So let me quite clear from the outset, I have not read this book, “Idiot America,” but, having written a book about the positive uses of stupidity, of course any book that addresses stupidity has become of great interest to me. So I read the Amazon page and I think I got the gist of the idea. Basically, the author addresses the dangers of scientific ignorance, as illustrated by a visit to a “creationism museum,” where a dinosaur is depicted with a saddle.
Yes, it is deplorable that such scientifically inaccurate dioramas are being shown to impressionable young children. Yes, I suppose it is idiotic.
But as I have tried to show in my book, “Principles of Applied Stupidity,” anytime anyone calls someone else a stupid idiot, what that really means is, “What you are doing runs so counter to my own frame of reference, that the only explanation I can come up with for your behavior is that your brain is defective.”
So one’s inability to comprehend another’s actions immediately translates into thinking there is something wrong with the other person’s thought processes. Rarely do people think there is something wrong with their own brain when it fails to comprehend someone else’s actions. Isn’t that interesting.
The trouble with saying anyone is an idiot is, idiocy is in the eye of the beholder. Yes, saddled dinosaurs seem pretty odd to me, but just to give one example, I could just as easily say that spending $200,000 on an education in certain academic areas that don't have many high-paying jobs waiting is also, from a certain perspective, just as idiotic. It makes just as little sense (to some folks anyway) as the dinosaur with the saddle.
But instead of trying to condemn one idea over another, let’s try and be more open-minded about it.
What both of these ideas really represent is a culmination of a series of thoughts that ultimately have the same goal. That goal is: to try to make sense of the world while not questioning certain dogmas, such as the pure unimpeachable goodness of Genesis, or the pure unimpeachable goodness of institutions of higher education.
But sadly, there is precious little open mindedness here. The eagerness to condemn takes over.
We all love to feel superior, and to achieve that, it is of course necessary to focus on the way in which someone else is inferior. When we find them, it is delicious, it is addicting, but it has a hidden cost. For the moment you start to participate in this finger pointing, you are no longer free. You are dependent upon some outside entity to endlessly discover new idiots for you to feel superior to. Like the Romans, you risk giving up your freedom in exchange for bread, circuses, and stupidity.
The real danger here is not the dinosaur with the saddle, or even the economic stress of student loans. The real problem is someone creating us-vs.-them factional strife while claiming to have a greater good in mind. If they really wanted to attain greater good, they wouldn’t be creating factional strife, now would they?
I have never succeeded in winning someone over to my way of thinking by calling them an idiot. There is precious little actual good that ever comes from such condemnations, except to the publishers, who are successfully exploiting your need to feel superior to (and your fear of) people who are different from yourself.
Instead of condemning these people who see the world differently from you, why not see what you have in common with them? Believe me, there is stuff you are doing right now that is just as offensive to another person as someone saddling a dinosaur is to your belief in scientific method. And better yet, how about expecting yourself to be less perfect and more human?
And another semantic/logic note: anything that anyone disapproves of can be labeled as being stupid or idiotic. So the use of the word itself is not very scientific, now is it?
I don’t mean to be all over this one author. On the surface, I agree with him completely. It is just that such a book is an excellent example of a genre of political opinion book that comes out at a rate of 16 an hour condemning the other side’s approach. They achieve little real progress, no consensus will ever come of it, but for just 24.95, you too can temporarily feel superior to the [insert other political party’s name here].
Be mindful of the sad fact that people are constantly trying to get you into their camp by pointing out how awful the people in the other camp are. This is usually a dodge to distract you from all the nasty things they are pulling themselves, or the fact that we are all avoiding the really tough questions and hard choices. If you get too eager to feel superior to the “enemy,” your perception of the truth about your own side will be severely hindered.
For a compete scientific analysis of the use of stupidity in human interactions, I invite you to read my book, “Principles of Applied Stupidity.”
-jl
