and the person is laughed in it's place.

Frater,,, first up is this a question you want Padowan to reply to or are you testing under the header of this post?

Quote from FraterLuciferi Padowan If you have enemies how would you treat them?

If it is just to see if he is stupid enough to take the bait then I am sorry for interrupting.

If it is a bait based example then it is well placed as replying truthfully to this could be a stupid act based on how much detail was given.

I mostly use the word 'stupid' in relation to intelligence. So even among 10 fairly clever people, one would still be the stupidest/least intelligent.

But of course, being a self-aware person, I try my best not to be stupid - neither relatively nor absolutely.
I'd say that impulsivity, quick acting without thinking it through, is responsible for a number of idiotic actions. So a good way to avoid the sin of stupidity is simple... think.

@nith
Do you have an observable/track able trait to identify stupidity. So far I've received abstract ideas and situational context.
I have asked because it is harder to identify than people believe.

So far we have a consensus of 'having knowledge but not using it or using it counter productively.'

@DyingPhoenix
I agree the truly stupid do act impulsively; acting without thought of consequence.

@frater
How will I recognize an enemy?

By the way, nith, I'm a woman. ;)

@Padowan: Only by technicality. You're a lady neeeejah