People too Dumb for Democracy to Work

[Nanoose]

Hmmm....

What say ye?

http://www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksd...tists-say.html

[skuthorp]

LOL,
"He and colleague Justin Kruger, formerly of Cornell and now of New York University, have demonstrated again and again that people are self-delusional when it comes to their own intellectual skills.This might be my favorite article of all time. FOR ONCE, someone says what everyone smart has known all along, and for once an article says something new, provocative, and oh-so-necessary. This is why I sometimes think oligarchy would be the best system--rule by an elite of people that actually knows what the hell its talking about!"
This is one of those articles that everyone will agree with but, of course, regard themselves as being on the up side of the mark, which is the whole point of the piece.
I presume there's not an intended element of satire here.

[Flying Orca]

Anyone who actually reads and comprehends the article probably is on the up side of the mark. I'm just sayin'.

[Dutch]

as if the mere fact that a twitter exists isnt enough

proof positive

Lady Gaga has established herself as the unchallenged queen of Twitter, becoming the first to have 20 million followers – two million more than any other user on the site.
A relatively early adopter, @ladygaga joined the site on 26 March 2008. Unlike other stars she runs her own account, using Twitter to chat directly to her "little monsters" as she calls fans, post pictures and share information about tours and releases. She took over as the most popular person on Twitter from Britney Spears in August 2010

[McMike]

I say, yup.

[JimD]

Clearly the author is what Rick Santorum would call a snob.

[SamSam]

I've wondered for years about the one man one vote apparatus. With a populous that apparently gets dumber by the year, elected officials and government can only become more and more mediocre. Mediocre government/schools produces even more mediocre people who elect even more mediocre politicians who produce even more mediocre schools, etc. etc. It would seem there must be a balance point where it could go either way, either get better and better or worse and worse, depending on the input of voters, but once it starts going in a direction it accelerates and becomes harder and harder to reverse. It appears that only when actions become absurdly obvious, do directions change. We adapt to new, lower normals until they become the norm and then we adapt to new, lower normals until they become the norm. Then maybe someday it becomes absurdly obvious, like "Hey, we just gassed 6 million Jews. WTF were we thinking?"

[Flying Orca]

With a populous that apparently gets dumber by the year

I'm not sure there's evidence for that. In fact, given the known links between health (particularly nutrition) and intelligence, I suspect that the populace is more intelligent now than it's ever been. Diverted by meaningless crap like television, sure, but probably more intelligent on the whole than, say, a hundred years ago.

[JimD]

... given the known links between health (particularly nutrition) and intelligence...

Given that Americans eat more junk food than all other democracies combined I'm not sure this is a good argument for voter intelligence.

[Nanoose]

I'm not sure there's evidence for that. In fact, given the known links between health (particularly nutrition) and intelligence, I suspect that the populace is more intelligent now than it's ever been. Diverted by meaningless crap like television, sure, but probably more intelligent on the whole than, say, a hundred years ago.

Interesting. Perhaps more intelligent, but due to shortened attention span/need for instant gratification, less able to sustain thought, analysis, critical thinking - skills necessary for creative thinking and more.

I have been teaching high school since 1979. I look back at what I used to be able to do with a given grade/course and am amazed at the gap between that and what a class today can accomplish. Things have changed. But, as you note, it may not be intelligence. Yet the inability to focus and foster sustained thought is taking a toll, regardless of intelligence. The overall impact is that the majority is dumbing down.

[Flying Orca]

Deb, I agree. I attribute the change to primarily to television and other fast-paced "entertainment". I suspect that the readers in your classes are the exceptions...?

[Paul Pless]

I'm not sure there's evidence for that. In fact, given the known links between health (particularly nutrition) and intelligence, I suspect that the populace is more intelligent now than it's ever been. Diverted by meaningless crap like television, sure, but probably more intelligent on the whole than, say, a hundred years ago.

Have you seen Idiocracy?

[Nanoose]

Deb, I agree. I attribute the change to primarily to television and other fast-paced "entertainment". I suspect that the readers in your classes are the exceptions...?

Sometimes the readers are the exceptions. The home schoolers that join us at some point during high school are virtually always an exception.

There just seems to be an inability to focus beyond 5 seconds. The culture is all about bits and bites, instant gratification, attention grabbing - sustaining some kind of stimulus 'high'. So the ability to focus and consider political alternatives, understand issues, make informed decisions, think critically are, imho, diminishing. Look at how campaigns are designed and run - this seems to be born out in the design of the whole election process.

[SamSam]

I'm not sure there's evidence for that.

Look at the GOP candidates, apparently the cream of the crop.

[Meli]

Hmm re lacking concentration and critical analysis skills...

I think our generation killed their brains with kindness.
I dunno how it works in the USA but I'm starting to wonder if we don't try to cram too many micro ideas's in kids heads too young.

In my sons grade 6, they covered early australian history, the concept to great minds and orators in history, environmental issues, as well as maths, science, sport, italian, english, art, australian political system.

Just short tasters for a week and move on.
Couple this WITH, TV with commercial breaks every 10 minutes, youtube and all the other, for want of a better expression..brain nibbles. No wonder they cant concentrate,follow a thought process, analyse etc.

now what was I doing?? Ah, cleaning the kitchen? um no er.. I've forgotten

[hanleyclifford]

The solution suggests itself. We need intelligence testing to establish an enlightened electorate so that the right wing demagogues cannot ride ignorance and bigotry to power, except we must not allow literacy tests or identification for voter registration because that would deny minorities their rights...this could get complicated.

[Fitz]

now what was I doing?? Ah, cleaning the kitchen? um no er.. I've forgotten

I can relate to this. Yes, Kitchen.

Oh wait, the laundry is done.....some of it.

Where was I?

Oh yeah, Democracy...People governing themselves

[David G]

The wisdom of crowds:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds

[Flying Orca]

Have you seen Idiocracy?

No, should I look for it?

[Gerarddm]

Which is why Norman Mailer called them The Wad.

[bobbys]

Jus MayB dish here story i done read aian't da trut, I plenty smart to vote fer DemEcrats, Lest one give me 20 buck gift card!

[Paul Pless]

No, should I look for it?

Just watch the first four minutes for the most brilliant explanation of recent human evolution I have ever seen.

[John Smith]

I'm not sure there's evidence for that. In fact, given the known links between health (particularly nutrition) and intelligence, I suspect that the populace is more intelligent now than it's ever been. Diverted by meaningless crap like television, sure, but probably more intelligent on the whole than, say, a hundred years ago.

I don't know if I can get the video, but Maher's show last night had a short film of interviewing people in Mississippi, accompanied by a letter that assured him the people interviewed were not "cherry picked" to make a point.

"Intelligent" doesn't seem to fit these folks.

[Paul Pless]

Clearly Mississippians ought not be allowed to participate in our democracy.

[Keith Wilson]

I dunno - I don't think people are dumber than they used to be at all, although there are a lot of dumb people. I don't think people are more ignorant than they used to be either, although there are a lot of ignorant people. More people may believe things that aren't true -- but I'm not sure of that either. Some pretty weird ideas were common at various times in history. We have both more effective methods of propaganda, and also more effective methods of countering propaganda and finding out the truth if one has the time and will. And knowledge really is cumulative. There's an almost universal human tendency to believe things are getting worse and worse despite evidence; why, I don't really know; maybe an effect of the aging process?

Democracy has always depended on people paying attention and understanding what's going on. Perhaps in one sense it's a victim of its own success. Life will be mostly OK whoever wins the election, so a lot people can pay attention to the rest of their life, not politics. Oh, well - "the worst form of government, except for all the others", right?

[Paul Pless]

Perhaps in one sense it's a victim of its own success. Life will be mostly OK whoever wins the election, so a lot people can pay attention to the rest of their life, not politics. Oh, well - "the worst form of government, except for all the others", right?

For the first time in my adult life I'm debating on my own participation* in the election process, if I do cast a vote it will almost certainly be protest vote of some sort.



*Other than Bilge commentary of course.

[McMike]

Sometimes the readers are the exceptions. The home schoolers that join us at some point during high school are virtually always an exception.

There just seems to be an inability to focus beyond 5 seconds. The culture is all about bits and bites, instant gratification, attention grabbing - sustaining some kind of stimulus 'high'. So the ability to focus and consider political alternatives, understand issues, make informed decisions, think critically are, imho, diminishing. Look at how campaigns are designed and run - this seems to be born out in the design of the whole election process.

I agree that it's not a lack intelligence or even raw knowledge. I think in the past 75 years we have seen tremendous growth in the availability and consumption of knowledge.

I think it's the lack of reasoning, the lack of experiential knowledge of cause and effect, the lack of instances of literal necessity . . . you know; the mother of invention and all.

Think about it; when was the last time we, as a country, experienced great hardship? My answer is WWII. The rest of the time has been relatively safe and secure.

Children grow up watching cartoons and sitcoms that, for the most part, finish up in a nice tidy wrapped box with a bow on it. They are drawn out of their experience and given another one, one that innately, when they reach adulthood makes them feel is their right to have, bow and all, no matter what effort they put forth. Parents do a great job of insulating their children from reality; it used to be if little Johnny broke the neighbor's window with his baseball he would have to work to repay the cost to replace it. Now Mom and Dad hand Mr. Wilson the check and the kid learns that when he damages someone else's property, whether it was an intentional act or not, someone else cleans up his mess.

This whole idea that children should be allowed to be children within the context of having no responsibility at all vs an age appropriate and reasonable application of consequences, is what has turned our country into a bunch of raving, self-centered, zealots.

When you are not taught how to be wrong, you will never be right. I think we see that quite clearly on both sides of the argument here in the bilge.

[Osborne Russell]

Clearly Mississippians ought not be allowed to participate in our democracy.

Participation is what it's about. To participate you have to want to understand. If you keep at it, you will. Little by little you become intelligent in terms of being a citizen of a democratic republic.

A prejudice against learning stops the process, and so with time you become less intelligent.

You have a right to wall yourself off with prejudice, insofar as no one can force you to come out and participate. But it means that you are at best dead weight when it comes to the republic.

[Wavewacker]

Very good article and yes, it's on target! It also justifies why I should be appointed as King and I'll get everything straight and restructured for you.

[hanleyclifford]

Very good article and yes, it's on target! It also justifies why I should be appointed as King and I'll get everything straight and restructured for you.

Hang on. There may be others who would like the job. Let's vote on it. (Didn't Josey Wales come from Missouri?)

[Flying Orca]

The people who set up our government recognized that your statement is more or less true. Most private citizens don't have the time and/or ability to fully research and understand all the issues that a government faces and make informed decisions about them. That's why we elect people to do this for us and represent us. Our government isn't a democracy and was never intended to be.

Indeed. Unfortunately, the process has shown itself to be flawed to the point where the primary requirement is money rather than intelligence - a drawback that could use some attention.

[Flying Orca]

I dunno - I don't think people are dumber than they used to be at all, although there are a lot of dumb people. I don't think people are more ignorant than they used to be either, although there are a lot of ignorant people. More people may believe things that aren't true -- but I'm not sure of that either. Some pretty weird ideas were common at various times in history.

This is more-or-less where I was coming from. I don't disagree that there are plenty of dumb and ignorant people out there - hell, there are plenty of them in here - but I think people were actually dumber and more ignorant in the past.

[Flying Orca]

I agree that it's not a lack intelligence or even raw knowledge. I think in the past 75 years we have seen tremendous growth in the availability and consumption of knowledge.

I think it's the lack of reasoning, the lack of experiential knowledge of cause and effect, the lack of instances of literal necessity . . . you know; the mother of invention and all.

Think about it; when was the last time we, as a country, experienced great hardship? My answer is WWII. The rest of the time has been relatively safe and secure.

Children grow up watching cartoons and sitcoms that, for the most part, finish up in a nice tidy wrapped box with a bow on it. They are drawn out of their experience and given another one, one that innately, when they reach adulthood makes them feel is their right to have, bow and all, no matter what effort they put forth. Parents do a great job of insulating their children from reality; it used to be if little Johnny broke the neighbor's window with his baseball he would have to work to repay the cost to replace it. Now Mom and Dad hand Mr. Wilson the check and the kid learns that when he damages someone else's property, whether it was an intentional act or not, someone else cleans up his mess.

This whole idea that children should be allowed to be children within the context of having no responsibility at all vs an age appropriate and reasonable application of consequences, is what has turned our country into a bunch of raving, self-centered, zealots.

When you are not taught how to be wrong, you will never be right. I think we see that quite clearly on both sides of the argument here in the bilge.

I think you've accurately identified part of the problem, yes.

[Flying Orca]

You hit the nail on the head with this one. This is EXACTLY why Obama was elected. He promised people that even though they F'ed things up for themselves, he would make someone else pay to fix it.

Dude, if you truly believe that, I'm sorry, but you've just clearly identified yourself with the dumb-and-ignorant camp.

[Ian McColgin]

The article has problems similar to the problems of Libertarianism or to a political chat at a Mensa meeting - it simply blunders past the main point. Intelligence is neither necessary nor sufficient for good judgement, though we may believe that like reason to the pursuit of truth or a midwife to the birth of a child, it enhances the probability of a healthy outcome. But even intelligence had a more central role, the sorting mechanism as to how those reasonable people would be chosen to rule is hopelessly inadequate. People who seek power with any success are smart enough in their manipulative sociopathic way anyhow and if you settle for some qualification driven oligarchy all you end up with is a random evolutionary process that rewards the law of tooth and claw.

Our only chance is to work with all citizens and include everyone in the political process as deeply and diversely as possible. Ron White fameously says that you can't fix stupid. Actually you can, to a limited extent. But more to the point you can overwhelm stupid with more people taking self-aware responsibility for themselves.

As a community organizer I have taken a group of people society labeled as class A loosers, semi-literate at best, never a bank account, no skills except to produce more children, and helped them move to owning and running their own food coop that served as a community locus for all sorts of empowering stuff. They looked and acted stupid, they repeated the stupid right wing opinions of folk who really manipulated and oppressed them, and they stayed poor until they found ways to be responsible for themselves.

It only looks daunting. People are not really that stupid unless you have a bunch of profoundly stupid "intelligent" elitists keeping them down.

[George Jung]

Sometimes the readers are the exceptions. The home schoolers that join us at some point during high school are virtually always an exception.

There just seems to be an inability to focus beyond 5 seconds. The culture is all about bits and bites, instant gratification, attention grabbing - sustaining some kind of stimulus 'high'. So the ability to focus and consider political alternatives, understand issues, make informed decisions, think critically are, imho, diminishing. Look at how campaigns are designed and run - this seems to be born out in the design of the whole election process.

NYTimes discussed this, at least tangentially, awhile back - and note the relatively recent development of the internet/computers, with the resultant 'small bytes' of info we now process, rather than longer, more involved treatises. Shorter attention spans; smaller nuggets of info.

[tigerregis]

I shouldn't do this but...."loosers" and "choises" and "semi-literate, at best" is a case of pot and kettle. When these errors have been pointed out repeatedly, the term "stupid" is the only description that fits, because stupid has nothing to do with IQ; it is the adjectival form of stupor. Refusal to listen or heed advice is intransigence.That is a stupor.

[McMike]

Dude, if you truly believe that, I'm sorry, but you've just clearly identified yourself with the dumb-and-ignorant camp.

+1 . . . That was not my point.

This is where abstract thinking and knowing how to be wrong comes into play.

[McMike]

I shouldn't do this but...."loosers" and "choises" and "semi-literate, at best" is a case of pot and kettle. When these errors have been pointed out repeatedly, the term "stupid" is the only description that fits, because stupid has nothing to do with IQ; it is the adjectival form of stupor. Refusal to listen or heed advice is intransigence.That is a stupor.

Then I guess stupid fits.

[bobbys]

Very good article and yes, it's on target! It also justifies why I should be appointed as King and I'll get everything straight and restructured for you.

.

Can you promise Pizza for Breakfast in your Kingdom?

[SamSam]

Just watch the first four minutes for the most brilliant explanation of recent human evolution I have ever seen.

That reminded me of the rest of what my thoughts on the subject were. That as intelligent people quit having children, for all the reasons against having children, and less intelligent people keep cranking them out for no particular reason, the gene pool can't help but become more and more mediocre.

When expressed before, my views were immediately dismissed as a form of Nazi eugenics, racist Aryan Nation BS. The notion of human engineering is taboo, it's politically incorrect and immoral. Be that as it may, breeding of animals is absolutely proven to produce critters with altered characteristics. You can breed in good qualities and breed out bad or vice versa. You can do it intentionally or it can happen unintentionally. Darwinism is unintentional breeding by nature with "bad" qualities unintentionally weeded out by nature. If one set of people limit reproduction for some reason and and another set don't, if there is a difference between the two sets to begin with, one difference will be propagated and the other will be limited.

Political systems function the same as physiological systems as far as Darwinism.

[George Jung]

While 'the film' may have some merits, I'd point out 1) the movie was made by - and with - the 'intelligentsia'. It says a lot of what some folks think of everyone else, perhaps more than they'd like. 2) just who do you think will be deciding if you're one of the 'smart people/breeder class' or 'dumb as a board/sterilize 'em' group? Generally speaking, the self-appointed are not the ones most of us want making those decisions.

[Paul Pless]

While 'the film' may have some merits, I'd point out 1) the movie was made by - and with - the 'intelligentsia'.

Dude! It was made by the creator of Beavis and Butthead. . .

[George Jung]

You don't think they believe they're the smart folk? Dude! yerself...

[Flying Orca]

Genties and ladlemen, I give you... the Flynn effect.

[SamSam]

While 'the film' may have some merits, I'd point out 1) the movie was made by - and with - the 'intelligentsia'. It says a lot of what some folks think of everyone else, perhaps more than they'd like. 2) just who do you think will be deciding if you're one of the 'smart people/breeder class' or 'dumb as a board/sterilize 'em' group? Generally speaking, the self-appointed are not the ones most of us want making those decisions.

I didn't advocate sterilization. What I described is the way it works, and what I described is the opposite of what you suggest. The 'smart people' are more or less self sterilized for a reason, the 'dumb as a board' are the breeders for no particular reason and 'who will be deciding' is unintentionally being relegated to mediocrity by who has the most votes. Generally speaking the mediocre are the ones that will be making those decisions no matter what 'us' thinks.

[Flying Orca]

I didn't advocate sterilization. What I described is the way it works, and what I described is the opposite of what you suggest. The 'smart people' are more or less self sterilized for a reason, the 'dumb as a board' are the breeders for no particular reason and 'who will be deciding' is unintentionally being relegated to mediocrity by who has the most votes. Generally speaking the mediocre are the ones that will be making those decisions no matter what 'us' thinks.

See "The Marching Morons", "The Time Machine", and other SF works. Interestingly, there is no evidence (as compared to anecdote) that this has actually come to pass.

[George Jung]

I didn't advocate sterilization. What I described is the way it works, and what I described is the opposite of what you suggest. The 'smart people' are more or less self sterilized for a reason, the 'dumb as a board' are the breeders for no particular reason and 'who will be deciding' is unintentionally being relegated to mediocrity by who has the most votes. Generally speaking the mediocre are the ones that will be making those decisions no matter what 'us' thinks.

I understand exactly what you're saying.

Do you understand that 'us' may not include us?

[Wavewacker]

Hang on. There may be others who would like the job. Let's vote on it. (Didn't Josey Wales come from Missouri?)

Why, yes, yes he was and not only that, he was my great, great, great uncle, twice removed. That in itself is reason enough for me to be King! But we have other famous patriots here, like Jogn Ashcroft, Roy Blunt and the ever famous Rush (Mad Man) Limbaugh, so being a Missourian, I'm well versed in the Conservative Languages of our time as well as having the ability to lie my azz off when speaking publicly. In fact, I only became more liberal in an effort to live by the moral convictions taught through conservative thinking!

Bobby, if you need pizza for breakfast you can redeem your food stamps for as mush pizza as you like! All of my subjects...I mean constituents, will live much happier lives as there will be prosperity for all, low inflation so that the value of your home always increases, $2.00 gas (before rebates), no wars, free health care and best of all, a wood boat building plan that will include free plans (purchased by the Interior Department) and government buildings to build in with storage facilities provided!

Then I'll reset the ideas of our founding fathers, lock them in so no one can screw with them, set up three parties, the lefties, the centeries and the righties and ban religion except in churches and homes, naturally legalize pot and provide free education with sex. Then everything will be turned back over to the masses to untangle what was done to suit their own personal and business agendas!

King Wavewacker, that has a nice ring to it..... My motto: Live Free Or Not!

[George Jung]

Leave it to someone named 'wavewacker to provide 'free education with sex'.....