250
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2025
250 points (100.0% liked)
Leopards Ate My Face
5256 readers
1274 users here now
Rules:
- If you don't already have some understanding of what this is, try reading this post. Off-topic posts will be removed.
- Please use a high-quality source to explain why your post fits if you think it might not be common knowledge and isn't explained within the post itself.
- Links to articles should be high-quality sources – for example, not the Daily Mail, the New York Post, Newsweek, etc. For a rough idea, check out this list. If it's marked in red, it probably isn't allowed; if it's yellow, exercise caution.
- The mods are fallible; if you've been banned or had a comment removed, you're encouraged to appeal it.
- For accessibility reasons, an image of text must either have alt text or a transcription in the comments.
- All Lemmy.World Terms of Service apply.
Also feel free to check out !leopardsatemyface@lemm.ee (also active).
Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
These are Cipolla's five fundamental laws of stupidity:
Always and inevitably, everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation.
The probability that a certain person (will) be stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person.
3. A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses.
5. A stupid person is the most dangerous type of person.
The rise of fascism globally isn't an intelligence test. People are trapped in information silos. No matter how smart a person is, if all they have is propaganda it's rational to assume they are going to believe the propaganda. We need to get true information into these information silos to help these people.
This one definition covers all humans so it's not particularly useful.
Also, this implies treating life as a zero-sum game is at least a correct strategy if not outright claiming it to be the preferred strategy. Part of trying to solve our problems involves overcoming this impulse and avoiding pointless tit-for-tat cycles which often land people in the situation your argument's definition states as problematic. Namely, in game theory terms, two people cheating in a prisoner's dilemma in order to gain and thus ensuring mutual loss.
I bring all that up because this just happened in the last election where pro-Palestinian activists and Democrat supporters of Kamala Harris could not get on the same page despite sharing the same goals.
We are consciousness running on meat sacks in a physics based universe. It only takes one person acting on self-destructive ideas and false information to be a danger to themselves and others. edit: typos