TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Basic Laws of Human Stupidity (1976)

166 点作者 soldeace超过 7 年前

20 条评论

kdamken超过 7 年前
What makes a person stupid? If I have a friend who squanders their money while I save and build up wealth, are they stupid? What if they have a much happier and more fulfilling life than I do?<p>If you have a difficult job (like brain surgeon), but are terrible at most of the other parts of your life, does that make you stupid?<p>Are slow readers stupid? What if they invent a product or start a business that makes them a lot of money?<p>“Smart” and “stupid” are such harsh, black and white terms. They leave no room for the many shades of gray in between.<p>We all think we’re smart, even if we say we don’t. No one wants to be the dumb kid.<p>I feel like being “smart” usually just means you can think and process information a little bit faster than others. But like having a super fast cpu installed, it’s really a matter of what you do with it. You could write a bestselling novel on a slower computer. You could have a super computer and just go on Facebook all day.<p>It seems like every time I feel like I’m smart, I see someone who I thought was dumber who is more successful or happier than me, and I wonder if I was that much smarter in the first place.
评论 #15442117 未加载
评论 #15439585 未加载
评论 #15440158 未加载
评论 #15440209 未加载
评论 #15443178 未加载
评论 #15445595 未加载
评论 #15442714 未加载
评论 #15443413 未加载
评论 #15451037 未加载
评论 #15439557 未加载
ian0超过 7 年前
There are lots of strategies which are rational, non-stupid, in a specific context but irrational &amp; stupid if context is expanded. Eg. Paying it forward by advising a sociopath, working on something interesting despite it being damaging, not being religious because its illogical even if being religious makes you feel&#x2F;act better.<p>A better general definition of stupidity as a non-rational strategy would be &quot;taking an action in deliberate ignorance of context&quot;. Not &quot;taking a non-rational action&quot;. Root contexts are pretty simple and almost universally agreed &quot;don&#x27;t be an ass to others&quot;, &quot;aim for happiness&quot;. If you don&#x27;t ensure your action within context is rational, your being stupid.<p>Obviously its difficult in many scenarios to grasp the larger context, but if we promoted this definition we would as a society optimise for core ethics and be less apt to being manipulated by a minority.<p>Rationalism, about as useful as a piece of string is long :P
评论 #15439736 未加载
评论 #15439283 未加载
runald超过 7 年前
Rather than asserting that the laws of stupidity are an inherent characteristic of people, I think it would be more useful or productive to apply the laws to human actions instead. So the third law would be something like:<p>A stupid action is anything that causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while the executor of action derives no gain and even possibly incurring losses.<p>The laws could serve as a heuristic for people who consistently perform stupid actions, and reconsider their position from being a plague to something (better?) like a bloodsucking parasite. Admittedly, the laws of stupidity seem to be in conflict with the laws of conservation. Then again, This comment probably qualifies as an act of stupidity.
评论 #15442815 未加载
yodsanklai超过 7 年前
&gt; Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation.<p>I think it&#x27;s very arrogant and pretentious to call other people &#x27;stupid&#x27; and I try to refrain from doing it. We all know people who are much smarter than us, surely we must sound stupid to them. Besides, one can be stupid for one thing (say mathematics) and shine for something else (raising kids or playing the trumpet).<p>That being said, I can&#x27;t help thinking a lot of people are stupid, especially when I read news or youtube comments. It&#x27;s amazing how so many people can be dumb, mean, uneducated and bitter.
评论 #15440204 未加载
评论 #15441394 未加载
mannanali413超过 7 年前
This manual, as I may call it, is hilarious. But its usefulness cannot be discounted. The first rule while dealing with people is &quot;Individuals are who they are.&quot; And if in the past you had an encounter with someone who fits the label of &quot;stupid&quot;, as described by these laws, then there is a high chance that the person is going to display stupidity even in the foreseeing future.<p>As a friend of mine once remarked in Hindi-- &quot;Once a chutiya, always a chutiya.&quot; (Translation ) &quot;Once a stupid, always a stupid&quot;
scandox超过 7 年前
I have never met a stupid person. Unwise, thoughtless, ignorant, uncouth, vain, angry - yes. Stupid no. I have never met someone I believed I could not make understand something, if I articulated it in the right way. I never met someone who, if confronted with a wrong action was intellectually incapable of understanding what was wrong: emotionally yes, but not intellectually.<p>I think stupid is just an inaccurate term and being pejorative brings little to any understanding of a situation or a person.
评论 #15440858 未加载
yosito超过 7 年前
It&#x27;s not that a certain percentage of people are stupid. It&#x27;s that no matter how intelligent people are, they are very inconsistent about what they apply their intelligence to and there&#x27;s always going to be some super intelligent idiot who doesn&#x27;t have his head in the game and fucks shit up for everyone else because he wasn&#x27;t paying attention to the right things.
alexpetralia超过 7 年前
Unfortunately this is a taboo subject so no one can talk about it candidly (hence: satire).
评论 #15440132 未加载
mino超过 7 年前
Worth remembering that Carlo M. Cipolla made up his middle name :)<p><i>What is the M. of Carlo M. Cipolla (1922-2000)? No, it&#x27;s not for Maria, as everyone believes and as Wikipedia also reports. So is it for Mario? Do not be bothered. It just stands for nothing at all.<p>Or, better, it stands for itself. &quot;M.&quot; is the initial that the author (...) made up just to fill the &quot;middle name&quot; box on the modules at the University of Berkeley where he moved in the 1950s.</i><p>(quick translation from <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ilsole24ore.com&#x2F;art&#x2F;cultura&#x2F;2011-10-21&#x2F;irresistibile-spirito-cipolla-182530.shtml" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ilsole24ore.com&#x2F;art&#x2F;cultura&#x2F;2011-10-21&#x2F;irresistib...</a>)
srrge超过 7 年前
I feel this is one thing that differentiate the European political cultures and the US political culture.<p>In Europe I feel we do better understand that people are stupid (in general). They won&#x27;t insure their health, they&#x27;ll kill you for $50, they won&#x27;t pay the price for an education.<p>That&#x27;s why we don&#x27;t have guns, we have mostly free healthcare and universities.<p>In the US, I feel you guys hope or would like that people would NOT be stupid and do smart things on a general basis.<p>But that&#x27;s not the case.<p>What if all side of the US political system could agree on this? People are fucking stupid, let&#x27;s make more rules and put more systems and programs in place that take this into account.
评论 #15439981 未加载
评论 #15440092 未加载
评论 #15443658 未加载
r0fls超过 7 年前
I know the OP is not the author, and this edit is about 30 years late. However, the quote &quot;With stupidity and sound digestion, man may front much&quot; should apparently be attributed to Thomas Carlyle, not Dickens: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;quotefancy.com&#x2F;quote&#x2F;917262&#x2F;Thomas-Carlyle-With-stupidity-and-sound-digestion-man-may-front-much" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;quotefancy.com&#x2F;quote&#x2F;917262&#x2F;Thomas-Carlyle-With-stup...</a>
dang超过 7 年前
Does anybody have a year for it? I went with 2009 via <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20090601000000*&#x2F;http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.zoon.cc&#x2F;stupid&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20090601000000*&#x2F;http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.zoon....</a> but it feels like it might be older, especially as the author had been dead for 9 years.<p>Edit: a comment (now deleted) helpfully pointed out the Whole Earth Review, Spring 1987 reference at the bottom. Thanks!<p>Previously: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;hn.algolia.com&#x2F;?query=Basic%20Laws%20of%20Human%20Stupidity%20points%3E3&amp;sort=byDate&amp;dateRange=all&amp;type=story&amp;storyText=false&amp;prefix&amp;page=0" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;hn.algolia.com&#x2F;?query=Basic%20Laws%20of%20Human%20St...</a>. Interesting annotation by pg at <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=817703" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=817703</a>.<p>Url changed from <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;harmful.cat-v.org&#x2F;people&#x2F;basic-laws-of-human-stupidity&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;harmful.cat-v.org&#x2F;people&#x2F;basic-laws-of-human-stupidit...</a>, which points to this.
评论 #15439749 未加载
评论 #15439370 未加载
mikenew超过 7 年前
&gt; I made a special point to extend my research to a specially selected group... The result confirmed Nature&#x27;s supreme powers: σ fraction of the Nobel laureates are stupid.<p>I mean... okay. I would like to know both what the definition of &quot;stupid&quot; is here and what this study actually consists of. Also I&#x27;m pretty sure using &quot;We all recollect occasions...&quot; as your main supporting evidence is several logical fallacies rolled into one.<p>Is this satire? Am I missing the joke? If the main point is that stupidity is a product of nature and can&#x27;t be changed by experience there needs to be a lot more evidence to back it up.
评论 #15439022 未加载
cko超过 7 年前
Speaking of intelligence, from my brief thirty-year existence, I&#x27;ve observed that self-reflection and creativity are positively correlated with intelligence. I haven&#x27;t tested out this theory, but I believe r = 0.75.
评论 #15439648 未加载
l0b0超过 7 年前
If you like this, try <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.thedevilsdictionary.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.thedevilsdictionary.com&#x2F;</a>. Less PC, but also hilarious in places.
MaysonL超过 7 年前
The author, Carlo M. Cipolla, was an Italian economic historian, a professor at U.C. Berkeley. The article is from a small (71 page) book, available in paperback and Kindle.
warent超过 7 年前
Is this thesis intentionally ironic? What exactly is the utility?<p>On a human level, loss and gain are subjective. The definition of a &quot;stupid&quot; person therefore requires complete context and access to their subjective state.<p>Therefore this doesn&#x27;t provide any gain to the &quot;intelligent&quot; person to help resolve the situation.<p>However, from the perspective of a potential stupid person who is by definition self-destructive, when they read this thesis, their reaction at best will be neutral, and at worst cause them to become destructive.<p>So, to recap, this essay provides no gain, but does create potential loss.<p>In which category would that place this essay?<p>Q.E.D.
评论 #15440205 未加载
rurban超过 7 年前
original url: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20130216132858&#x2F;http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cantrip.org&#x2F;stupidity.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20130216132858&#x2F;http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cantrip...</a><p>with a bit more background and drama
nebelwerfer2k超过 7 年前
THIS is the shit. Very hilarious and weirdly very relatable to my life ??
quantum_state超过 7 年前
Not much of a reasonable writing ... what would it help????