Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Five Universal Laws of Human Stupidity

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Five Universal Laws of Human Stupidity

    I think we've all had experience with people like this.

    https://getpocket.com/explore/item/t...=pocket-newtab
    "For a musician, the SNES sound engine is like using Crayola Crayons. Nobuo Uematsu used Crayola Crayons to paint the Sistine Chapel." - Jeremy Jahns (re: "Dancing Mad")
    "The difference between an amateur and a master is that the master has failed way more times." - JoCat
    "Thinking is difficult, therefore let the herd pronounce judgment!" ~ Carl Jung
    "There's burning bridges, and then there's the lake just to fill it with gasoline." - Wiccy, reddit
    "Retail is a cruel master, and could very well be the most educational time of many people's lives, in its own twisted way." - me
    "Love keeps her in the air when she oughta fall down...tell you she's hurtin' 'fore she keens...makes her a home." - Capt. Malcolm Reynolds, "Serenity" (2005)
    Acts of Gord – Read it, Learn it, Love it!
    "Our psychic powers only work if the customer has a mind to read." - me

  • #2
    When the writer insists that stupidity brings no benefits whatsoever to the stupid person themself, I suspect they're overlooking a few intangibles. These people may be gaining psychological payoffs from defending their own ego and/or worldview. Also, I note that "spite" has lately been a bit of a topic in games theory, and it also may provide a psychological payoff. A good deal of stupid behavior does seem to smell spiteful.

    Comment


    • #3
      Quoth Mental_Mouse View Post
      When the writer insists that stupidity brings no benefits whatsoever to the stupid person themself, I suspect they're overlooking a few intangibles. These people may be gaining psychological payoffs from defending their own ego and/or worldview. Also, I note that "spite" has lately been a bit of a topic in games theory, and it also may provide a psychological payoff. A good deal of stupid behavior does seem to smell spiteful.
      I think the argument could be made that "spite" and "stupid" are not the same, something along the lines of:
      • stupid: no benefit to anybody, potential harm to self and/or others, because of ignorance/lack of understanding/foresight/whatever
      • spite: as above, but done deliberately/knowingly, derives the benefit of pleasure to the spiteful

      So the derived pleasure is the benefit, thus moving the spiteful person from "stupid" to "bandit" in the graph on the page.

      Regardless, this page has made an entirely new category in my quotefile: "Human Stupidity". Lots of overlap with pretty much everything else, everywhere.
      Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, you speak with the Fraud department. -- CrazedClerkthe2nd
      OW! Rolled my eyes too hard, saw my brain. -- Seanette
      she seems to top me in crazy, and I'm enough crazy for my family. -- Cooper
      Yes, I am evil. What's your point? -- Jester

      Comment


      • #4
        "Spite" is not just a matter of doing harm for personal pleasure -- as you say, that's "bandit" behavior.

        Spite is a game-theoretic tactic meant to spoil someone else's reward, even at one's own expense. It's commonly a response to (what you see as) someone taking advantage of you, but that's relative.

        The classic "real-world" example is the divorced wife with a court order to sell the couple's fancy car and split the proceeds, so she sells the $60,000 car on Craigslist for $60. She doesn't get the $30K she could have, but neither does he, and it's more important to her to deprive him. Note of course that judges know about this sort of tactic and the law does punish it. The classic tale of Solomon and the baby is also about spite-detection.

        The typical experimental example is setting up a situation a prize is offered to two people: One of them gets to split the prize between the two any way they like, but the other can veto the prize entirely. The temptation for the divider is to, say take $75 for themself and allow $25 for the other. Now, if they do that the other person could get a free $25... but they're quite likely to give that up to punish the divider. But on the flip side, the vetoer can get greedy: "give me the $75 and accept $25, or you get nothing".

        In game-theory simulations, spite turns out to be an important factor in enforcing equity and sharing, even when the "world-rules" don't.

        Spite can appear as "stupid", and on the flip side, people who are "stupid" can use it inappropriately -- that is, when the surrounding factors don't actually support their attempted power play, or where long-term thinking would recognize that they will eventually be punished for it.
        Last edited by Mental_Mouse; 04-03-2021, 07:37 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Quoth Mental_Mouse View Post
          The typical experimental example is setting up a situation a prize is offered to two people: One of them gets to split the prize between the two any way they like, but the other can veto the prize entirely. The temptation for the divider is to, say take $75 for themself and allow $25 for the other. Now, if they do that the other person could get a free $25... but they're quite likely to give that up to punish the divider. But on the flip side, the vetoer can get greedy: "give me the $75 and accept $25, or you get nothing".
          I grew up whe real world version of that experiment. I would get to cut the cake, but my brother would get first choice of the pieces.
          "I don't have to be petty. The Universe does that for me."

          Comment


          • #6
            Quoth Ironclad Alibi View Post
            I grew up whe real world version of that experiment. I would get to cut the cake, but my brother would get first choice of the pieces.
            That's a different scenario -- indeed, that's more-or-less the optimum way to cut a cake such that both parties agree. (Specifically, it's optimum when dividing the cake between two people. Having more people complicates the bejeezus out of the problem.)

            The "spite" scenario would be, you get to cut the cake and pick your piece... if he doesn't decide to throw away the entire cake.

            Comment

            Working...
            X