Dumb and Stupid Quotes Thread: Idiotic Source and Context are Key.

[Tahuti]

Do you mean "dumber"? Wouldn't "less educated" be a friendlier and more accurate expression?

'Less sophisticated' would be the more polite way of saying it, perhaps. I am loathe to use 'less educated', since being 'educated' a little does not mean intelligence or intellectual sophistication. Education is primarily about learning good behavior, which may help in intellectual development and is always a good thing to learn (when learned right), though hardly a guarantor for intelligence. The intelligent may be uneducated and the educated may be unintelligent, despite the otherwise strong correlation between intelligence and education.

 

[Borachio]

It's just that, it seems to me, people's intelligence is pretty much disconnected from the wealth of their parents. Unlike their education.

 

[Farm Boy]

Sophistication is often mistaken for wisdom, though, isn't it?

 

[Borachio]

Um. Yes, it can be I guess.

I like things to be simple, though. Not because I think of myself as wise (that would be laughable!). But because I find the simpler things are easier for me to understand, and I'm more sure of my ground.

Kind of like how the "elegant" solutions in maths are the simplest.

 

[Traitorfish]

Democracy can only take hold in countries were the average populace are a match to its ruling elite. If the general populace is significantly dumber than the elite, democracy - if it exists - will usually collapse on sight, as people are simply intellectually unable to assert their power. It is literally unthinkable. It also possible that people - however smart - for some reason tolerate totalitarianism, as is the case in China.

No possibility that relative access to social, political and economic resources might enter into this in some way?

I mean, there are plenty of countries in which the elite are "dumber" that the general populace, insofar as the elite unanimously subscribe to their own legitimising fairy-tales while the general populace remain basically agnostic, but that doesn't really tell you anything about the distribution of power.

 

[Cutlass]

It's polite, but I don't think there's a rule about it.





I agree that it's good advice - but out of interest, when and how did 'on point' come to mean 'insightful'? I've heard it used of cricketers and soldiers in a patrol, but can't think how either of those meanings turned into that one.

I'm not sure of the how or when, but it's not new in the American version of the English language. There's even a radio news program of that name.

 

[Borachio]

I agree that it's good advice - but out of interest, when and how did 'on point' come to mean 'insightful'? I've heard it used of cricketers and soldiers in a patrol, but can't think how either of those meanings turned into that one.

Is that what it means?

Is it related to "to the point"? Or is that off the point?

 

[Tahuti]

I mean, there are plenty of countries in which the elite are "dumber" that the general populace, insofar as the elite unanimously subscribe to their own legitimising fairy-tales while the general populace remain basically agnostic, but that doesn't really tell you anything about the distribution of power.

Maybe you are right. If that's the case, it is primarily a matter of street wisdom, and the ruling classes are simply more knowledgable about wielding power and not necessarily anything else. It also possible that there is a temporary lull, in which the powers of the elite is simply in a precarious position and might be destroyed if the ruled classes find out.

After all, Louis XIV probably did more for the French revolution to happen than any Enlightenment writer like say Voltaire, given how the centralisations of France pretty much made the Noblesse a politically weak yet materially wealthy. Thus they were unable to resist the revolution, and became a target of the revolution instead.

 

[Cutlass]

"Popular culture becomes a cesspool, a lot of corporations profit off of it, and then people are surprised that some drunk 19-year-old kids repeat what they've been hearing."
—

Bill Kristol, blaming the SAE chant on hip-hop

 

[Flying Pig]

After all, Louis XIV probably did more for the French revolution to happen than any Enlightenment writer like say Voltaire, given how the centralisations of France pretty much made the Noblesse a politically weak yet materially wealthy. Thus they were unable to resist the revolution, and became a target of the revolution instead.

You say this constantly, and it's still equally difficult to believe.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Translation: "I don't know how to use social media prudently, so I'm just going to say it's terrible". Seriously, is it so much trouble to think before hitting that post button?
"Social media is, on the whole, a very bad thing. It wastes time, gives at best ephemeral pleasure with a modicum of interest, causes privacy and necessary social boundaries to disintegrate, and enriches people very much at the expense of others. Anyone can make a statement they later regret. It is now impossible to genuinely retract or escape such a statement. This is outrageous. Social media brings out the very worst in people. Rather than free speech, ot also promotes - essentially requires - a ridiculous level of self-censorship or imposition of extreme global shaming. This is not a societal good."
-Ralph, comment on "How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life", The New York Times Magazine

 

[Borachio]

You say this constantly, and it's still equally difficult to believe.

Oh I don't know. It makes a kind of sense.

After all, the rain raining is responsible for people getting wet. So a monarch reigning... is responsible for people panicking and losing their heads?

Spoiler :

See. If I were a lot cleverer, I could have written a good joke there. But I'm not. So I didn't.

 

[Farm Boy]

Translation: "I don't know how to use social media prudently, so I'm just going to say it's terrible". Seriously, is it so much trouble to think before hitting that post button?
"Social media is, on the whole, a very bad thing. It wastes time, gives at best ephemeral pleasure with a modicum of interest, causes privacy and necessary social boundaries to disintegrate, and enriches people very much at the expense of others. Anyone can make a statement they later regret. It is now impossible to genuinely retract or escape such a statement. This is outrageous. Social media brings out the very worst in people. Rather than free speech, ot also promotes - essentially requires - a ridiculous level of self-censorship or imposition of extreme global shaming. This is not a societal good."
-Ralph, comment on "How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life", The New York Times Magazine

On a side note, I've seen HR generalists avoid hiring candidates that don't use Facebook because they couldn't snoop on them to their satisfaction. There is some very real badness in our norms surrounding social media.

 

[Arakhor]

Even if said candidates had a Facebook, what is the HR person going to do? Insist that they get added as a friend or set everything to public access?

 

[Farm Boy]

Yes. They did insist upon that for purposes of "assessment" or somesuch.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Translation: "I don't know how to use social media prudently, so I'm just going to say it's terrible". Seriously, is it so much trouble to think before hitting that post button?
"Social media is, on the whole, a very bad thing. It wastes time, gives at best ephemeral pleasure with a modicum of interest, causes privacy and necessary social boundaries to disintegrate, and enriches people very much at the expense of others. Anyone can make a statement they later regret. It is now impossible to genuinely retract or escape such a statement. This is outrageous. Social media brings out the very worst in people. Rather than free speech, it also promotes - essentially requires - a ridiculous level of self-censorship or imposition of extreme global shaming. This is not a societal good."
-Ralph, comment on "How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life", The New York Times Magazine

I agree with much of the quote, but I would think that learning self-censorship is a distinct social good that social media might foster, and that the thought of being globally shamed might be a useful mechanism for developing said skills in self-censorship.

 

[Arakhor]

Yes. They did insist upon that for purposes of "assessment" or somesuch.

Haha, no. Quite apart from the obvious ethical issues, what's to stop me creating a special "stupid employer" category which shows only what I want it to show and then adding said company to that list?

 

[Farm Boy]

I had to think about this, since I've never set up a Facebook account. I think what they actually did was have the interviewee let them log into the account itself for viewing purposes. I think it was spelled out in some form of document that they'd review it and not change anything. Ethics though? In employment law? There is what is legal, what is illegal, and what is illegal that can be made to look legal.

 

[Hygro]

"Popular culture becomes a cesspool, a lot of corporations profit off of it, and then people are surprised that some drunk 19-year-old kids repeat what they've been hearing."
—

Bill Kristol, blaming the SAE chant on hip-hop

Yeah, that's why this thread is for, although that middle part of the sentence w/ the corporations is aight.

As if they had been repeating lyrics. As Chris Rock says with his signature nod, "it's gotta be in the song." I would argue that Chris Rock is the arbiter of mainstream society's values. Right or wrong, they would have gotten a pass.

Translation: "I don't know how to use social media prudently, so I'm just going to say it's terrible". Seriously, is it so much trouble to think before hitting that post button?
"Social media is, on the whole, a very bad thing. It wastes time, gives at best ephemeral pleasure with a modicum of interest, causes privacy and necessary social boundaries to disintegrate, and enriches people very much at the expense of others. Anyone can make a statement they later regret. It is now impossible to genuinely retract or escape such a statement. This is outrageous. Social media brings out the very worst in people. Rather than free speech, ot also promotes - essentially requires - a ridiculous level of self-censorship or imposition of extreme global shaming. This is not a societal good."
-Ralph, comment on "How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life", The New York Times Magazine

I think that's his problem. And yeah, I think people who deserve the heat do get most of it but I think people who don't deserve the heat gets some of it and as Farm Boy says below, it becomes part of the system's requirement of accessing your personal life for profit.

I had to think about this, since I've never set up a Facebook account. I think what they actually did was have the interviewee let them log into the account itself for viewing purposes. I think it was spelled out in some form of document that they'd review it and not change anything. Ethics though? In employment law? There is what is legal, what is illegal, and what is illegal that can be made to look legal.

Crazy. Absolutely crazy.

Resistance is

 

[Cutlass]

"Decision-making power over the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama, and over the end or survival of this lineage, resides in the central government of China."
—

statement by government officials