(no subject)

[lhexa]

From a discussion elsewhere:

"As much as I would like to believe that the people who dislike me do so because they are idiots, chances are that's not the case. There are social influences that will cause any person to behave or speak less intelligently than she is capable of; given that, idiocy is no explanation if you do not explain what engenders idiocy and makes it momentarily acceptable. There's a saying that goes, 'Do not attribute to malice what you can attribute to stupidity.' But from my life, I've learned that the better maxim is, 'Attribute nothing to malice or stupidity.'"

Comments

[spottylogic.livejournal.com]

That's a positive view. I'm starting to revise my personal opinion on the power of stupidity in the world, but "young and stupid" is really a lack of perspective and patience, and a need to establish a personal identity, rather than actual lack of intelligence.

The Black Box theory of humanity helps me a lot when I have to be diplomatic--you can't know what's going on inside the other person's head, but most people assume they do, because they percieve the outside behavior.

[baktre.livejournal.com]

Yeah, people react to SOMETHING. Malice takes effort (and there's a reason they felt that way in the first place, right?) and the notion that lots of people are just dumb is...unlikely.

[roricat.livejournal.com]

I am faithful and careful to always attribute ill, unauthorized, disreputable, licentious, unruly destructive &c. &c. actions to the far-reaching influence or result of propaganda and/or subtly-worked actions from unknown, suspicious sources and perhaps groups, most likely such pernicious agent networks as the vested and system-wide scoundrels to which I am opposed.

However your method also works!

[lhexa.livejournal.com]

Another counter to that disdainful attitude is to be aware of one's own moments of stupidity. Except that, just as with arrogance or immorality, a person who is aware of such moments will usually think of them in different terms.

That Black Box theory is really only good as a first-order approximation (I initially wanted to say zeroth-order, but the point of zero knowledge would probably be a critical point (in the mathematical sense) in any reasonable graph here), meaning that it's fine for low values of whatever quantity is at stake. Say, for small values of the effort expended to know another person. But I have had enough moments of insight to claim that the theory is no better than an approximation -- one particular experience, of describing another person's inner world without having it described to me beforehand, stands out as a counterexample.

[lhexa.livejournal.com]

Systemic stupidity or malice is another matter entirely. ^_^

[lhexa.livejournal.com]

*nods, smiles*

This gets into a pet distinction of mine, that between interpretations and theories... the fact the distinction (attempts to) explain being how much more difficult interpretations are to argue against.