Meditations on Stupidity and Evil
Here begins a series of posts I shall call “Meditations,” my thoughts on philosophy, morality, religion, and such. They shall come at random intervals, and occur whenever I have something that needs saying. If I ever found a religion, they shall be collected and entered into a holy book; wouldn’t that be fun? ^_^
There are no stupid people, only stupid actions, thoughts, questions, statements. Is it so? The realization that otherwise smart people do stupid things is an important one. Someone may be incredibly brilliant at devising worlds and languages, yet they smoke cigarette at cost to their health. Or someone could be a superbly bright medical doctor, and yet be a staunchly conservative supporter of Bush.
One facet of such stupidity is that those involved do not perceive it as such. For the smoker, the mental benefits may outweigh the health costs. For the Republican, perhaps Bush does not seem so bad.
It must be noted that I am not speaking of stupidity as a measurable lack of intelligence. That is, I believe, irrelevant to this discussion. Calling people stupid for something they cannot change is just rude and unpleasant. So I shall not.
This view of stupidity may also be applied to evil. An action is stupid if its disadvantages outway its advantages; so too is an action evil if it causes more harm than good. And so too is it subjective-Hitler did not believe killing Jews to be evil. For him, the loss of human life, the pain, the suffering, was irrelevant compared to his twisted vision of a perfect world. (Let it not be said that I bear fondness for Hitler. He and Stalin may duke it out for the title of Vilest Person of the 20th Century. And also let it not be said that I am in any way equivalating a smoker or a Republican to Hitler. We shall see what the difference is.)
What then, you say, is this difference? Let me make it transparent: stupidity is jumping off a cliff; evil is pushing someone off it. Stupidity harms oneself, or accidentally harms others; evil carries with it the intent of harming others. Yes, I hold that it is morally worse for someone to be killed intentionally than for them to die of a mistake (Not that that makes large blunders any more forgivable, mind. I’m sure Mao didn’t mean to starve 20 million peasants to death during the Great Leap Forward. That still doesn’t excuse the error, it just makes him misguided and stupid rather than malicious and evil.)
Now, it is a bit extreme to call lesser actions that cause discomfort to others evil. (“Evil” is such a strong word.) Perhaps it would be better to think of them as merely wrong. And the boundary of course is subjective.
I would conclude that a stupid person is one whose stupid deeds outweigh or are sufficiently more numerous than their smart ones, and that an evil person is one whose evil deeds outweigh the good. Again, very subjective. I am sceptical of those who rush to assure us of objective truths.
What are your thoughts? Does this help anyone? I make no claims to be better or wiser than anyone else, but I can do no more than humbly submit my thoughts. At least, I hope this is sufficiently humble. I should hate to have come across as an arrogant bastard. Do tell if I am, though. (I also feel that I am sounding horribly British. Is this so?)
There are no stupid people, only stupid actions, thoughts, questions, statements. Is it so? The realization that otherwise smart people do stupid things is an important one. Someone may be incredibly brilliant at devising worlds and languages, yet they smoke cigarette at cost to their health. Or someone could be a superbly bright medical doctor, and yet be a staunchly conservative supporter of Bush.
One facet of such stupidity is that those involved do not perceive it as such. For the smoker, the mental benefits may outweigh the health costs. For the Republican, perhaps Bush does not seem so bad.
It must be noted that I am not speaking of stupidity as a measurable lack of intelligence. That is, I believe, irrelevant to this discussion. Calling people stupid for something they cannot change is just rude and unpleasant. So I shall not.
This view of stupidity may also be applied to evil. An action is stupid if its disadvantages outway its advantages; so too is an action evil if it causes more harm than good. And so too is it subjective-Hitler did not believe killing Jews to be evil. For him, the loss of human life, the pain, the suffering, was irrelevant compared to his twisted vision of a perfect world. (Let it not be said that I bear fondness for Hitler. He and Stalin may duke it out for the title of Vilest Person of the 20th Century. And also let it not be said that I am in any way equivalating a smoker or a Republican to Hitler. We shall see what the difference is.)
What then, you say, is this difference? Let me make it transparent: stupidity is jumping off a cliff; evil is pushing someone off it. Stupidity harms oneself, or accidentally harms others; evil carries with it the intent of harming others. Yes, I hold that it is morally worse for someone to be killed intentionally than for them to die of a mistake (Not that that makes large blunders any more forgivable, mind. I’m sure Mao didn’t mean to starve 20 million peasants to death during the Great Leap Forward. That still doesn’t excuse the error, it just makes him misguided and stupid rather than malicious and evil.)
Now, it is a bit extreme to call lesser actions that cause discomfort to others evil. (“Evil” is such a strong word.) Perhaps it would be better to think of them as merely wrong. And the boundary of course is subjective.
I would conclude that a stupid person is one whose stupid deeds outweigh or are sufficiently more numerous than their smart ones, and that an evil person is one whose evil deeds outweigh the good. Again, very subjective. I am sceptical of those who rush to assure us of objective truths.
What are your thoughts? Does this help anyone? I make no claims to be better or wiser than anyone else, but I can do no more than humbly submit my thoughts. At least, I hope this is sufficiently humble. I should hate to have come across as an arrogant bastard. Do tell if I am, though. (I also feel that I am sounding horribly British. Is this so?)