4 ms·

The term Bonhoeffer used is "Dummheit". As a German "stupidity" seems to be a more accurate translation to me.

by mudita 5y ago

ladon86 5y ago
It is, but I would say that on an axis of: Stupidity <——> Silliness …Dummheit leans slightly more towards silliness than pure stupidity does in English. I think Dummheit can be both an adjective and a noun, right? The latter, “eine Dummheit”, sounds more like a silly mistake to me (like “I did a stupid” in internet-speak). A word like “nonsense” might be a good parallel? In English that word can cover serious, trivial, and silly cases.
- _hl_ 5y ago
  I think it's folly to try and grasp the nuances of "Dummheit" as Bonhoeffer used it 80 years ago from our modern usage of the word. It depends on how the word was used at the time. Even today it depends on context, although generally you are right that it leans a little bit towards silly.
  - guyomes 5y ago
    This reminds me of a visualisation tool [0] for the distance between the meaning of words in french, based on databases of texts. I wonder if that would help to grasp the nuances in older times. [0]: https://www.cnrtl.fr/proxemie/sottise https://www.cnrtl.fr/proxemie/sottise
- groby_b 5y ago
  As a German: It depends on the context. If you use it as a noun, referring to an individual act, it is used to refer to a mistake. But even then, not a silly one. It refers to a lapse in judgment, to a lack of proper reasoning. If it doesn't refer to an individual act, but to a trait, it's meant as an incapability to reason properly, often painfully so. It's used as a derogative, not to mark a silly mistake. The most famous quote about Dummheit makes fairly clear it's not just meant as silliness. Schiller's "Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens" (Even the gods struggle in vain against stupidity) clearly marks it as something both detrimental and incorrigible. That's really the core distinction - Dummheit as referring to an individual act vs. as a trait. This goes for both the adjective ("dumm") and the trait. It is an implicit acknowledgment of the fact that individual mistakes happen and are excusable, but constant failure is a negative mark. Bonhoeffer very clearly refers to the latter, but moves it from an individual failing to a societal one.
  - ladon86 5y ago
    Thank you for the full explanation! I could tell that there was a difference between the noun and adjective usage, and I now have a much better understanding of what it is.

The term Bonhoeffer used is "Dummheit". As a German "stupidity" seems to be a more accurate translation to me.

by mudita 5y ago

The term Bonhoeffer used is "Dummheit". As a German "stupidity" seems to be a more accurate translation to me.

It is, but I would say that on an axis of: Stupidity <——> Silliness …Dummheit leans slightly more towards silliness than pure stupidity does in English. I think Dummheit can be both an adjective and a noun, right? The latter, “eine Dummheit”, sounds more like a silly mistake to me (like “I did a stupid” in internet-speak). A word like “nonsense” might be a good parallel? In English that word can cover serious, trivial, and silly cases.

_hl_ 5y ago
I think it's folly to try and grasp the nuances of "Dummheit" as Bonhoeffer used it 80 years ago from our modern usage of the word. It depends on how the word was used at the time. Even today it depends on context, although generally you are right that it leans a little bit towards silly.
- guyomes 5y ago
  This reminds me of a visualisation tool [0] for the distance between the meaning of words in french, based on databases of texts. I wonder if that would help to grasp the nuances in older times. [0]: https://www.cnrtl.fr/proxemie/sottise https://www.cnrtl.fr/proxemie/sottise
groby_b 5y ago
As a German: It depends on the context. If you use it as a noun, referring to an individual act, it is used to refer to a mistake. But even then, not a silly one. It refers to a lapse in judgment, to a lack of proper reasoning. If it doesn't refer to an individual act, but to a trait, it's meant as an incapability to reason properly, often painfully so. It's used as a derogative, not to mark a silly mistake. The most famous quote about Dummheit makes fairly clear it's not just meant as silliness. Schiller's "Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens" (Even the gods struggle in vain against stupidity) clearly marks it as something both detrimental and incorrigible. That's really the core distinction - Dummheit as referring to an individual act vs. as a trait. This goes for both the adjective ("dumm") and the trait. It is an implicit acknowledgment of the fact that individual mistakes happen and are excusable, but constant failure is a negative mark. Bonhoeffer very clearly refers to the latter, but moves it from an individual failing to a societal one.
- ladon86 5y ago
  Thank you for the full explanation! I could tell that there was a difference between the noun and adjective usage, and I now have a much better understanding of what it is.