Comments | vap0rtranz: On Calling People Stupid: Bitch-slap

vap0rtranz

On Calling People Stupid: Bitch-slap

Apr 02, 2007 21:57

Calling people stupid is synoymous to calling them retarded. Opinions, arguments -- words -- are stupid. People are not stupid.

I just searched my friend's list and am prepared to call people out for using this label. Before blasting half my friends away, I want to note a trend. A person usually calls kinds of people stupid, and this lends ( Read more... )

friends, links, arguments against stupidity, journaling & blogging, psychology

Comments 27

tacky_tramp April 3 2007, 02:52:03 UTC

I'm not sure I understand your argument here. What's wrong with the usage you've cited for me?

vap0rtranz April 3 2007, 03:01:32 UTC

It was quoted from a letter but still, what did you mean by "stupid people"?

tacky_tramp April 3 2007, 03:05:20 UTC

People with below-average IQs. I believe I specifically used the word "stupid" there to emphasize the assumption that poor people who fail to succeed financially are unintelligent and therefore less worthy.

vap0rtranz April 3 2007, 03:09:52 UTC

So they're are such people, or you're playing the Devil's advocate ...

Thread 16

I may be stupid, but... dakini_bones April 3 2007, 04:30:41 UTC

I'm not sure what you object to?
Yes, there are stupid people.
I would agree with your friend. MY definition of stupid would also be for people of below AVERAGE intelligence.
Obviously, I am more stupid than people of greater intelligence than I am. Derek is smarter than I am. You are probably smarted than I am.
There is stupid reasoning...illogical, overly emotional, downright silly.
There are stupid situations: preventably unfortunate.
There are stupid people.
Please let me give an example!
One of the customers walks up to my technician and says "Last time you told me to get a Bordatella booster shot for my dog this time. Do I need to get a booster shot for my dog?"
Um, duh.
Convicted of stupidity by his own words!!

Re: I may be stupid, but... vap0rtranz April 3 2007, 06:37:06 UTC

I'm not sure what you object to?

You're abit different but generally I object to dismantling the PC culture until we are all absolutely equal. (This happens at the Big Bang and Big Crunch.) Seeing how we are ubiquitously unequal, then we cannot allow name-calling to fester prejudices.

But ideally and even in actuallity (now), I am smarter than you in some intelligence (field) and you are smarter than me in some other way -- vetinary medicine comes to mind. In the end, our holistic intelligence equations, so to say, balance out. So there's no net gain in individual, comparative intelligences (and only temporal assessments of individual intelligences have net gains. Ex: learning medicine).

I don't think your customer was stupid. They were probably worried about money and wanted to verify that it was indeed a necessary health cost.

Re: I may be stupid, but... dakini_bones April 4 2007, 04:41:00 UTC

But as you say inequality is ubiquitous ( ... )

Re: I may be stupid, but... vap0rtranz April 4 2007, 05:17:53 UTC

I heard two points: A) that we agree on labelling impersonal things "stupid", and B) you see some kind of objectivity for an ethics that can label someone stupid. I just don't see the later. If science cannot judge who is stupid because of the inherit limits on IQ tests and the inability of intelligence to measure or describe every stupidity-context, then what can be the objective source for calling someone "stupid"? You talk about standards. Where does these come from? Mr. Binet and his intelligence theory?

There are trends in behavior. You and I would obviously agree on population dynamics and the "divinely" natural numbers, like e, and normal distribution curves. But to say the Golden Rule is natural as if to call it objective and universal would be a stretch for science, IMHO as a non-god. Instead I believe that judgement can be good but eitherway it boils down to normative statements of who is smart versus who is stupid, as it ought to be that way if indeed its ethical question.

force_of_will April 3 2007, 04:46:32 UTC

Well, I try and attain a certain ethics of action, and only in weak moments will I call anyone any derogatory name...

Generally, I think the more specific reference of the word to mental retardation is lost and is replaced by one of a personal slander where the subject is voicing their irritation at someones lack of insight into the social context of the moment. But as you point out, this revolves around a certain selfish outlook. *why are you being so unconscious of my needs/situation?* which is flung with a verbal lash. But I would not cut any of this off from historical context, where the word was used for certain levels of slight retardation...

Nice paradoxical flare at the end, btw...

vap0rtranz April 3 2007, 06:39:13 UTC

So you agree? (I'm playing off our other thread) *evil grin*

Sometimes my mind plays tricks on me. sedeara April 3 2007, 18:23:45 UTC

:: phew :: Am I glad I didn't make your "stupid" list.

There's this huge inertia on LJ and in the public in general for calling everyone else -- but oneself -- stupid, or at least calling oneself 'not that stupid', as if one's own stupidity is less than the masses of ignorant people and this slight edge gives us validity in judging everyone else's far-more-stupid behavior.

Yes!! I've often reflected upon the fact that for a blog to be "well-read," it has to be MEAN. And I'm tired of it. Tired of being mean and tired of reading mean. And tired of people calling each other stupid or variations thereof.

Re: Sometimes my mind plays tricks on me. vap0rtranz April 4 2007, 04:28:22 UTC

I've often reflected upon the fact that for a blog to be "well-read," it has to be MEAN. And I'm tired of it.

Hallelujah! I wish I could hug you. :) Being nice or at least not being cynical are signs of weakness in our modern, civilized society.

*HUGZ*

Re: Sometimes my mind plays tricks on me. sedeara April 4 2007, 14:58:44 UTC

Stupididity phelicis April 5 2007, 03:16:20 UTC

I would like to point out that the adjective 'stupid' in English primarily refers to a person- though it can be used to describe objects (as you insist should be its primary purpose ( ... )

Re: Stupididity vap0rtranz April 5 2007, 05:16:29 UTC

This is longer than I expected in response but I'll try to reply on every point.

I would like to point out that the adjective 'stupid' in English primarily refers to a person- though it can be used to describe objects (as you insist should be its primary purpose).

Hence my primary objection to it is a personal one.

as 'classist' (a very loaded word, handle with care)

Obviously, hence I defined it in my post.

1) How can a word, or argument, or object be 'stupid'?

It lacks reason, or whatever quality we want, in the objective sense of "reasonable". Ex. a bigotted statement lacking any specific person to utter its words.

2) [...] - would you agree that it is at times appropriate? Or should the word be purged from the English language?

Yes, and No. *evil grin*

If the latter, what word should replace it and how would you prevent said word from picking up the identical classist connotation?It's fine as an English word because it conveys meaning. I'm not about to fall prey to Orwellian criticisms about manipulating language. * ( ... )