4 ms·

I think a great many people are actually stupid and easily lead astray. There are large numbers of people who won’t vaccinate their children (not talking about

I think a great many people are actually stupid and easily lead astray. There are large numbers of people who won’t vaccinate their children (not talking about Covid vaccine). Such a person is either stupid or a victim of misinformation. Humans are easily persuadable. This is particularly true with a group of people echoing who feel slighted or are angry about some perceived injustice. The mob mentality is real and it makes its participants vulnerable to making bad decisions and going with the flow. We see this with the cult like devotion of Trump supporters. We see examples in consumerism. There was a time when people fought each other over a Cabbage Parch Doll. Our moments of lucid analysis of an issue or speech occur far less often than our moments of “going with the flow”.

machina_ex_deus 3y ago
And my general experience with anti vaxers is that they generally look into more resources and research and put much more thoughts into their decisions than a regular person. Which I generally view as a positive quality. I put much more value on the process by which a person reached his decisions than whether they were correct in one particular instance. Whether I agree with their final conclusion is irrelevant, I can't with straight face call a person who spent his time carefully considering his decisions less intelligent than a person who didn't spend a single moment to think about it. Even if they reached the wrong conclusion. It's actually hilarious that you call them mob mentality. Going with the herd automatically is the most mob mentality possible. Have you tried talking to Trump supporters before you assumed they are "cult" and "mob"? You're exactly the kind of person I directed my post at. You've been successfully fooled into thinking other people are stupid without even trying to understand them. And for the record, I think flat earthers are more intelligent than people who never even asked themselves how do we know that the earth is spherical. They are not intelligent because they couldn't understand the answer, but they are more intelligent than a person who never even asked the question. The people I consider more intelligent than flat earthers tried asking this question, looked for the solution and could understand basic geometry enough to understand why it is true. Anyone else isn't more intelligent, just more conformal and knowledgeable. In the case of knowing the earth is flat, it's such well known fact it's just pure conformity never asking why, and I don't value that at all. It's not an intelligent trait.
- synetic 3y ago
  And my general experience with anti vaxers is that they generally look into more resources and research and put much more thoughts into their decisions than a regular person. Which I generally view as a positive quality. I put much more value on the process by which a person reached his decisions than whether they were correct in one particular instance. Ah. The, “they did their research” and “read lots of words” retort. It’s ok that almost all of it is wrong. What matters is that they read a lot. They thought a lot about it! The thoughts were completely wrong but quantity over quality, right? Consider this. What does it say about you that you think people with no knowledge of or training in virology can legitimately said to have conducted research into the efficacy of vaccines? I have not successfully been fooled into thinking that people are dumb. All of us are dumb in certain areas. All of us can be manipulated. All of us are susceptible to false information. (Read up on the Gell-Mann amnesia effect as an example of this.) It is absolutely an intelligent trait to rely on the expert knowledge of others. Hence, flat earthers are incredibly dumb. The knowledge that the Earth is spheroidal has been known for many hundreds of years. Another example. Almost everyone knows that 1+1=2 despite the fact that very few people can actually prove it. It is not intelligence to question this fact. It is intelligence to ask how to prove it and even more intelligence to understand the proof. An intelligent person doesn’t question the efficacy of vaccines. The evidence of their efficacy is plain to see by the fact that polio is virtually nonexistent. An intelligent person asks why are vaccines effective. How do they work? Etc. Any fool can ask questions. Asking the right questions requires some perspicacity.
  - machina_ex_deus 3y ago
    There are no right questions, only right answers. A question, by definition, isn't right or wrong. That's why it's a question, not an answer. The very first step to being an intelligent person is not being afraid to ask questions. The second step is trying to understand it even if you might reach the wrong result. Only if you passed those first two steps you even have the hope of answering the question correctly. And even a child can prove that 1+1=2, and if you're such an NPC you think it's hard to prove, I honestly find flat earthers more intelligent. Ironically, you're acting like such a bot that you're actually quite good at contradicting my point. You're begging the question (like "why are vaccines effective"). You don't look for understanding but for knowledge to remember then repeat. I always value more the person who tried and failed than the person who never tried. I don't think a layperson can conduct academic research, but I think they can try to understand. And I think that those who tried to understand yet reached the wrong conclusion are still much better than those who never tried.
giardini 3y ago
[flagged]
- synetic 3y ago
  [flagged]

machina_ex_deus 3y ago

And my general experience with anti vaxers is that they generally look into more resources and research and put much more thoughts into their decisions than a regular person. Which I generally view as a positive quality. I put much more value on the process by which a person reached his decisions than whether they were correct in one particular instance. Whether I agree with their final conclusion is irrelevant, I can't with straight face call a person who spent his time carefully considering his decisions less intelligent than a person who didn't spend a single moment to think about it. Even if they reached the wrong conclusion. It's actually hilarious that you call them mob mentality. Going with the herd automatically is the most mob mentality possible. Have you tried talking to Trump supporters before you assumed they are "cult" and "mob"? You're exactly the kind of person I directed my post at. You've been successfully fooled into thinking other people are stupid without even trying to understand them. And for the record, I think flat earthers are more intelligent than people who never even asked themselves how do we know that the earth is spherical. They are not intelligent because they couldn't understand the answer, but they are more intelligent than a person who never even asked the question. The people I consider more intelligent than flat earthers tried asking this question, looked for the solution and could understand basic geometry enough to understand why it is true. Anyone else isn't more intelligent, just more conformal and knowledgeable. In the case of knowing the earth is flat, it's such well known fact it's just pure conformity never asking why, and I don't value that at all. It's not an intelligent trait.

synetic 3y ago
And my general experience with anti vaxers is that they generally look into more resources and research and put much more thoughts into their decisions than a regular person. Which I generally view as a positive quality. I put much more value on the process by which a person reached his decisions than whether they were correct in one particular instance. Ah. The, “they did their research” and “read lots of words” retort. It’s ok that almost all of it is wrong. What matters is that they read a lot. They thought a lot about it! The thoughts were completely wrong but quantity over quality, right? Consider this. What does it say about you that you think people with no knowledge of or training in virology can legitimately said to have conducted research into the efficacy of vaccines? I have not successfully been fooled into thinking that people are dumb. All of us are dumb in certain areas. All of us can be manipulated. All of us are susceptible to false information. (Read up on the Gell-Mann amnesia effect as an example of this.) It is absolutely an intelligent trait to rely on the expert knowledge of others. Hence, flat earthers are incredibly dumb. The knowledge that the Earth is spheroidal has been known for many hundreds of years. Another example. Almost everyone knows that 1+1=2 despite the fact that very few people can actually prove it. It is not intelligence to question this fact. It is intelligence to ask how to prove it and even more intelligence to understand the proof. An intelligent person doesn’t question the efficacy of vaccines. The evidence of their efficacy is plain to see by the fact that polio is virtually nonexistent. An intelligent person asks why are vaccines effective. How do they work? Etc. Any fool can ask questions. Asking the right questions requires some perspicacity.
- machina_ex_deus 3y ago
  There are no right questions, only right answers. A question, by definition, isn't right or wrong. That's why it's a question, not an answer. The very first step to being an intelligent person is not being afraid to ask questions. The second step is trying to understand it even if you might reach the wrong result. Only if you passed those first two steps you even have the hope of answering the question correctly. And even a child can prove that 1+1=2, and if you're such an NPC you think it's hard to prove, I honestly find flat earthers more intelligent. Ironically, you're acting like such a bot that you're actually quite good at contradicting my point. You're begging the question (like "why are vaccines effective"). You don't look for understanding but for knowledge to remember then repeat. I always value more the person who tried and failed than the person who never tried. I don't think a layperson can conduct academic research, but I think they can try to understand. And I think that those who tried to understand yet reached the wrong conclusion are still much better than those who never tried.

giardini 3y ago

[flagged]

synetic 3y ago
[flagged]