3 ms·
I only read the intro, and I don't think I can bare the rest of it. First, I think the premises is false. I think smarter people are happyer. Second, many peopl
by RealityVoid 1y ago
I only read the intro, and I don't think I can bare the rest of it. First, I think the premises is false. I think smarter people are happyer. Second, many people when they engage with pieces like this, expect that smarter people are unhappyer, which, yes, the article doesn't say this, but I feel it at least suggests it.
And last but not least, their study that says smart people are not happier doesn't really say that. It essentially says smart people are happier when not surrounded by stupid people.
- machomaster 1y agoSmarter people get part of the unhappiness from being surrounded by stupidity. And that article is a great example of that. It is full of stupidity (brow-raising premise, invalid arguments, incorrect rephrasing, wrong conclusions, lack of basic understanding, weird theories, unnecessary DEI commentary, inability to ask relevant questions) and it is a mess. I was mad reading it. It made me sad to see such a stupid article existing and getting traction, as well as made me unhappier to see all the time resources wasted.
- duskdozer 1y agoCurious what diversity/equity/inclusion commentary you took issue with?
- machomaster 1y agoThe 3 paragraphs under "WHAT’S GOING ON HERE?". This is akin to discussing veganism and saying "Veganism has a history of being supported by Hitler". Irrelevant dirtying by proxy. In some other case that could be explained by the author unnecessarily wanting to give a historical context that nobody asked for and brushed aside. But in this case the low quality of the article is a common theme and such DEI remarks are only strengthening the overall negative impression. At this point it is not an one-off, but a part of an established pattern. DEI is not at all the biggest problem with the article.