4 ms·

This is one version of a broad category of highly elitist sentiments that is disturbingly common. They all take the form of underestimating a person's "intellig

This is one version of a broad category of highly elitist sentiments that is disturbingly common. They all take the form of underestimating a person's "intelligence" or "worth" based on that person's understanding of one aspect of one system, e.g. computer virus vectors ("only stupid people get viruses"), social engineering ("only stupid people fall for phone scams"), etc. It's poisonous, and pretty obviously immoral, but most of all, it's indicative of ignorance. Experience with people will demonstrate that this sentiment, even stripped of its hatefulness, just isn't factually true.

ndiscussion 6y ago
But actually, stupid people are more likely to get viruses, and I've never fallen for any scams.
- core-questions 6y ago
  How do we feel about some kind of objective standardized test that you'd have to pass in order to be allowed to vote? Should cover some high-school basics as well as an understanding of the published platform for all major candidates in the election.
  - InitialLastName 6y ago
    Places have tried this (look up the history of "literacy tests"), and it mostly functioned as a mechanism to discriminate against voters of certain classes. Long term, if you have a test to vote and, say, people somewhere don't tend to vote the way you like, but you have control of the funding for their education system, it's easy enough to make decisions that net reduce that population's ability to vote.
    - core-questions 6y ago
      > it mostly functioned as a mechanism to discriminate against voters of certain classes Well, we can set the bar wherever we like; the question was ultimately "can we have a bar at all". Since some people seem to think that even asking for ID is too high of a bar, it's clear to me that there's a market into catering to extremely-low-information voters; not that anyone is every going to _do_ a damned thing for them, but you can certainly make hollow promises easily enough. An alternate requirement if we want a higher bar than an academic test would be to require that one own land and have children before you're allowed to vote, or something like that. Perhaps a combination of alternatives could be offered. The question I'm really trying to ask is whether it's at all reasonable to do something to increase the quality of the vote.
      - InitialLastName 6y ago
        >The question I'm really trying to ask is whether it's at all reasonable to do something to increase the quality of the vote. Absolutely. I'm 100% for programs to promote literacy and civic education. Reduce corporate political financing so that politicians _have to_ appeal to their constituencies. Increase the density of elected representatives so that each representative has a constituency small enough for them to actually reasonably represent.
  - striking 6y ago
    How do you feel about the fact that these existed and were outlawed? https://ballotpedia.org/Literacy_as_a_requirement_for_voting https://ballotpedia.org/Literacy_as_a_requirement_for_voting
    - core-questions 6y ago
      Seems like a shame, honestly. The test could certainly have evolved, like IQ tests have, to be less focused on particular cultural knowledge and just be a general test of capability.
  - ndiscussion 6y ago
    Who's "we"? Anyone who's read Plato's Republic knows the dangers of democracy, or is lying to themselves.
  - rascul 6y ago
    Most people of legal age to vote in the US has completed or will soon complete their high school education. If that's not good enough, maybe the problem is the education.
  - mikestew 6y ago
    How do we feel about some kind of objective standardized test that you'd have to pass in order to be allowed to vote? Sure you want that? Because if there are any questions on the test about Jim Crow laws, you're going to fail. https://www.treeoflogic.com/literacy_test.htm https://www.treeoflogic.com/literacy_test.htm
- dbingham 6y ago
  That has actually nothing to do with intelligence and everything to do with experience in certain arenas. You haven't fallen prey to scams because you are experienced with avoiding scams. I guarantee there are people who are a hell of a lot smarter than you, know a hell of a lot more about many areas than you, who have very little experience avoiding internet scams (for one reason or another) who might well fall prey to them. Given enough experience would they learn how to avoid them? Yes. But in the mean time, their lack of that experience does not mean they deserve to fall prey to those scams - nor that we shouldn't go after and punish the scammers.
  - ndiscussion 6y ago
    What does it say about their intelligence that they didn't choose to learn about internet scams, given how devastating they can be?
    - dbingham 6y ago
      It says that they've had better things to do with their time than waste a lot of it on the internet.
      - ndiscussion 6y ago
        Fantastic level of coping skills. I'm too IMPORTANT to be smart!
    - admax88q 6y ago
      What does it say about your intelligence that you didnt choose to learn about diabetes given how devastating it can be?
      - ndiscussion 6y ago
        My BMI is 20 what's yours? https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/lose_wt/BMI/bmicalc.htm https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/lose_wt/BMI/bmi...
sloshnmosh 6y ago
Indeed. It is also common for a victim of fraud or scams to feel embarrassed about falling for a scam. It is not a fault that a person trusts another human, it is an asset. Victim blaming is just as bad as the fraud or crime itself.
Cullinet 6y ago
I suffered a head trauma and subsequent infection that depleted my vocabulary to kindergarten level over 2 weeks and took 5 years to recover from - I can absolutely vouch for the struggle that I experienced with sketchy stuff like this, I felt like I was physically being dragged into a quick sand put every time I came across anything like this and was still fighting my way out the next day. I had a stupidly elite education and prior knowledge didn't count as much as ingrained reflex in saving my butt.

ndiscussion 6y ago

But actually, stupid people are more likely to get viruses, and I've never fallen for any scams.

core-questions 6y ago
How do we feel about some kind of objective standardized test that you'd have to pass in order to be allowed to vote? Should cover some high-school basics as well as an understanding of the published platform for all major candidates in the election.
- InitialLastName 6y ago
  Places have tried this (look up the history of "literacy tests"), and it mostly functioned as a mechanism to discriminate against voters of certain classes. Long term, if you have a test to vote and, say, people somewhere don't tend to vote the way you like, but you have control of the funding for their education system, it's easy enough to make decisions that net reduce that population's ability to vote.
  - core-questions 6y ago
    > it mostly functioned as a mechanism to discriminate against voters of certain classes Well, we can set the bar wherever we like; the question was ultimately "can we have a bar at all". Since some people seem to think that even asking for ID is too high of a bar, it's clear to me that there's a market into catering to extremely-low-information voters; not that anyone is every going to _do_ a damned thing for them, but you can certainly make hollow promises easily enough. An alternate requirement if we want a higher bar than an academic test would be to require that one own land and have children before you're allowed to vote, or something like that. Perhaps a combination of alternatives could be offered. The question I'm really trying to ask is whether it's at all reasonable to do something to increase the quality of the vote.
    - InitialLastName 6y ago
      >The question I'm really trying to ask is whether it's at all reasonable to do something to increase the quality of the vote. Absolutely. I'm 100% for programs to promote literacy and civic education. Reduce corporate political financing so that politicians _have to_ appeal to their constituencies. Increase the density of elected representatives so that each representative has a constituency small enough for them to actually reasonably represent.
- striking 6y ago
  How do you feel about the fact that these existed and were outlawed? https://ballotpedia.org/Literacy_as_a_requirement_for_voting https://ballotpedia.org/Literacy_as_a_requirement_for_voting
  - core-questions 6y ago
    Seems like a shame, honestly. The test could certainly have evolved, like IQ tests have, to be less focused on particular cultural knowledge and just be a general test of capability.
- ndiscussion 6y ago
  Who's "we"? Anyone who's read Plato's Republic knows the dangers of democracy, or is lying to themselves.
- rascul 6y ago
  Most people of legal age to vote in the US has completed or will soon complete their high school education. If that's not good enough, maybe the problem is the education.
- mikestew 6y ago
  How do we feel about some kind of objective standardized test that you'd have to pass in order to be allowed to vote? Sure you want that? Because if there are any questions on the test about Jim Crow laws, you're going to fail. https://www.treeoflogic.com/literacy_test.htm https://www.treeoflogic.com/literacy_test.htm
dbingham 6y ago
That has actually nothing to do with intelligence and everything to do with experience in certain arenas. You haven't fallen prey to scams because you are experienced with avoiding scams. I guarantee there are people who are a hell of a lot smarter than you, know a hell of a lot more about many areas than you, who have very little experience avoiding internet scams (for one reason or another) who might well fall prey to them. Given enough experience would they learn how to avoid them? Yes. But in the mean time, their lack of that experience does not mean they deserve to fall prey to those scams - nor that we shouldn't go after and punish the scammers.
- ndiscussion 6y ago
  What does it say about their intelligence that they didn't choose to learn about internet scams, given how devastating they can be?
  - dbingham 6y ago
    It says that they've had better things to do with their time than waste a lot of it on the internet.
    - ndiscussion 6y ago
      Fantastic level of coping skills. I'm too IMPORTANT to be smart!
  - admax88q 6y ago
    What does it say about your intelligence that you didnt choose to learn about diabetes given how devastating it can be?
    - ndiscussion 6y ago
      My BMI is 20 what's yours? https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/lose_wt/BMI/bmicalc.htm https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/lose_wt/BMI/bmi...

sloshnmosh 6y ago

Indeed. It is also common for a victim of fraud or scams to feel embarrassed about falling for a scam. It is not a fault that a person trusts another human, it is an asset. Victim blaming is just as bad as the fraud or crime itself.

Cullinet 6y ago

I suffered a head trauma and subsequent infection that depleted my vocabulary to kindergarten level over 2 weeks and took 5 years to recover from - I can absolutely vouch for the struggle that I experienced with sketchy stuff like this, I felt like I was physically being dragged into a quick sand put every time I came across anything like this and was still fighting my way out the next day. I had a stupidly elite education and prior knowledge didn't count as much as ingrained reflex in saving my butt.