4 ms·

I'm sorry but smart people don't make wild generalizations because they understand it's impossible to easily categorize almost 7 billion unique people. So far i

by jsz0 17y ago

I'm sorry but smart people don't make wild generalizations because they understand it's impossible to easily categorize almost 7 billion unique people. So far in life I've personally encountered people who could be defined as stupid but they are quite clever. This makes them appear to be far smarter than they probably are. I've encountered lots of very smart people who seem to spend a significant amount of their life complaining about stupid people instead of using their intelligence for something more constructive. I've encountered ignorant people who are willing to learn if you give them a chance. I've encountered smart people who are close minded and stubborn to a fault. I suppose this article is a joke and I'm taking it too seriously. I can't stand intelligent people who feel the need to put down other people. Always makes me wonder who's really the smart one. The ignorant person who is happy with themselves or the intelligent person who needs to belittle others to achieve the same thing?

vixen99 17y ago
I wonder why you equate the article's attempt at human categorisation (with which you might fairly find fault) with putting people down or belittling them. Don't see it myself.
jwhite 17y ago
> I'm sorry but smart people don't make wild generalizations because they understand it's impossible to easily categorize almost 7 billion unique people. I think you're confusing categorizing people with pronouncing value judgments on them. Moreover, your first sentence makes a demonstrably false claim. It is trivially easy to categorize people (e.g. male/female/transgender, people-I-like/people-I-don't-like, etc.). The interesting question is how to categorize people in useful ways that can help you understand how society functions, and I think the article gives a really interesting analysis of one chosen categorization. I agree that it isn't healthy to base one's self esteem on negative value judgments of others, just as it is always better to look at what positive contributions a person has to offer society, no matter how small.

by jsz0 17y ago

vixen99 17y ago

I wonder why you equate the article's attempt at human categorisation (with which you might fairly find fault) with putting people down or belittling them. Don't see it myself.

jwhite 17y ago

> I'm sorry but smart people don't make wild generalizations because they understand it's impossible to easily categorize almost 7 billion unique people. I think you're confusing categorizing people with pronouncing value judgments on them. Moreover, your first sentence makes a demonstrably false claim. It is trivially easy to categorize people (e.g. male/female/transgender, people-I-like/people-I-don't-like, etc.). The interesting question is how to categorize people in useful ways that can help you understand how society functions, and I think the article gives a really interesting analysis of one chosen categorization. I agree that it isn't healthy to base one's self esteem on negative value judgments of others, just as it is always better to look at what positive contributions a person has to offer society, no matter how small.