In the last post I overviewed stupidity that causes socio-cultural harm and if left unchecked can lead to totalitarian systems of manipulation and control. According to the Cipolla quadrant scheme, I interpret the world being run by a small group of the Bandits with lots of stupid people supporting them. And many who may not be stupid that have been coopted to be lesser bandits themselves by following a socio-Darwinian ‘myth of survival of the fittest mentality’ that makes them self-centered. The givers struggle to make a difference, often at a cost to themselves, while the intelligent group are suppressed or ignored. The good news is that large numbers of stupid people are waking up to what is going on and finally starting to listen to the intelligent group and the givers about making a difference to improve the world.
“Information is not knowledge. The only source of knowledge is experience. You need experience to gain wisdom” Einstein.
Wisdom is being discerning of all knowledge. Most stupid people are not dumb or idiotic. (There are some who are and they are merely lost causes for the short term and will go along with the majority when change comes.) The bulk of the stupid, simply have locked their beliefs into what has been termed ‘The myth of the given.’ “It’s not what you know that gets you into trouble, but what you do know that just ain’t so” Josh Billings. In this case, stupidity therefore is a description of lack of discernment and lack of critical thinking, and simple acceptance of truth as it has been given to them! As I describe often in this blog, this describes our cultural upbringing where we believe authority figures that condition us with certain beliefs that define our worldviews, that in turn leads us to accept the inconsistencies in our societies all around the world. For example, most people know that humanity cannot keep living a consumer society but we somehow keep rationalizing that change for the better would be more painful than maintaining a destructive path. What I think makes most people stupid, and why there are so many of them, is their stubborn unwillingness to consciously to look outside their rigid belief systems or be willing to comprehend different perspectives of reality. Instead remaining fixed within the conditioned reality that they accept as absolute truth. But can people just suddenly change from being stupid to becoming awakened. Yes! Sometimes all it needs is a revelation caused by some form of cognitive dissonance that they can no longer explain away.
One of the problems with modern social media is that everyone can express their opinions in a global public format. In earlier times a person could express an opinion, but only to the people they knew directly. Confirmation bias was limited to the news format that expressed their beliefs and knowing that format gave listeners clear insight into their beliefs. Social media on the other hand allows all manner of ‘expert’ opinion to be expressed with little idea of the validity of such opinions. And the saddest part is how easy it is to get people on board with an idea by using simple slogans and memes that can arise and go viral within hours. It’s one of the reasons that so much polarization exists as mainstream media outlets promogulated one narrative and alternate outlets offer another, each proposing to offer the truth about the reality of any situation. It used to be that conspiracy theorists were relegated to the realms of the ridiculous, but now it is a term used for anyone not following a mainstream narrative on any idea. What I find fascinating is that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is contemplating ‘misinformation and disinformation’ as future domestic terrorism categories. Now this is Orwellianism at its finest!
I’ve been reading a lot of philosophical sites about what is reason and what is opinion. What I found intriguing was the argument that only experts can offer true reason since they have the background knowledge to fall back on and that we must trust them when they speak out in public forums. What was never said was, what happens only select experts are called upon that support a mainstream or political narrative only and other experts that have contradictory conclusions are ignored or censored from participation. One of the fundamental expectations about science is that we have ongoing debates and discussions to uncover factual understandings. Yet, I find it fascinating how many academics now favor censorship of valid scientific and medical perspectives from other experts. I see this as scientism and it is as harmful to free thinking as religious dogmatism was to revolutionary thinking during the Medieval Renaissance.
The Greek philosopher Plato distinguished between opinion or common belief from acknowledged facts. When we say proof, we can only refer that to mathematical logic. The rest of science (in all its disciplines) is about consensus with known information, and that requires an open system of dialogue and discussion. Opinion, however, covers a range from tastes or preferences to beliefs requiring technical expertise (think legal or scientific opinions). My trying to tell you that rice is better than potatoes, or dark chocolate is better than milk chocolate, is a preference no matter what nutritionists might say on any given day in any media format. Social media has created a new kind of ‘amateur expert’ who without real knowledge express their views are gospel. And this is the problem we face with stupidity. Some experts hide behind their qualifications and claim absolute truth without debate (scientism) and lay-people (anyone, including other scientists not in a specific discipline) who do not delve deeply into alternative media, or only alternative media, claim expertise based on authorities they believe. This creates a form of narcissism whenever their opinions are questioned (a form of stupidity as per Cipolla).
“[Narcissists] will not tolerate criticism and can be scathing of anyone who criticizes them. They will often attack and belittle the person who is being critical, instead of dealing with the points the person is making. They do this usually because they have no defense against the criticism, they have been found out. So, it’s easier to destroy the reputation of the critical person instead” David Mc Dermott, ‘What Is Narcissism? A Practical Guide To Protecting Yourself.’
The solution? A willingness to continually observe your own beliefs and to question them, means to remain open-minded but this takes continual effort and metacognition (e.g., see earlier post, The role of Limiting Beliefs and Empowering Beliefs 1 – Becoming Empowered through Metacognition {May 2019). At a deeper level, we must find ways to reassert the primacy of truth and reason in our discourse, and not blind obedience or mindless parroting of MSM memes pushing nefarious narratives. We need to teach our kids how to think for themselves with critical analysis and compassion for differing viewpoints. Then the tools of science: statistics, critical thinking, along with civics and social studies so that they understand the world in which they live with a deep appreciation for the human condition and their role within the natural world. We must also find a way to instill empathy and commitment to the commonwealth for all people, everywhere. And it isn’t just about being open minded, but also not leaping to judgment as soon as a belief is contradicted. Understanding others’ worldviews demands we set aside knee jerk judgments. More on that on the next post.
In the Sustainability degree program that I created and ran, when asked about my goals for the students, I told parents and students that my goal was to have graduates be able to think critically and explain their reasoning while using multiple sources of information concerning environmental issues. In debates, I had them argue for viewpoints they disagreed with so that they would understand why people they had thought stupid could sit down and discuss their perspectives with each other. In my classes I was able to force students to break past their entrenched beliefs. Some had a desperate time doing so, but did eventually and emerged different (and better) for the experience. In society, getting ‘stupid’ relatives, friends, colleagues, and strangers to sit down and earnestly debate for understanding is more difficult – we can’t force them to cooperate. But we can invite them to explain themselves and along the way ask them to sit respectfully to listen to what we have to say. Knowing where entrenched perspectives and beliefs are coming from and being well informed ourselves allows us to find the chinks in their beliefs to induce cognitive dissonance. Doing so with compassion and respect deflates anger and opens up the possibility of dialogue. The really stupid ones will always refuse. But those that are ready will open up. It starts with respect, even if you firmly disagree with another’s perspective. We have to show stupid people that we can listen so that they will do so. The future of all of humanity is at stake.
To Be Continued ………………….
0 Comments