The Existential Threat of Ignorance and Stupidity in America

[Revoltingest]

Think what you like. We are coming for you.

Xi has made that clear.
But warn him...I'm a very very good shot.

 

[Audie]

Xi has made that clear.
But warn him...I'm a very very good shot.

Well. Now ya head it from Xu, too.

 

[Heyo]

Think what you like. We are coming for you.

I don't fear you or the traditional eastern culture towards education. While you still value education, something we have partially lost (and non more than the US), the eastern tradition focuses much on fact learning and reverence for the teacher. The west has (or had) a tradition of learning first and then innovating very early on. Thinking for oneself and applying knowledge is what people from the east learn in the west. Chinese people and people with Chinese heritage excel in science in the west or after they had been in the west.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Not exactly.
It is a pervading cultural aspect. If skepticism had been fostered in the first place, and if authorities had to earn credibility, we wouldn't be here talking about this problem. But we, collectively, took the shortcut and became prone to believe in self-proclaimed authorities because they have a degree or because an institution gave them power. And now that we no longer consider those degrees and institutions as reliable, anyone with a phone can claim to be an authority.

It does seem ironic that all the technology available today for anyone to declare their empty expertise so widely and frequently required genuine expertise coming from those, now disdained institutions, to develop and implement.

I do see it as an aspect of culture.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I notice this problem a lot when I try to communicate with people. I tend to often use words like "justified," "truth," "belief," "value," "fact," "evidence," "impossible," "unlikely," "possible," "plausible," "likely," "almost certain," "logical," "illogical," and "ignorant" in ways that imply the context of epistemic logic, Bayesian epistemology, or Stoic philosophy.

It causes a lot of confusion, particularly because words like "logical" and "fact" and "truth" are often used as loaded language that merely assert some form of general praise. Pointed rhetoric you agree with becomes logical. Opinions become facts. Truth becomes subjective, and we all get our own that can be whatever we feel like making up, and how arrogant is it of me to say that anything could be false!

When I want to "debate" with "arguments," most people aren't jumping to have a dispassionate dialectic in an attempt to reconcile two conflicting viewpoints as a cooperative effort to find common ground and reach the truth. Instead, they passionately defend their position while attacking mine, using whatever dirty persuasive techniques they can, with no intention of ever conceding even the smallest point. They prefer verbal abuse and sarcastic mockery right out the gate.

I don't really know an easy way to overcome this barrier where we mean completely different things by the words we use. The very concepts of "truth" and "knowledge" and "reason" only have rigid meanings in their academic sense. In the popular sense, they have become political buzzwords that are almost entirely devoid of meaning now. At the same time, I can't realistically expect everyone to be educated on every nuance of academic epistemology, can I?

Pessimistically, I suspect that if everyone was educated on epistemology, it would just lead to an even greater misuse of terms as politicians and activists would have to come up with new ways to distort reality to fit their agendas. The smarter the population as a whole becomes, the smarter the con men become, too. It's a philosophical arms race and they're clearly winning, because global inequality has been steadily rising for awhile now and we're not really doing anything in the face of a climate catastrophe that benefits a select few at the expense of everyone else.

An philosophical or educational arms race that breeds intellectual fitness similar in pattern to coevolution. I'm not sure that wouldn't be a good thing overall, but fitness does have its costs.

I see it more as reaching target audiences and growing market share by bringing disenfranchised groups together under the belief they share common problems and values. This is how the Republican party did it to begin with in the 70's and 80's by courting disenfranchised religious groups to bulk up party numbers. Then one day, the disenfranchised groups had taken over and changed the landscape to suit themselves.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

An philosophical or educational arms race that breeds intellectual fitness similar in pattern to coevolution. I'm not sure that wouldn't be a good thing overall, but fitness does have its costs.

I see it more as reaching target audiences and growing market share by bringing disenfranchised groups together under the belief they share common problems and values. This is how the Republican party did it to begin with in the 70's and 80's by courting disenfranchised religious groups to bulk up party numbers. Then one day, the disenfranchised groups had taken over and changed the landscape to suit themselves.

The fun thing is that I get what you are saying. But the price of ignorance and stupidity is different in Denmark, because it happens differently as for what is fought over.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Hah!
China is far more ignorant because of the strictly
controlled access to info & government propaganda.
As Uncle Duke said...
China is the world's largest penal colony.

Of course, this doesn't apply to your ilk, who live
with greater freedom than the mainland masses.

Outright disdain for knowledge does appear to be a peculiarly Anglo-Saxon phenomenon, however. We have the freedom to embrace and flaunt our stupidity, and boy do we exercise that freedom. Such attitudes are rare in Asia, I suspect.

 

[wellwisher]

I agree. Denial of scientific reality seems to be an American speciality, which as you say is quite worrying. For example, when posts denying the climate emergency are made on RF you can be pretty sure it will be by American members of the site. I find some posts and attitudes here quite incredible and yes worrying for the future.

The problem is the computer simulation models have not accurately predicted anything, in 20 years, but tend to be too high, more in line with hype that never appears. This tells me the climate science has not completely evolved or else they would be right almost all the time. The local weather man is not right 100% of the time, so what makes you think predicting the climate of the entire earth, over many decades in the future, is even easier?

A seven-day forecast can accurately predict the weather about 80 percent of the time and a five-day forecast can accurately predict the weather approximately 90 percent of the time. However, a 10-day—or longer—forecast is only right about half the time; even science will throw a coin for local weather never mind global.

The science models do not always get it right. Those who are called deniers, actually have a better prediction record over the last 20 years, since they always bet against the the doom and gloom that science predicted, which did not happen. Where has real science gone and what is this left in its place that can be outguessed by deniers?

I predicted the Arctic Ice cap; 15 years ago, would still be here, today. That made me a denier back then. Denier must really mean, someone who denies the foolish path and who is right in terms of reality. That bizarre reverse criteria, shows politics is leading. We need to go back over the past 20 years, compare the records of the deniers, with that of the science, and whoever did better, gets all the Climate funding.

The source of the problem is, climate science still uses statistical models, which uses the same math that is used by gambling casinos, pollsters and politicians. The common black box math, blurs the lines between all these various areas of knowledge. The black box hides rational understanding. This common black box offers a way for politics and polls to influence public opinion on casino science. This science is a more of a crap shoot and not a rationally sure thing. Lady Luck is not cooperating but they money still comes in due to politics.

Like the weather man, there are no consequences when they are wrong, since this area of science is really science, gaming and politics all blended together. This year we should have a winner take all showdown. If the science prediction does not get it right, again, we shut it down.

Odds making, using casino math, is not a good science approach, since the Science House always wins, even when they lose; we need more money since the bogeyman is coming. It was worse than we thought. Rational models can get rid of the casino approach and make it harder for politics to merge via common math.

Go Deniers! Your predictions have won the most times over the past 20 years!

 

[Revoltingest]

Outright disdain for knowledge does appear to be a peculiarly Anglo-Saxon phenomenon, however. We have the freedom to embrace and flaunt our stupidity, and boy do we exercise that freedom. Such attitudes are rare in Asia, I suspect.

Piffle!
The same phenomenon is observable in China, Russia, Italy,
Afghanistan, & many other places, particularly in the Muslim
fundamentalist world. USA looks pretty good in comparison.
Moreover, you describe it in a manner that suggests universality
of this disdain, which ignores diversity in the countries...which
have made many of the most important contributions to
knowledge & understanding.

Aggressive ignorance is more noticeable here because of the
spotlight fallacy, particularly regarding the Trump cult's behavior,
which is exceedingly newsworthy, & engenders scorn (thus
heightening noticeability). I blame partisan politics, anti-USA
sentiment, & far too much doomscrolling. One should not judge
reality by consuming news of current events culled by sources that
are rewarded for outrageous & inflammatory dramas de jour.

Criticism should be directed at the actual offenders, eg, the MAGAs
who are still swilling bleach while decrying the stolen election.
Tis prejudicial (bigoted?) to generalize it to whole populations,
most of whom don't buy such crap.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Piffle!
The same phenomenon is observable in China, Russia, Italy,
Afghanistan, & many other places, particularly in the Muslim
fundamentalist world. USA looks pretty good in comparison.
Moreover, you describe it in a manner that suggests universality
of Anglo-Saxon disdain for knowledge, which ignores diversity
in the cultures...which have made many of the most important
contributions to knowledge understanding.

Aggressive ignorance is more noticeable here because of the
spotlight fallacy, particularly regarding the Trump cult's behavior,
which is exceedingly newsworthy, & engenders scorn (which
heightens noticeability). I blame partisan politics, anti-USA
sentiment, & far too much doomscrolling. One should not judge
reality by consuming news of current events culled by sources that
are rewarded by finding the spiciest, most outrageous & inflammatory
dramas de jour.

Criticism should be directed at the actual offenders, eg, the MAGAs
who are still swilling bleach while decrying the stolen election.
Tis prejudicial (bigoted?) to generalize it to whole populations,
most of whom don't buy such crap.

I know whereof I speak; I’m English, we’ve been renowned for centuries for our distrust of intellectuals. You’ve inherited that I think. As have most Aussies, for whom culture is something that grows on yoghurt.

 

[RestlessSoul]

 

[Revoltingest]

I know whereof I speak...

Everyone thinks that.
But we only see that which we see.
This isn't reality...just our take on it.

 

[metis]

I predicted the Arctic Ice cap; 15 years ago, would still be here, today. That made me a denier back then

I've read a great many articles in Scientific American" on this for decades now, but I never read a single article that claimed that the Arctic ice cap would be completely gone on 15 years. So, can you post a scientific source for your assertion?

The source of the problem is, climate science still uses statistical models, which uses the same math that is used by gambling casinos, pollsters and politicians.

That's complete unadulterated nonsense.

Go Deniers! Your predictions have won the most times over the past 20 years!

Oh, the delusion.

BTW, did you read the recent news that the pace of climate change has been speeding up more than previously hypothesized, or is it that you really don't care?

 

[Audie]

Outright disdain for knowledge does appear to be a peculiarly Anglo-Saxon phenomenon, however. We have the freedom to embrace and flaunt our stupidity, and boy do we exercise that freedom. Such attitudes are rare in Asia, I suspect.

From over here we see Americans as self indulgent
and very smugly self satisfied.

You see it up close, too, America tourists
are fat. Or up closer still, living in the USA.

Don't get me wrong. I like the USA, and made
wonderful acquaintances there. Would have
married one if fate had not ruined it.

I don't want America to fail.

I feel like Cassandra, trying to alert you guys
that being fat smug ignorant and self satisfied
is not lovable and it's not going to work.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I don't fear you or the traditional eastern culture towards education. While you still value education, something we have partially lost (and non more than the US), the eastern tradition focuses much on fact learning and reverence for the teacher. The west has (or had) a tradition of learning first and then innovating very early on. Thinking for oneself and applying knowledge is what people from the east learn in the west. Chinese people and people with Chinese heritage excel in science in the west or after they had been in the west.

Eastern countries and people are perfectly capable of excelling in science without needing to go to or be in the West:

Conventional wisdom often suggests that technological breakthroughs proliferate in an environment of free markets, free speech, and democracy. In short, if you want to innovate, you need to operate like the United States. But over the past twenty years, China has transformed from a technological backwater into an innovation powerhouse.

Today, China directly competes with the United States on key emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence and quantum computing. And it has managed to accomplish this feat even as its government has tightened controls on markets, speech, and politics.

How China Became an Innovation Powerhouse

Also:

Why China is on the way to being a global innovator - IMD business school for management and leadership courses

As part of the transformation of the Chinese economy, attested by many elements of the recent news, China is fast transitioning from low cost manufacturing to a higher value innovation-led economy. Anticipating the next few years is fraught with difficulties. China is a huge and diverse country...

www.imd.org

The notion that innovation is somehow inherent to the West and that the East produces less of it due to one cultural difference or another seems to me both outdated and, if it was ever true before, no longer accurate. I'm not saying that you're claiming this, but I have encountered that argument before. Some people who claim that seem to overlook or forget that immigration to the West and "brain drain" have been a core part of the technological and scientific innovations that have taken place in immigrant hotspots such as the US, UK, and Canada.

Japan, China, India, Taiwan, and South Korea are now leading examples in how the West certainly doesn't have the market cornered on innovation and how societies that have collectivist leanings can and do innovate without needing to exalt individualism or downplay the importance of the collective.

 

[Revoltingest]

From over here we see Americans as self indulgent
and very smugly self satisfied.

You see it up close, too, America tourists
are fat. Or up closer still, living in the USA.

Don't get me wrong. I like the USA, and made
wonderful acquaintances there. Would have
married one if fate had not ruined it.

I don't want America to fail.

We see the Chinese as tiny thieving rapacious
robots marching to the propaganda of their
authoritarian government...as they steal
technology, fail to respect patents, invade
Tibet, help Putin conquer his neighbors, take
the S China Sea from contiguous countries,
& export bad drivers to the USA.

A mutual disdain arrangement, eh.
But they do work cheap, so I still buy their goods.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I see no particular difference between the USA and Brazil on this case, except I see no regress here in Brazil.

What we are living here is a consequence of:

1) Trusting in authorities. It doesn't really matter if said authority (be it a doctor, a lawyer, a scientist, a journalist or a priest) can explain to us what is going on. Just trust their authorities.

2) Said authorities are proven to be unreliable time and time again. Messing up big gime at least every once in a while.

Eggs are a good dietary option. Now they are not. Now they are once again.

You have been diagnosed with X, but actually you happen to have Y.

And so on... Entailing in loss of trust.

3) With a phone and internet connection, everyone can present oneself as an authority and look knowledgeable about a subject.

Now there is a battle over who is telling the truth: The new guys that have a very interesting narrative (such as conspiracy theories) or the old guys that can't be completely trusted.

So, what's the root of the problem? The whole 'Trust the authorities' that started this mess.

What do you suggest the average scientist or expert should do in order to earn the trust of the average layperson? We saw first-hand that during the pandemic, some people distrusted experts and scholarly authority no matter the amount of evidence and credentials that were presented by the experts. Not even the statistics and other evidence concerning the loss of life and effects of disease worldwide sufficed to change the anti-scientific opinions that some had.

I have no doubt that some experts certainly don't deserve to be called authorities on their fields, but overall, I would say that trusting experts—while maintaining a baseline of skepticism and openness to new information—when it comes to expert matters such as science and medicine is a far safer and more reasonable bet than trying to use "common sense" without tempering it with expert knowledge. A lot of knowledge about the world is not necessarily intuitive or in line with some people's perception of "common sense."

 

[Audie]

We see the Chinese as tiny thieving rapacious
robots marching to the propaganda of their
authoritarian government...as they steal
technology, fail to respect patents, invade
Tibet, help Putin conquer his neighbors, take
the S China Sea from contiguous countries,
& export bad drivers to the USA.

A mutual disdain arrangement, eh.
But they do work cheap, so I still buy their goods.

Keep thinkingvhat, America.
But you at least know better.

Plus I feel quite triggered by you calling me tiny.

Ys mean swab.

 

[Heyo]

Eastern countries and people are perfectly capable of excelling in science without needing to go to or be in the West:





How China Became an Innovation Powerhouse

"In this video, I argue that three main factors have turbocharged China’s rise as a technological powerhouse: a large, semi-protected market; ties with researchers and companies around the world; and waves of financial, human, and physical capital invested in promising fields like AI."

 

[Debater Slayer]

"In this video, I argue that three main factors have turbocharged China’s rise as a technological powerhouse: a large, semi-protected market; ties with researchers and companies around the world; and waves of financial, human, and physical capital invested in promising fields like AI."

Yes, that's one of the factors, and it holds true for the US as well. It's not the only reason innovation happens, though.