Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Stupidity

Stupidity is the disposition to engage in self-defeating or harmful actions without commensurate benefits, particularly those that impose losses on others while yielding no personal gain, as defined by economist Carlo M. Cipolla in his analysis of human behavior.^[1] This characterization distinguishes stupidity from mere incompetence or banditry, emphasizing its irrationality and prevalence across all social strata, with Cipolla's first law asserting that individuals consistently underestimate the proportion of stupid people in any population.^[2] Empirical psychological studies corroborate this by identifying stupidity through lay conceptions of unintelligent acts, categorized into behaviors reflecting absent-mindedness, overconfidence in limited abilities, and disregard for foreseeable risks or social norms.^[3]^[4] Philosophically, thinkers like Arthur Schopenhauer framed stupidity as a fundamental failure to grasp causation, rendering individuals unable to connect actions to their consequences, a defect more pitiable than malice yet equally disruptive to rational discourse.^[5] Unlike intelligence, which correlates with adaptive problem-solving, stupidity manifests in persistent errors despite accessible evidence, often amplified by cognitive limitations rather than mere lack of knowledge.^[4] Research links it to evolutionary mismatches, where modern environments expose innate cognitive shortcuts—such as overreliance on heuristics—as maladaptive, positioning stupidity as a bottleneck to collective progress.^[6] Cipolla's framework further posits that stupid actions generate greater societal damage than intelligent or self-interested ones due to their unpredictability and lack of reciprocity.^[7] Notable for its ubiquity, stupidity defies traditional metrics like IQ, as high-intelligence individuals can exhibit it through hubris or ideological rigidity, while its mitigation demands vigilance against underestimation and institutional incentives that reward folly.^[8] Controversies arise in distinguishing stupidity from bias or ignorance, with studies suggesting it involves volitional elements, such as willful neglect of disconfirming data, rendering it not merely cognitive but agentic.^[9]^[3] This trait's defining impact lies in its causal role in historical failures, from economic mismanagement to policy blunders, underscoring the need for mechanisms to curb its influence in decision-making.^[10]

Historical and Etymological Foundations

Etymology

The noun stupidity entered English in the mid-16th century, adapted from Latin stupiditās ("dullness, senselessness"), with influences from French stupidité.^[11]^[12] This Latin term derives from the adjective stupidus ("amazed, stunned, senseless"), which itself stems from the verb stupēre ("to be stupefied, astounded, or struck dumb").^[13]^[14] The root stupēre traces to Proto-Indo-European *(s)teu- ("to push, stick, knock, beat"), evoking an image of mental paralysis akin to being physically struck into insensibility.^[13] The adjective stupid first appeared in English around 1541, initially conveying bewilderment or numbness before evolving by the 17th century to denote intellectual dullness or lack of understanding.^[15]^[13] In modern usage, stupidity specifically refers to the quality or state of being stupid, emphasizing deficient reasoning or judgment rather than mere astonishment.

Pre-Modern Conceptions

In ancient Greek philosophy, stupidity was primarily understood through the lens of amathia, a form of ignorance that corrupted rational faculties and engendered moral vice. Plato conceptualized amathia as the vice of the soul's rational part, characterized by distorted evaluative commitments that hindered comprehension of the human good, often manifesting as folly (anoia) or thoughtlessness (aphrosunē), and directly contributing to unjust behavior and a disordered life.^[16] This view positioned stupidity not merely as cognitive deficit but as a culpable failure of reason, perpetuated by intellectual complacency and resistance to truth. Sophocles reinforced this moral dimension, portraying stupidity as evil's close kin and a formidable foe in human affairs.^[17] Aristotle extended these ideas by linking vice to ignorance of particulars in action, though he emphasized that true moral failing involved habitual choice over innate incapacity, distinguishing it from mere intellectual error. In Roman thought, Cicero highlighted persistence in error as the hallmark of idiocy, stating that while anyone may err, only the idiot clings to mistakes, underscoring a voluntary element in sustained folly.^[18] Seneca, drawing on Stoic principles, critiqued the fool's self-deception and paradoxical ignorance of personal limits, viewing stupidity as a barrier to virtue arising from unchecked passions and environmental misperception.^[19] Biblical traditions framed stupidity as spiritual rebellion, with the fool (kesil in Hebrew) depicted in Proverbs as one who rejects divine instruction and wisdom, equating folly with impiety and self-destructive behavior (Proverbs 1:7: "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction"). Early Christian interpreters built on this, associating foolishness with profane ignorance and moral waywardness, often advising avoidance of fools to prevent contagion of vice.^[20] Medieval scholasticism, exemplified by Thomas Aquinas, integrated Aristotelian and Christian perspectives, defining stultitia (stupidity or foolishness) as a capital sin opposing prudence and wisdom, akin to a dulling of intellect that rendered one beast-like in reason's absence. Aquinas likened the insipiens (foolish person) to animals through numerous analogies, emphasizing stupidity's role in habitual aversion to truth and good, treatable yet gravely impairing moral agency.^[21] This conception persisted into the late pre-modern era, influencing depictions of folly in art and literature as both pitiable and culpable defects.

Development in Modern Thought

In the early 20th century, Austrian author Robert Musil analyzed stupidity as a distinctly modern affliction in his 1937 Vienna lecture "On Stupidity," differentiating "constitutional" stupidity—innate intellectual limitation—from "functional" stupidity, where capable minds subordinate reason to collective irrationality, nationalism, or bureaucratic efficiency in mass societies.^[22] Musil contended that this functional variant thrives amid technological progress and democratization of opinion, as individuals mask personal inadequacies by aligning with prevailing ideologies, thereby amplifying societal dysfunction without self-awareness.^[23] He warned that stupidity's resemblance to optimism and adaptability renders it insidious, evading critique as mere error.^[24] Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a German Lutheran theologian imprisoned by the Nazis, elaborated on stupidity's dangers in his 1942-1943 reflections compiled as "After Ten Years," portraying it as a voluntary ethical lapse rather than cognitive deficit: individuals relinquish autonomous thinking under propaganda's sway, becoming tools of power structures more perilous than deliberate evil, which can be confronted rationally.^[25] Bonhoeffer observed that stupidity correlates with prideful isolation from inner freedom and communal bonds, fostering conformity that evil exploits; unlike malice, it resists persuasion, yielding only to external force or personal disgrace.^[26] His analysis, drawn from witnessing Germany's capitulation to totalitarianism, emphasized stupidity's social contagion in hierarchical environments, where flattery and slogans supplant evidence-based judgment.^[27] Post-World War II, Italian economic historian Carlo M. Cipolla quantified stupidity through game-theoretic lenses in his 1976 pamphlet "The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity," defining a stupid person as one whose actions cause net losses to others without self-gain, independent of intelligence or education.^[2] Cipolla's five laws include: (1) underestimation of stupid individuals' prevalence; (2) stupidity's orthogonality to traits like wealth or power; (3) stupid actions' inherent harmfulness; (4) non-stupid persons' underestimation of stupid ones' damage; and (5) stupidity's outsized threat relative to intelligent self-interest or helpless dependency.^[28] He illustrated this via a coordinate graph plotting personal gain against others' losses, positioning stupidity in the quadrant of mutual detriment, arguing it undermines civilizations more than predation or incompetence.^[29] These frameworks evolved the concept from pre-modern moral folly toward a multifaceted modern diagnosis, integrating ethical, sociological, and analytical dimensions, often in response to totalitarianism and bureaucratic rationalism's failures.^[30] While empirical psychology increasingly quantified cognitive limits via IQ testing from the early 1900s, philosophical treatments like these prioritized stupidity's volitional and relational mechanics over mere capacity deficits.^[31]

Conceptual Definitions

Philosophical Perspectives

In ancient Greek philosophy, stupidity was often conflated with a lack of practical wisdom (phronesis), which Aristotle described in the Nicomachean Ethics as the intellectual virtue enabling sound deliberation toward the good life; its absence manifests as foolishness (anoia), a vice of defective reasoning that leads to misguided actions despite potential for better judgment. Aristotle attributed such failings not solely to innate deficits but to habitual errors in habituation and choice, emphasizing that even the wise harbor elements of folly, as "there is a foolish corner in the brain of the wisest man."^[32] In modern philosophy, Arthur Schopenhauer critiqued human folly as a product of the will's dominance over intellect, where individuals pursue illusory satisfactions driven by insatiable desires, mistaking transient impulses for rational ends; he argued that much so-called wisdom devolves into folly across epochs, urging indulgence toward others' vices as reflections of universal human shortcomings.^[33] Schopenhauer's pessimism framed stupidity as an inevitable outcome of life's ceaseless striving, resistant to correction by reason alone, since the intellect serves the blind will rather than mastering it. Twentieth-century theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer provided a stark analysis in his 1943–1944 prison letters, asserting that stupidity (Dummheit) poses a greater threat to goodness than outright evil, as malice can be confronted through exposure, protest, or force, whereas stupidity renders individuals impervious to facts, ethics, or appeals to conscience.^[26] Bonhoeffer, observing Nazi Germany's mass compliance, characterized stupidity as neither congenital nor merely intellectual but a voluntary moral surrender—facilitated by social pressures, propaganda, and power dynamics—that erodes personal responsibility and inner freedom, allowing evil to propagate unchecked through unreflective obedience to slogans or authority.^[26] He contended that stupidity thrives in collectivist environments where independent thinking atrophies, and its antidote lies not in argumentation (which rebounds harmfully) but in cultivating individual spiritual autonomy and ethical solitude. Contemporary philosophical treatments, particularly in virtue epistemology, reposition stupidity as an epistemic vice: a stable disposition toward flawed belief acquisition, maintenance, or application, even when evidence and norms demand otherwise, distinguishing it from mere ignorance or error through its culpable persistence and motivational deficits.^[34] This view, echoed in analytic discussions, underscores stupidity's gradability and contextual embedding, where it often correlates with arrogance or overconfidence in defective reasoning rather than low raw intelligence, rendering it a barrier to knowledge that rational agents must vigilantly counter through reflective practices.^[35] Across these perspectives, stupidity emerges less as isolated cognitive shortfall and more as a profound failure in rational agency, intertwined with moral, social, and existential dimensions that evade simple remediation.

Psychological and Scientific Definitions

In psychology, stupidity is distinguished from low general intelligence (as measured by IQ), which primarily reflects cognitive processing speed, pattern recognition, and abstract reasoning capacity. Instead, stupidity is often framed as a failure of rational thought processes, encompassing behaviors that disregard evidence, persist in ineffective strategies, or prioritize short-term impulses over long-term outcomes, even among individuals with average or high IQs. This view aligns with dual-process theories of cognition, where stupidity arises from overreliance on intuitive System 1 thinking—characterized by heuristics and biases—rather than deliberative System 2 reasoning.^[3]^[36] Empirical investigations into lay conceptions of stupidity, drawn from content analyses of self-reported anecdotes, identify three core categories: absentminded actions (e.g., careless errors like locking keys in a car), incoherent or goal-confused behaviors (e.g., pursuing contradictory objectives without resolution), and predictably unfortunate decisions (e.g., ignoring clear risks, such as driving without brakes). These categories highlight stupidity as context-dependent maladaptiveness rather than a static trait, with the third type most strongly linked to perceived unintelligence due to its foreseeability. The study, involving 154 participants' narratives, underscores that stupidity judgments emphasize controllability and avoidability over innate ability deficits.^[3] From a cognitive science perspective, stupidity correlates with metacognitive errors, such as deficient self-assessment of competence, exemplified by the Dunning-Kruger effect: individuals with low ability in a domain overestimate their performance due to inability to recognize their gaps, while high performers underestimate. This effect, validated across tasks like logical reasoning and grammar (with effect sizes around d=0.5-1.0 in meta-analyses), explains why stupidity manifests as unwarranted confidence in flawed judgments, independent of overall IQ. Neuroscientific correlates include reduced prefrontal cortex activation during error monitoring, impairing adaptive learning from feedback.^[37] Scientific quantification efforts, such as Keith Stanovich's rationality quotient (RQ), operationalize stupidity as deficits in probabilistic thinking, myside bias avoidance, and override of default intuitions—dimensions uncorrelated with IQ (r<0.3 in validation studies). RQ assessments, using tasks like the Cognitive Reflection Test (where average scores hover at 1.2 out of 3), reveal that even high-IQ individuals score low on rationality if prone to base-rate neglect or conjunction fallacies. This framework posits stupidity as a probabilistic mismatch between belief formation and evidence, exacerbating in high-uncertainty environments.

Etiology and Causes

Innate and Genetic Contributors

Twin and adoption studies consistently demonstrate that genetic factors account for a substantial portion of variance in intelligence, with broad-sense heritability estimates averaging around 50% across diverse populations and increasing to 70-80% in adulthood.^[38] ^[39] This heritability reflects the proportion of individual differences in cognitive ability attributable to genetic influences, implying that innate endowments play a primary role in limiting cognitive potential at the lower end of the distribution, where manifestations of stupidity—such as persistent errors in reasoning or failure to grasp basic causal relations—are more prevalent. Longitudinal meta-analyses of twin data further indicate that heritability strengthens over developmental stages, from approximately 20-40% in early childhood to higher levels by adolescence, as shared environmental effects diminish.^[39]^[40] Adoption studies reinforce these findings by comparing relatives reared apart, yielding narrow-sense heritability estimates (additive genetic effects) similar to twin designs, around 50% for intelligence.^[38] For monozygotic twins separated at birth, IQ correlations reach 0.70-0.80, far exceeding those for unrelated individuals raised together, underscoring the dominance of genetic over environmental sharing in shaping cognitive outcomes.^[41] These patterns hold across socioeconomic strata, though some analyses note slightly lower heritability in low-SES groups, potentially due to environmental constraints amplifying non-genetic variance rather than negating genetic influence.^[39] Critically, intelligence follows a polygenic architecture, with no single "stupidity gene" but rather thousands of variants cumulatively influencing brain development, neural efficiency, and processing speed—traits inversely linked to foolish decision-making or gullibility. Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified over 1,000 genetic loci associated with general cognitive function, implicating 700+ genes involved in cortical expression and synaptic plasticity.^[42] Polygenic scores derived from such GWAS predict 4-10% of IQ variance in independent samples, with recent advances reaching up to 14% for educational attainment proxies of cognition, confirming a causal genetic basis rather than mere correlation.^[38] ^[43] These scores outperform null models and align with twin heritability, though they capture only a fraction due to incomplete genomic coverage and the polygenic nature of traits involving rare variants. For the lower tail—corresponding to profound cognitive deficits akin to chronic stupidity—genetic load from deleterious alleles accumulates, as evidenced by higher polygenic risk in individuals with intellectual disabilities, independent of environmental confounds.^[44] While genetic contributions are probabilistic and interact with neurodevelopmental processes, they establish innate ceilings on adaptability, explaining why interventions rarely elevate below-average cognition beyond modest gains. Meta-analyses of polygenic prediction validate this, showing consistent out-of-sample forecasting of IQ differences from childhood onward.^[45] Thus, innate genetic factors represent a core, non-malleable driver of stupidity's persistence across generations, distinct from acquired deficits.^[46]

Acquired Factors: Environment and Upbringing

Environmental exposures and familial influences during formative years can diminish cognitive capacities, contributing to patterns of impaired reasoning and decision-making often characterized as stupidity. Empirical research identifies specific mechanisms, such as toxin accumulation and nutritional shortfalls, that disrupt neurodevelopment. For example, prenatal and early childhood exposure to lead, a pervasive industrial pollutant until regulatory curbs in the 1970s-1980s, correlates with IQ reductions of approximately 2-5 points per 10 μg/dL increase in blood lead levels, based on meta-analyses of cohort studies spanning decades. This effect persists into adulthood, impairing executive functions like impulse control and foresight, as evidenced by longitudinal data from the Cincinnati Lead Study tracking participants from 1979 onward. Malnutrition compounds these risks, with deficiencies in key micronutrients stunting brain maturation. Iodine deficiency, affecting over 2 billion people globally as of recent WHO estimates, lowers average population IQ by 8-13.5 points, per randomized supplementation trials in regions like rural China and Ecuador conducted in the 1990s-2000s. Similarly, iron deficiency anemia in infancy, prevalent in low-income settings, associates with 5-10 point IQ deficits and reduced neural myelination, according to systematic reviews of interventions showing partial reversibility if addressed before age 2. Protein-energy undernutrition, as seen in cases of fetal growth restriction, further hampers synaptic pruning and hippocampal development, yielding long-term cognitive lags documented in birth cohort studies like the Dutch Hunger Winter analysis of 1944-1945 famine effects. Upbringing dynamics, including parenting practices and educational access, modulate these vulnerabilities through behavioral reinforcement and skill acquisition. Neglectful or abusive home environments, characterized by inconsistent supervision and emotional unavailability, predict poorer prefrontal cortex maturation and heightened susceptibility to irrational choices, with twin studies disentangling shared environment contributions estimating 10-20% variance in non-genetic cognitive outcomes. Authoritarian parenting, emphasizing rote obedience over critical inquiry, correlates with diminished abstract reasoning in adulthood, as per longitudinal data from the Minnesota Study of Risk and Adaptation following children from 1975. Conversely, enriched stimulation—such as responsive caregiving and early literacy exposure—mitigates deficits, though baseline harms from deprivation often endure, underscoring causal irreversibility in critical periods. Substandard schooling amplifies acquired deficits by failing to cultivate adaptive intelligence. Inadequate instruction, marked by low teacher quality and overcrowded classrooms, results in 0.2-0.5 standard deviation drops in cognitive test scores, according to randomized evaluations of U.S. charter school lotteries from 2000-2020. Chronic absenteeism and unstructured curricula further entrench habits of superficial learning, with international assessments like PISA 2018 revealing that students in bottom-quartile environments score 20-30 points lower in problem-solving domains, equivalent to 2-3 years of schooling lag. These patterns hold across socioeconomic strata, though resource disparities exacerbate them, as causal inference from policy reforms in Finland's 1990s decentralization demonstrates sustained gains from rigorous, inquiry-based pedagogy. Overall, such environmental and upbringing factors operate via direct physiological insults and indirect behavioral conditioning, yielding measurable declines in faculties essential to averting stupidity.

Ideological and Cultural Influences

Ideologies contribute to stupidity by fostering environments where empirical evidence is subordinated to doctrinal adherence, often through mechanisms like motivated reasoning and suppression of dissent. In such contexts, individuals prioritize ideological consistency over rational evaluation, leading to persistent errors in judgment despite available contradictory data. For instance, groupthink—a phenomenon where group cohesion overrides critical appraisal—manifests in ideological settings, prompting members to rationalize flawed decisions and stereotype outsiders to maintain unity.^[47] This dynamic has been observed in political movements, where high-stakes conformity under stress or leadership pressure yields suboptimal outcomes, such as ethical oversights or ignored risks.^[47] Empirical research links higher intelligence to greater rationality in political preferences, defined as consistency between attitudes and voting behavior, with intelligence explaining up to 2.7% additional variance in alignment on social and global issues across U.S. datasets.^[48] However, polygenic scores predictive of cognitive performance correlate with social liberalism and reduced authoritarianism within families, suggesting genetic predispositions toward intelligence may incline toward certain left-leaning views, even after controlling for socioeconomic factors.^[49] Countervailing evidence indicates a small positive association (r = 0.07) between cognitive ability and economic conservatism in meta-analyses of 46,426 participants, moderated by measurement type and sample origin, implying that ideological rationality varies by domain rather than uniformly favoring one orientation.^[50] Cultural norms exacerbate these tendencies by embedding cognitive biases that prioritize social harmony or authority over independent verification. In high-conformity cultures, norm enforcement suppresses individual innovation and error correction, reducing adaptive rationality as deviations from group consensus are penalized.^[51] Political correctness norms, prevalent in Western academic and media institutions, have been critiqued for impeding critical thinking by enforcing self-censorship and limiting discourse on sensitive topics, potentially hindering students' analytical development.^[52] Systemic left-leaning ideological imbalances in academia, evidenced by hiring discrimination in disciplines like social sciences, further entrench uncritical acceptance of prevailing narratives, as conservative perspectives face underrepresentation and scrutiny.^[53] These influences collectively diminish collective foresight, as seen in historical ideological failures where evidence was dismissed in favor of purity, from Soviet economic planning to certain modern policy echo chambers.^[47]

Assessment and Quantification

Traditional Metrics: IQ and Cognitive Tests

Intelligence Quotient (IQ) tests represent the primary traditional metric for assessing cognitive abilities, with low scores often interpreted as indicators of intellectual limitations contributing to stupidity in decision-making and problem-solving. Developed initially by French psychologist Alfred Binet and physician Théodore Simon in 1905, the Binet-Simon scale aimed to identify schoolchildren requiring remedial education by measuring mental age relative to chronological age.^[54] In 1916, American psychologist Lewis Terman revised this into the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, introducing the IQ formula as (mental age / chronological age) × 100, which standardized scores around a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15 in modern versions.^[55] These tests evaluate core cognitive domains including verbal comprehension, perceptual reasoning, working memory, and processing speed through tasks like vocabulary, analogies, block design, and digit span.^[54] Central to IQ's construct is the g factor, or general intelligence, proposed by British psychologist Charles Spearman in 1904 via factor analysis of cognitive test correlations. Spearman observed that performance across diverse mental tasks shares a common variance, accounting for approximately 40-50% of individual differences in cognitive abilities, with specific factors (s factors) explaining narrower skills.^[56] This g factor exhibits high heritability (estimates of 0.5-0.8 in adulthood) and underpins the predictive power of IQ tests. Meta-analyses confirm IQ's reliability, with test-retest correlations typically exceeding 0.9 over short intervals and around 0.8 over years, indicating stable measurement of underlying traits.^[57] Validity is evidenced by strong correlations with real-world outcomes: IQ predicts academic achievement with coefficients of 0.5-0.7, job performance with 0.5-0.6 (rising to 0.7+ for complex roles), and socioeconomic success, where each standard deviation increase in IQ associates with 1-2 additional years of education and higher income.^[58]^[59] Low IQ scores (below 70-85) correlate with impaired adaptive functioning, higher error rates in reasoning tasks, and increased vulnerability to exploitative or irrational choices, aligning with manifestations of stupidity as deficient cognitive processing.^[58] Despite robust empirical support, IQ tests face critiques for potential cultural loading in item content, such as vocabulary or analogies drawn from Western norms, which may disadvantage non-native speakers or those from dissimilar educational backgrounds, though efforts like Raven's Progressive Matrices aim for culture-reduced formats.^[60] Differential item functioning analyses show minimal bias in modern, well-normed tests after statistical corrections, and g's cross-cultural stability persists even when group mean differences are controlled.^[60] Critics arguing overemphasis on IQ overlook that it explains only part of variance in outcomes like creativity or leadership, yet meta-analytic evidence affirms its unparalleled utility for predicting cognitive demands in structured environments, underscoring low IQ as a key vector for stupidity rather than a holistic definition.^[59] Ongoing refinements, including computerized adaptive testing, enhance precision while preserving g's centrality.^[61]

Alternative Measures: Rationality and Behavioral Assessments

While intelligence quotient (IQ) tests primarily evaluate cognitive processing speed, pattern recognition, and logical deduction, they inadequately capture rationality, defined as the effective application of reasoning to achieve goals while minimizing biases and errors in judgment.^[62] High-IQ individuals can exhibit dysrationalia, making persistently poor decisions despite cognitive capacity, as evidenced by failures to override intuitive errors or adhere to probabilistic norms.^[63] Rationality assessments address this gap by targeting reflective thinking, bias avoidance, and adaptive decision-making under uncertainty. The Rationality Quotient (RQ), developed by Keith Stanovich, Richard West, and Maggie Toplak in their 2016 book The Rationality Quotient, operationalizes rationality through the Comprehensive Assessment of Rational Thinking (CART).^[63] The CART comprises over 20 tasks evaluating domains such as probabilistic reasoning (e.g., Bayesian updating), scientific thinking (e.g., falsifiability and correlational causation discernment), avoidance of myside bias (preferential evaluation of evidence aligning with prior beliefs), and reflective mindware (metacognitive strategies for problem-solving).^[64] Unlike IQ, which correlates modestly with RQ (around 0.3-0.4), the RQ predicts real-world outcomes like financial decisions and belief formation better, highlighting independent variance in foolishness attributable to irrational habits rather than mere processing limitations.^[65] Empirical validation across diverse samples confirms RQ's reliability, with normative data establishing cutoffs for rational proficiency.^[66] The Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT), introduced by Shane Frederick in 2005, serves as a concise behavioral proxy for rationality by gauging the propensity to suppress automatic, intuitive responses in favor of deliberative analysis.^[67] Consisting of three mathematical word problems (e.g., "A bat and a ball cost $1.10 in total. The bat costs $1.00 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?"), the CRT elicits a common System 1 error ($0.10) overridden by System 2 reflection ($0.05).^[68] Scores predict susceptibility to heuristics like base-rate neglect and framing effects, independent of IQ after controlling for numeracy, and recent extensions (e.g., 7- or 11-item versions) enhance robustness for broader rationality screening.^[69] Longitudinal stability and heritability estimates (around 0.5, overlapping with general intelligence genetics) underscore CRT's utility in identifying behavioral stupidity as a heritable yet trainable deficit in override mechanisms.^[70]^[71] Other behavioral assessments complement these by directly probing decision biases. For instance, tasks measuring framing effects—where equivalent outcomes are evaluated differently based on presentation (e.g., gains vs. losses)—reveal emotional overrides of logic, linked to amygdala activation rather than cognitive deficits.^[72] The Wason selection task assesses deductive rationality by testing hypothesis falsification, where low performance (around 10-30% correct in general populations) indicates confirmation bias, a hallmark of non-rational thinking uncorrelated with IQ. Aggregate bias indices from batteries like the Heuristics and Biases Program provide composite scores for everyday rationality, emphasizing that stupidity often manifests in goal-subverting choices (e.g., gambling fallacies) despite intact intelligence.^[73] These measures collectively argue for multifaceted evaluation, as single-metric IQ overlooks the causal role of flawed mental tools in perpetuating irrational behavior.^[74]

Challenges and Critiques of Measurement

Measuring stupidity poses inherent difficulties due to its multifaceted nature, encompassing not only cognitive deficits but also failures in rational decision-making, emotional regulation, and adaptive behavior, which resist unified quantification. Traditional metrics like IQ tests primarily assess general cognitive ability (g-factor) but overlook domain-specific irrationalities or situational folly, where individuals with above-average IQ exhibit poor judgment, as evidenced by studies showing no perfect correlation between IQ and real-world decision quality.^[75] This definitional ambiguity undermines construct validity, as tests may proxy intelligence without capturing "stupidity" as maladaptive outcomes from overconfidence or bias neglect.^[76] IQ tests face critiques for cultural and socioeconomic biases, where performance reflects prior education and environmental exposure rather than innate capacity, with evidence from longitudinal data indicating that early schooling disparities inflate score variances misattributed to ability.^[77] Reliability concerns persist, including test-retest inconsistencies (e.g., standard error of measurement up to 5-10 points on Wechsler scales) and limited scope excluding creativity, motivation, or social intelligence—traits implicated in stupid behaviors like risk miscalculation.^[78] Critics argue these instruments yield relative rankings rather than absolute measures, prone to Flynn effect inflation (3-point generational rise uncorrelated with practical gains), rendering cross-temporal or individual comparisons unreliable.^[79] Alternative assessments, such as the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT), aim to gauge rationality by pitting intuition against deliberation but suffer from low reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.60-0.74 due to only three items) and familiarity effects, where prior exposure boosts scores without reflecting true reflective capacity.^[80] These tests inadequately address the breadth of cognitive biases (e.g., confirmation bias or base-rate neglect), showing weak predictive power for complex, real-world irrationality, and are further limited by numeracy demands that confound rationality with mathematical skill.^[81] Behavioral metrics, like observational folly indices, introduce subjectivity and rater biases, lacking standardized validity against objective outcomes such as financial losses from poor choices.^[82] Broader psychometric challenges include measurement error from administration variability and construct under-specification, where even high-reliability tests (e.g., 0.90+ internal consistency) fail individual-level predictions due to unsystematic variance, as heritability estimates for IQ (0.50-0.80 in adults) mask environmental confounds.^[83] Validity erosion occurs when tests prioritize predictive correlations over causal mechanisms of stupidity, such as ideological echo chambers unproxied by scores. Overall, these limitations highlight that no current tool fully quantifies stupidity without conflating it with narrower proxies, necessitating multimodal approaches despite their integration hurdles.^[84]

Forms and Manifestations

Cognitive and Intellectual Stupidity

Cognitive and intellectual stupidity refers to persistent deficiencies in rational cognition, characterized by flawed reasoning, inadequate evidence evaluation, and poor problem-solving that result in maladaptive decisions, independent of overall intelligence levels. Unlike mere low IQ, which measures cognitive capacity, this form of stupidity often involves the misapplication or neglect of available intellectual resources, leading to beliefs and actions contradicted by empirical data. Psychologist Keith E. Stanovich introduced the term dysrationalia in 1993 to describe this phenomenon, defining it as the inability to think and behave rationally despite possessing adequate intelligence, akin to a specific learning disability in rationality rather than raw processing power.^[85] Stanovich argued that dysrationalia manifests in everyday failures, such as adhering to unsubstantiated superstitions or ignoring probabilistic risks, even among those with high IQ scores above 120.^[86] A core mechanism underlying cognitive stupidity is metacognitive deficit, where individuals fail to accurately assess their own competence, exacerbating errors in judgment. The Dunning-Kruger effect, empirically demonstrated in 1999 by psychologists Justin Kruger and David Dunning, illustrates this: participants performing in the lowest quartile on tests of humor, grammar, and logic overestimated their abilities by approximately 20-30 percentile points, while high performers underestimated theirs due to heightened awareness of task complexity.^[87] This effect arises from a lack of domain-specific knowledge needed to recognize incompetence, leading to inflated self-evaluations; for instance, in a study involving logical reasoning tasks, low scorers (below the 12th percentile) rated themselves in the 62nd percentile.^[88] Such metacognitive blind spots contribute to intellectual stupidity by fostering overconfidence in erroneous conclusions, as seen in persistent endorsement of conspiracy theories despite contradictory evidence.^[89] Manifestations of intellectual stupidity frequently appear in decision-making under uncertainty, where systematic cognitive biases override logical analysis. Chronic susceptibility to confirmation bias—seeking or interpreting information to affirm preconceptions—exemplifies this, with studies showing it correlates with reduced updating of beliefs in light of new data; for example, individuals prone to this bias in experimental settings adjusted probability estimates by only 10-15% after disconfirming evidence, compared to 40-50% for less biased counterparts.^[90] In probabilistic reasoning tasks, such as the Linda problem (where participants irrationally favor a conjunctive fallacy over base rates), failure rates exceed 80% even among educated samples, indicating a default cognitive shortcut that intelligent individuals fail to override.^[91] These patterns persist across domains, from financial choices—where overreliance on anecdotes leads to suboptimal investments—to scientific literacy, where rejection of evolution or vaccination efficacy stems not from ignorance but from compartmentalized irrationality.^[92] Intellectual stupidity also involves a reluctance to engage in effortful thinking, termed "cognitive miserliness," where heuristics substitute for deliberate analysis, yielding predictably poor outcomes in novel situations. Stanovich's framework posits that rationality comprises three components—algorithmic mind (IQ-related), reflective mind (metacognition), and autonomous mind (belief revision)—with stupidity arising from weaknesses in the latter two, even when the first is strong.^[93] Empirical data from rationality quotient (RQ) assessments, developed by Stanovich and colleagues, reveal that RQ scores predict life success (e.g., avoiding bankruptcy or legal issues) better than IQ in some cohorts, with dysrational individuals scoring low on tasks like recognizing base-rate neglect despite average intelligence.^[94] This underscores that cognitive stupidity is not merely absence of smarts but active subversion of reason, often amplified by environmental cues like echo chambers that reinforce flawed priors.^[95] Social variants of stupidity arise when interpersonal dynamics and group pressures suppress individual rationality, leading to collective irrationality. In organizational contexts, functional stupidity manifests as the deliberate limitation of critical reflection to align with prevailing norms, prioritizing short-term harmony over substantive evaluation. This includes deficits in reflexivity (questioning assumptions), justification (providing reasons for actions), and normative avoidance (eschewing debates on values), as outlined in a stupidity-based theory of organizations. Such behaviors enable efficient operations but foster systemic errors, as evidenced by cases where uncritical adherence to flawed processes contributes to corporate failures, including financial meltdowns and technical disasters.^[96]^[97] Group settings amplify social stupidity through mechanisms like conformity and diffusion of responsibility, where individuals defer judgment to perceived majority views, resulting in suboptimal outcomes. For instance, deindividuation in crowds reduces personal accountability, prompting actions individuals would avoid in isolation, such as escalated risk-taking or failure to intervene in emergencies. Psychological research attributes this to social identity pressures overriding personal cognition, with studies demonstrating heightened irrationality in group deliberations compared to solitary decision-making.^[98] Mainstream academic sources on these phenomena, often from social psychology, may underemphasize individual agency due to institutional emphases on collectivist explanations, yet empirical data consistently show how social cues distort evidence-based reasoning.^[99] Emotional variants of stupidity involve the dominance of unregulated affects over logical assessment, impairing adaptive responses. Low emotional intelligence (EQ), defined as deficient perception, use, understanding, and management of emotions, leads to impulsive outbursts, blame-shifting, and relational breakdowns, as individuals struggle to identify feelings or empathize effectively. For example, those with low EQ exhibit insensitivity to social cues, frequent conflicts from emotional reactivity, and avoidance of accountability, correlating with weaker support networks and heightened stress.^[100] While emotions typically facilitate coherent decision-making by signaling anticipated outcomes and motivating learning, extreme dysregulation—such as rage-induced actions—produces irrationality by short-circuiting deliberation, as seen in rare but documented cases of violence or self-sabotage.^[101] Empirical links between emotional drivers and broader stupidity appear in meta-analyses showing irrational beliefs, fueled by unchecked anxiety or anger, positively associate with distress metrics: general psychological distress (r = 0.48), anxiety (r = 0.45), depression (r = 0.42), and guilt (r = 0.40), based on data from over 10,000 participants across 87 studies. These patterns indicate how emotional overrides contribute to persistent folly, distinct from cognitive deficits, by entrenching maladaptive habits without evidential correction.^[102]

Political and Collective Stupidity

Political stupidity manifests in the systematic underinformed decision-making of electorates and policymakers, often resulting in policies that contradict empirical evidence or rational self-interest. Empirical assessments reveal profound gaps in public knowledge of foundational political facts; for instance, a 2024 national survey indicated that over 70% of Americans failed a basic civic literacy test on elements such as the three branches of government and the number of U.S. Supreme Court justices.^[103] This deficiency extends to policy comprehension, with studies showing that uninformed voters frequently support measures at odds with their economic preferences, as experimentally providing factual information shifts voting patterns away from such choices.^[104] Rational ignorance theory explains much of this pattern: individual voters invest minimally in political knowledge because the marginal probability of swaying an election approximates zero in large democracies, rendering information acquisition a low-return activity.^[105] Legal scholar Ilya Somin documents this as a structural flaw, citing surveys where majorities cannot identify basic constitutional mechanisms or historical events like the causes of the War of 1812, leading to perverse outcomes such as sustained support for inefficient government expansions despite awareness of fiscal constraints in personal life.^[106] Such ignorance is not merely episodic but pervasive, with Pew Research finding in 2023 that fewer than half of respondents correctly identified procedural details like Senate term lengths or Electoral College functions.^[107] Collective stupidity arises when aggregated individual errors compound through social dynamics, particularly groupthink, wherein tight-knit advisory groups favor unanimity over scrutiny, suppressing dissenting evidence and alternatives. Psychologist Irving Janis applied this framework to U.S. foreign policy debacles, including the 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion, where President Kennedy's inner circle dismissed logistical flaws and intelligence doubts to preserve cohesion, culminating in operational failure.^[108] Analogous processes underlay the 1941 Pearl Harbor oversight, the 1950 Korean War boundary extension, and Vietnam escalation, where premature consensus overlooked contrary analyses from military experts.^[109] In contrast, Janis highlighted vigilant successes like the 1947 Marshall Plan and 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, where structured dissent and devil's advocacy yielded robust strategies.^[110] These mechanisms extend to broader political collectives, where conformity in bureaucracies or electorates amplifies suboptimal choices, as seen in organizational studies of "collective stupidity" wherein competent actors engage in value-destructive behaviors due to unreflective routines and risk aversion.^[111] Scholarly analyses of policy fiascos attribute such failures not to malice but to diminished critical appraisal under pressure for harmony, a pattern replicated in subsequent cases like certain post-9/11 intelligence assessments.^[112] While academic literature on these phenomena draws from diverse ideological contexts, systemic biases in social sciences—such as reluctance to critique democratic processes—may underemphasize the scale of voter incompetence relative to elite decision errors.^[113]

Societal Consequences

Individual Ramifications

Individuals exhibiting cognitive stupidity, often proxied by low intelligence quotient (IQ) scores, experience diminished socioeconomic attainment, including reduced educational achievement and occupational success. Meta-analyses indicate that cognitive ability accounts for substantial variance in life success metrics such as income and employment stability, with lower IQ correlating to higher unemployment rates and lower earnings potential.^[114] This stems from impaired problem-solving and adaptability in complex work environments, where individuals struggle to navigate job demands requiring abstract reasoning.^[115] Health outcomes are adversely affected, as low IQ predicts higher morbidity and reduced longevity through mechanisms like poor adherence to preventive behaviors and risky lifestyle choices. Longitudinal studies demonstrate that childhood IQ inversely correlates with late-life mortality, even after controlling for socioeconomic factors, with each standard deviation increase in IQ associated with a 20-25% reduction in mortality risk across causes including cardiovascular disease and accidents.^[116]^[117] Genetic and environmental analyses further confirm this link persists, attributing it partly to superior decision-making in health management, such as diet, exercise, and medical compliance.^[118] Low rationality, encompassing susceptibility to cognitive biases, exacerbates personal decision-making failures in domains like finance and interpersonal relations. Overconfidence bias, prevalent among those prone to irrational judgments, leads to excessive risk-taking in investments, resulting in sustained losses from holding underperforming assets.^[119] Framing effects and confirmation bias distort everyday choices, fostering patterns of debt accumulation or relational conflicts by prioritizing short-term gratification over evidence-based evaluation.^[120] Empirical assessments show that deficient critical thinking, a marker of behavioral stupidity, more strongly predicts negative life events like financial ruin or social isolation than IQ alone.^[121] Criminal involvement represents a severe ramification, with low IQ serving as a consistent risk factor for offending behaviors. Meta-analytic reviews establish that individuals with IQs below 90 are disproportionately represented in violent and property crimes, with effect sizes indicating a protective role for higher intelligence against antisocial conduct.^[122] This association holds in population cohorts, where lower cognitive capacity impairs impulse control and foresight, elevating perpetration rates even after adjusting for confounders like socioeconomic status.^[123]^[124]

Broader Economic and Political Impacts

National IQ averages exhibit a strong positive correlation with GDP per capita across countries, with studies reporting coefficients ranging from 0.62 to 0.82, indicating that populations with higher average cognitive ability generate substantially greater economic output.^[125]^[126] This relationship persists even after controlling for factors like economic freedom and education levels, suggesting cognitive capacity causally drives productivity and innovation rather than merely correlating with them.^[127] Low national IQs, often below 90, are associated with stagnant growth rates under 1% annually, while higher averages above 100 support sustained expansion exceeding 2-3%.^[128] Within economies, individuals and groups with lower intelligence contribute disproportionately less to technological progress and income generation, as evidenced by econometric models showing that low-IQ cohorts (below 85) exert minimal influence on aggregate output compared to average or high-IQ groups.^[129] This manifests in reduced patent rates, slower adoption of complex machinery, and higher error rates in labor-intensive sectors, amplifying opportunity costs estimated in trillions globally when scaled to national levels.^[130] Irrational decision-making, such as persistence in unprofitable investments due to cognitive biases, further erodes efficiency; for instance, sunk cost fallacies in corporate and policy choices lead to prolonged resource misallocation, with behavioral economics quantifying annual losses in the U.S. economy alone at hundreds of billions from such errors.^[131] Politically, widespread voter ignorance and irrationality—where citizens systematically undervalue factual policy knowledge due to the negligible personal impact of a single vote—result in electoral support for inefficient interventions like excessive regulation or fiscal imbalances.^[132] This "rational irrationality" enables biases favoring short-term populism over long-term viability, as modeled in frameworks where the marginal cost of ideological error in voting approaches zero, yielding policies with negative net present value, such as ballooning public debt exceeding 100% of GDP in low-information democracies.^[133] Empirical surveys reveal that political misconceptions, like overestimating welfare sustainability, correlate with lower cognitive test scores and drive outcomes like persistent budget deficits, with U.S. examples from 2008-2023 showing trillions in avoidable interest payments from deficit-financed spending unsupported by growth projections.^[105]

Evidence of Increasing Prevalence

Recent studies indicate a reversal of the Flynn effect, whereby average IQ scores in developed nations have begun to decline after decades of increases. In the United States, analysis of a large sample of adults tested between 2006 and 2018 revealed statistically significant drops in verbal reasoning, matrix reasoning, and letter and number sequencing scores, with declines ranging from 0.29 to 0.39 IQ points per year, though spatial ability showed a slight increase.^[134] ^[135] This pattern aligns with findings from Norway, where IQ gains stalled for cohorts born after 1975 and reversed for those born in the 1990s, with a loss of approximately 7 IQ points per generation in some measures.^[136] International assessments corroborate declining cognitive performance among youth. The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2022 results from the OECD documented an unprecedented drop in 15-year-olds' proficiency across OECD countries, with average reading scores falling 10 points and mathematics scores declining 15 points compared to 2018 levels, equivalent to about three-quarters of a school year's learning loss in those subjects.^[137] ^[138] In the US specifically, PISA mathematics scores decreased by 13 points from 2018 to 2022, exacerbating a pre-existing downward trend observed in prior cycles.^[139] These metrics suggest a growing proportion of the population falling below cognitive thresholds associated with effective reasoning and problem-solving, potentially manifesting as increased susceptibility to errors in judgment. Environmental factors, such as changes in education quality, nutrition, and media consumption, are posited as contributors rather than genetic shifts, though the exact causal mechanisms remain under investigation.^[140] Peer-reviewed analyses emphasize that such declines are not uniform but consistently negative in fluid intelligence domains critical for adapting to novel situations.^[141]

Countermeasures and Mitigation

Enhancing Personal Rationality

Individuals can mitigate personal stupidity—manifesting as persistent errors in judgment due to uncorrected cognitive biases or flawed reasoning—through deliberate training in debiasing techniques and evidence-based decision processes. Research indicates that targeted interventions, such as one-shot debiasing sessions, significantly reduce the influence of biases like confirmation bias on decision-making outcomes.^[142] Game-based training methods have proven more effective than passive lectures, with studies showing sustained reductions in biases like anchoring and overconfidence when participants actively engage in simulated scenarios.^[143]^[144] A meta-analysis of 54 randomized controlled trials on educational debiasing approaches among students found small but statistically significant improvements in reducing bias susceptibility, with effect sizes persisting in follow-up assessments.^[145]^[146] Key personal strategies include fostering metacognition—self-monitoring thought processes to identify bias triggers—and employing "cognitive forcing" tactics, such as deliberately generating alternative hypotheses before concluding.^[147] These methods encourage skepticism toward initial intuitions, drawing from heuristics-and-biases research to prioritize probabilistic reasoning over anecdotal evidence.^[148] Practicing evidence-based decision-making frameworks further enhances rationality by emphasizing data collection, quantification of uncertainties, and evaluation of multiple sources before action.^[149] For instance, structured techniques like decision trees or pre-mortem analysis—imagining failure causes in advance—have been shown to improve accuracy in high-stakes personal choices by countering optimism bias.^[150] Long-term habit formation, such as daily reflection on past errors and exposure to disconfirming information, builds resilience against recurring irrationality, though transfer to novel contexts requires repeated application.^[151] While individual variability exists, consistent self-application yields measurable gains in rational behavior over time.^[152]

Educational Reforms

Educational reforms to counteract manifestations of stupidity focus on replacing ineffective progressive pedagogies with evidence-based methods that build foundational knowledge, explicit skills, and rational decision-making capacities. Direct instruction, which involves structured teacher-led explanations, modeling, and guided practice, has demonstrated superior outcomes compared to discovery or inquiry-based learning in meta-analyses of instructional efficacy; for instance, one synthesis reported a 43.6% increase in student success rates attributable to direct instruction across subjects.^[153] This approach addresses cognitive limitations by minimizing extraneous load and ensuring mastery before advancing, countering the inefficiencies of minimally guided methods that often exacerbate errors in reasoning and retention.^[154] In literacy, systematic phonics instruction—teaching grapheme-phoneme correspondences explicitly—produces measurable gains in reading proficiency and spelling, particularly for early learners, with effects persisting across grades and outperforming balanced or whole-language alternatives in controlled studies.^[155] ^[156] Such reforms mitigate functional illiteracy, a proxy for intellectual underdevelopment, by prioritizing decoding skills over comprehension strategies that presuppose unmet prerequisites, as evidenced by national panels reviewing decades of intervention data. Curriculum integration of probability, statistics, and formal logic from elementary levels equips students to detect fallacies and quantify uncertainty, reducing susceptibility to probabilistic fallacies like the gambler's fallacy or base-rate neglect. Interventions targeting confirmation bias through metacognitive prompts, such as structured reflection on evidence-seeking, have shown promise in altering habitual reasoning patterns in classroom settings.^[157] High-performing systems, like those in East Asia, incorporate these elements within rigorous sequences that emphasize factual recall and application, correlating with sustained advantages in international metrics.^[158] To foster critical analysis, reforms advocate embedding writing tasks that require evidence evaluation and argumentation, which randomized trials link to verifiable improvements in analytical skills over non-writing controls.^[159] Addressing broader declines, such as the 30-point drop in U.S. PISA math scores from 2006 to 2022, necessitates shifting from equity-focused diffusion to content-specific drills and sequential progression, as unguided exploration fails to close achievement gaps without prior knowledge scaffolds.^[160] These changes prioritize causal mechanisms of learning—repetition, feedback, and hierarchy—over ideological preferences for student-centered autonomy, which empirical syntheses consistently rate lower in effect size for core competencies.^[161]

Cultural and Institutional Strategies

Cultural strategies to counter stupidity prioritize norms that incentivize skepticism, empirical scrutiny, and intellectual humility over ideological conformity. Historical examples include the use of satire and philosophical critique, as in Voltaire's writings, which mocked dogmatic folly to promote rational discourse, though modern implementations often falter due to institutional capture. More contemporarily, promoting viewpoint diversity in cultural production—such as through independent media and think tanks—helps dismantle echo chambers that amplify errors; research indicates that political diversity reduces confirmation bias and improves reasoning quality among intellectuals.^[162] This approach counters the systemic left-leaning biases prevalent in mainstream media and cultural elites, which have been documented to skew narratives toward unsubstantiated consensus, as evidenced by disproportionate faculty political affiliations in social sciences (ratios exceeding 10:1 liberal to conservative in U.S. universities as of 2020 surveys).^[163] Institutional strategies emphasize structural reforms that impose accountability and leverage decentralized processes to filter out irrationality. Nassim Nicholas Taleb's principle of "skin in the game" posits that requiring decision-makers to personally incur the costs of errors—such as financial or reputational risks—deters stupidity, as bureaucrats and experts without such exposure often propagate flawed policies without learning from failures; empirical cases include the 2008 financial crisis, where advisors insulated from losses endorsed risky models.^[164] In organizations, techniques like appointing devil's advocates or conducting dialectical inquiries have been shown to enhance group decision-making by challenging assumptions and aggregating diverse insights, reducing the incidence of "dumb" collective outcomes observed in experiments where homogeneous groups outperform structured diverse ones by up to 20% in accuracy.^[165] Within academia and public institutions, adopting institutional neutrality—refraining from official stances on contested sociopolitical issues—mitigates groupthink by preserving space for open inquiry; by December 2024, 148 higher education institutions had implemented versions of this policy, signaling a shift toward prioritizing evidence over activism.^[166] Friedrich Hayek advocated market-like mechanisms as robust institutional designs, where competitive selection and price signals harness dispersed knowledge to correct errors organically, outperforming centralized planning prone to the "fatal conceit" of overestimating human foresight; historical data from post-WWII economic liberalizations in Europe demonstrate faster error correction via markets, with GDP growth rates 2-3% higher in decentralized systems.^[167] These strategies collectively aim to embed causal accountability, ensuring institutions evolve antifragile resilience against pervasive folly.

Cultural and Media Depictions

In Literature and Philosophy

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, in a 1943 essay composed during his imprisonment in Tegel prison, distinguished stupidity from malice by arguing that the former proves more pernicious to moral good, as it evades exposure through reason or force and flourishes amid authoritarian conformity, where individuals surrender independent judgment to become instruments of the powerful. Bonhoeffer contended that stupidity arises not from intellectual deficit but moral failing, yielding only to inner personal liberation and renewed responsibility rather than direct opposition.^[26] Economic historian Carlo M. Cipolla, in his 1976 pamphlet The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity, proposed five axioms treating stupidity as a predictable social force: individuals invariably underestimate its prevalence; its probability remains constant irrespective of wealth, education, or status; a stupid actor causes net losses to others without self-benefit; non-stupid persons fail to anticipate stupidity's harm; and stupid individuals constitute civilization's gravest threat due to their irrational damage.^[2] Cipolla's framework, grounded in graphical analysis of interpersonal utility exchanges, posits stupidity as orthogonal to intelligence or malevolence, emphasizing its disproportionate societal cost. Arthur Schopenhauer critiqued stupidity's ubiquity in human affairs, observing that much attributed to fate stems instead from personal folly, and advising the intelligent to feign lesser acumen in society to evade envy provoked by superior wit.^[168] He further noted that theologians encounter mankind's stupidity comprehensively, contrasting it with the weaknesses seen by physicians or wickedness by jurists.^[169] In literature, Fyodor Dostoevsky portrayed stupidity as stark and unvarnished compared to reason's convolutions, asserting in The Brothers Karamazov (1880) that "the stupider one is, the closer one is to reality," while stupidity remains "brief and artless" against intelligence's "squirm[ing]."^[170] Desiderius Erasmus's Praise of Folly (1511), narrated by the goddess Folly, satirizes human pretensions in scholarship, theology, and governance, defending folly as indispensable for endurance amid life's absurdities and critiquing self-deception as folly's core.^[171] Aristotle acknowledged folly's persistence even among the sagacious, remarking that "there is a foolish corner in the brain of the wisest man," linking it to defensive resistance against unwelcome truths.^[32]

In Popular Media and Humor

Stupidity is a staple in comedic portrayals across popular media, often amplified for humorous effect through slapstick, verbal blunders, or characters whose irrational decisions lead to chaotic outcomes. In film, movies like Dumb and Dumber (1994) exemplify this by centering on protagonists Lloyd Christmas and Harry Dunne, whose low intelligence propels a road-trip plot filled with absurd mishaps, grossing over $247 million worldwide and spawning sequels due to its appeal to audiences recognizing exaggerated folly. Similarly, This Is Spinal Tap (1984) satirizes rock band incompetence through deliberate errors in logic and performance, blending mockumentary style with depictions of self-deluded stupidity that influenced later comedies.^[172] Television series frequently feature recurring idiot archetypes whose cognitive shortcomings generate ongoing humor via workplace or family dysfunction. In The Office (U.S. version, 2005–2013), Michael Scott, portrayed by Steve Carell, embodies managerial stupidity through impulsive, tone-deaf decisions that undermine productivity, such as hosting disastrous diversity trainings or ignoring basic social cues, contributing to the show's nine-season run and Emmy wins for its cringe-inducing realism. Other examples include Andy Dwyer from Parks and Recreation (2009–2015), whose childlike naivety and poor judgment—evident in schemes like failing to grasp municipal bureaucracy—highlight everyday irrationality, ranking high in lists of comedic buffoons for blending eccentricity with genuine dimness.^[173]^[174] Humor rooted in human stupidity often draws from the superiority theory, where laughter arises from observing others' intellectual failings or misfortunes, as articulated in analyses of comedic mechanisms. Stand-up routines frequently mine this vein; George Carlin's bits on "dumb people and stupid names" (e.g., in routines from the 1980s–2000s) dissect linguistic absurdities and societal idiocy, amassing millions of views for their pointed mockery of flawed reasoning. Contemporary comedians like Tom Segura and Dylan Moran similarly target "dumb" behaviors in crowds or cultures, using observational exaggeration to underscore universal cognitive lapses without endorsing them as normative.^[175]^[176]^[177] These depictions serve not merely as entertainment but as cultural mirrors, exaggerating real-world errors to provoke reflection, though critics note that over-reliance on idiot tropes can normalize low-effort humor at the expense of wit. In aggregate, such portrayals underscore stupidity's comedic potency, with lists of "stupid comedy movies" citing over 45 titles from Duck Soup (1933) onward as evidence of enduring popularity.^[172]

References

[1]
[PDF] Carlo M. Cipolla - The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity
The Mad Millers printed onlv a limited number of copies of this book which addresses itself not to stupid people but to those who on occasion have to.Missing: summary | Show results with:summary
[2]
[PDF] The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity
The first basic law of human stupidity asserts without ambiguity that: Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in ...Missing: summary | Show results with:summary
[3]
What is stupid?: People's conception of unintelligent behavior
In a content analysis of stories we found that people use the label 'stupid' for three separate categories of actions. · The level of observed stupidity was ...
[4]
What is stupid? People's conception of unintelligent behavior
... psychological perspectives of studying the attribute of stupid in everyday life. ... To this end, we look at how the evolving concept of stupidity is defined ...<|separator|>
[5]
What Arthur Schopenhauer learned about genius at the asylum
Mar 31, 2021 · Schopenhauer deemed this boy not insane but merely 'stupid'. Stupidity, according to Schopenhauer, is a failure to understand causation – or ...
[6]
Stupidity as an Evolutionary Bottleneck: The Limits of Human Survival
Sep 27, 2025 · This paper conceptualizes stupidity-defined as the persistent failure to apply available cognitive resources to survival-relevant problems ...
[7]
[PDF] Testing Carlo Cipolla's Laws of Human Stupidity with Agent ... - HAL
Nov 21, 2014 · Cipolla put forward a theory of human stupidity, articulated in five fundamental laws, which is regarded by many as a real work of genius. One ...
[8]
[PDF] A Biophysical Interpretation of Carlo Cipolla's Stupidity Laws - arXiv
Based on this examination, we propose a “6th law of stupidity,” additional to the five proposed by Cipolla. The law states that “humans are the stupidest ...Missing: summary | Show results with:summary
[9]
[PDF] Working Paper Understanding Human Stupidity in a Post-truth Area
Taking the perspective of psychologists, stupidity has often been looked at as the outcome of cognitive biases or errors in judgment.1 In fact, most of the ...
[10]
[PDF] Chapter 7 – Cipolla's Laws - Gandalf
The most useful concept in Carlo Cipolla's approach is the definition of stupidity (and intelligence) based on the results of human behavior, not on difficult ...Missing: summary | Show results with:summary<|separator|>
[11]
stupidity, n. meanings, etymology and more - Oxford English Dictionary
Partly a borrowing from French. Partly a borrowing from Latin. Etymons: French stupidité; Latin stupiditās. See etymology ...
[12]
On ignorance and stupidity - The Grammarphobia Blog
Nov 20, 2015 · As for “stupidity,” English adapted it in the 16th century from stupiditas, Latin for dullness or senselessness. The ultimate source is the verb ...
[13]
Stupid - Etymology, Origin & Meaning
Originating from Latin 'stupidus' meaning "amazed, dull," and French 'stupide,' stupid means mentally slow or dull, derived from PIE root *(s)teu- "to push, ...
[14]
STUPID Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
The meaning of STUPID is slow of mind : obtuse. How to use stupid in a ... Word History. Etymology. Adjective. Middle French stupide, from Latin stupidus ...
[15]
stupid, adj., adv., & n. meanings, etymology and more
The earliest known use of the word stupid is in the mid 1500s. OED's earliest evidence for stupid is from around 1541, in the writing of Robert Copland, ...
[16]
[PDF] The Anatomy of Ignorance in Plato's Republic - PhilArchive
Plato typically reserves amathia ('ignorance, stupidity')—and to a lesser extent anoia ('want of understanding, folly'), aphrosunē ('folly, thoughtlessness'), ...
[17]
“The Ascension of Fools” Some Ancient Comments on Stupidity
May 27, 2021 · “The Ascension of Fools” Some Ancient Comments on Stupidity ... μωρολογία: properly, “stupid-talking” or “the talk of fools”. But why not: “the ...
[18]
Marcus Tullius Cicero Quotes About Stupidity
Any man can make mistakes, but only an idiot persists in his error. · The wise are instructed by reason, average minds by experience, the stupid by necessity and ...
[19]
[PDF] Paradox and the Fool in Seneca - SciSpace
to the mindset of projecting self-ignorance that views its environment and circumstances as determinative of its affective experience. As the scene unfolds ...
[20]
The concept of Folly in Christianity
(1) Folly is associated with impiety and ignorance, and those who are foolish are guilty of profanity, and thus should be avoided. (2) This refers to the ...
[21]
Foolishness and Fools in Aquinas's Analysis - Medievalists.net
Mar 31, 2013 · In the same way as “donkey” is used in English to designate a stupid person, Aquinas gives twenty comparisons of the 'insipiens' person with ...Missing: conceptions | Show results with:conceptions
[22]
On Stupidity by Robert Musil (translated from the German)
Oct 21, 2019 · As I wrote some years ago: 'If stupidity were not confusingly similar to progress, ability, hope and improvement, then no-one would want to be ...
[23]
A modern calamity – Robert Musil on stupidity - Bo Isenberg, 2018
Jun 29, 2017 · In his abundant 1937 lecture, stupidity is defined only vaguely. Musil, on one hand, talks of 'permanent' or 'constitutional' stupidity, a form ...
[24]
Descartes & Stupidity | Issue 155 - Philosophy Now
But if stupidity is no more than a sum of stupid actions, the sting is less sharp than that aimed for by essentialism. It is more in sorrow than in anger that ...Missing: development | Show results with:development
[25]
Dietrich Bonhoeffer on the "Stupidity" That Led to Hitler's Third Reich
Sep 27, 2018 · While awaiting execution, Bonhoeffer recorded a number of his thoughts in a work we now know as 'Letters and Papers from Prison.Missing: source | Show results with:source
[26]
We have far more to fear from stupidity than evil - Big Think
Jan 26, 2023 · Bonhoeffer's “theory of stupidity”: We have more to fear from stupid people than evil ones · When we know something or someone is evil, we can ...
[27]
Bonhoeffer's Theory of Stupidity - Learning Videos - Social Sciences
Oct 19, 2021 · Bonhoeffer's Theory of Stupidity ... Dietrich Bonhoeffer argued that stupid people are more dangerous than evil ones. This is because while we can ...
[28]
The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity by Carlo M. Cipolla
The Laws: 1. Everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals among us. 2. The probability that a certain person is stupid is independent of any other ...
[29]
[PDF] The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity
Law #1: Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation. •. Law #2: The probability that a certain person be ...Missing: summary | Show results with:summary
[30]
(PDF) A modern calamity – Robert Musil on stupidity - ResearchGate
Both problems are essential in that genuine twentieth-century experience which Musil calls functional stupidity: the functionalisation of the mind to collective ...
[31]
The Concept of Stupidity: Evolutionary, Cognitive, and Social ...
Dec 6, 2024 · This article examines stupidity through interdisciplinary lenses, including its evolutionary roots, cognitive underpinnings, and societal manifestations.
[32]
There is a foolish corner in the brain... Aristotle - Forbes Quotes
There is a foolish corner in the brain of the wisest man. Aristotle. Share F. More Quotes on Fools · To follow foolish precedents, and wink with both our eyes ...
[33]
We should treat with indulgence every human fol... - Goodreads
We should treat with indulgence every human folly, failing, and vice, bearing in mind that what we have before us are simply our own failings, follies, ...
[34]
12 The Epistemology of Stupidity - Oxford Academic
This chapter analyzes stupidity as a problem for epistemology. Its proper home belongs to virtue epistemology, as a specific epistemic vice.<|control11|><|separator|>
[35]
[PDF] A New Theory of Stupidity - PhilArchive
Third, it should recognise that stupidity is a gradable phenomenon: as Engel puts it, “'stupid' or 'fool' and their contraries are gradable adjectives: one can ...<|separator|>
[36]
A Theory of Collective Stupidity in Organisations – and Possible ...
Jul 4, 2025 · Collective stupidity is fairly common in organisations. Firms full of very smart individuals who act in reckless ways that destroy them.
[37]
How the Dunning-Kruger Effect Works - Verywell Mind
Sep 25, 2025 · As Charles Darwin wrote in his book The Descent of Man, "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge." Keep reading to ...
[38]
The new genetics of intelligence - PMC - PubMed Central
For intelligence, twin estimates of broad heritability are 50% on average. Adoption studies of first-degree relatives yield similar estimates of narrow ...
[39]
Genetics and intelligence differences: five special findings - PMC
Sep 16, 2014 · Explaining the increasing heritability of cognitive ability across development: A meta-analysis of longitudinal twin and adoption studies.
[40]
A meta-analysis of 11000 pairs of twins shows that the heritability of...
A meta-analysis of 11000 pairs of twins shows that the heritability of intelligence increases significantly from childhood (age 9) to adolescence (age 12) and ...
[41]
Are Some Destined to Be Smart? | Psychology Today
Oct 2, 2025 · Twin studies reveal strong heritability, showing correlations of .70–.80 in IQ for twins raised apart. That means the environment still ...
[42]
Study of 300,486 individuals identifies 148 independent genetic loci ...
May 31, 2018 · Gene-based analyses find 709 genes associated with general cognitive function. Expression levels across the cortex are associated with general ...
[43]
Relax, dear parents – you can't really increase your child's intelligence
Mar 17, 2025 · Polygenic scores can now predict 14 percent of IQ differences between children. The most powerful polygenic score prediction is for ...
[44]
DNA and IQ: Big deal or much ado about nothing? – A meta-analysis
Intelligence is polygenic, highly heritable, and predicts wide-ranging life outcomes. Here, we meta-analysed the predictive validity of polygenic scores for ...
[45]
Polygenic Score Prediction Within and Between Sibling Pairs for ...
Jun 23, 2025 · The IQ3 polygenic score was used to predict intelligence and cognitive abilities, including general cognitive ability (g) and its verbal and ...Polygenic Score Prediction... · Materials And Methods · Statistical Analyses
[46]
Genetic variation, brain, and intelligence differences - Nature
Feb 2, 2021 · Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies. Nat Genet. 2015;47:702–9. Article CAS PubMed Google ...<|separator|>
[47]
Groupthink - Psychology Today
Groupthink is a phenomenon that occurs when a group of well-intentioned people makes irrational or non-optimal decisions spurred by the urge to conform.
[48]
Intelligence and the rationality of political preferences - ScienceDirect
We show that in political behavior intelligence is related to rationality. Intelligence is operationalized as achievement in standard mental ability tests.
[49]
Predicting political beliefs with polygenic scores for cognitive ...
Intelligence is correlated with a range of left-wing and liberal political beliefs. This may suggest intelligence directly alters our political views.
[50]
Do Smarter People Have More Conservative Economic Attitudes ...
Most studies indicate that lower cognitive abilities are linked to the endorsement of conservative political views.
[51]
[PDF] Culture and Bounded Rationality - Projects at Harvard
Sometimes cultural groups adopt very high levels of norm enforcement that severely suppresses the individual variations, innovations, and. 'errors' that innate ...
[52]
Political Correctness
### Summary of Effects of Political Correctness on Discourse, Critical Thinking, or Rationality
[53]
The Hyperpoliticization of Higher Ed: Trends in Faculty Political ...
Several indicators suggest that ideological hiring discrimination is a systemic problem in left-leaning academic disciplines.
[54]
Alfred Binet and the History of IQ Testing - Verywell Mind
Jan 29, 2025 · Alfred Binet developed the world's first official IQ test. His original test has played an important role in how intelligence is measured.History · First IQ Test · Stanford-Binet Scale · Army Alpha and Beta Tests
[55]
From the Annals of NIH History | NIH Intramural Research Program
Apr 26, 2022 · The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale was first developed in 1905 by French psychologist Alfred Binet and his collaborator Theodore Simon.
[56]
How General Intelligence (G Factor) Is Determined - Verywell Mind
Jul 6, 2023 · In 1904, Spearman suggested that this g factor was responsible for overall performance on mental ability tests. He noted that while people ...Theory · Types · Components · Measurement
[57]
A Meta-Analysis on the Validity of Self-Assessed Intelligence ... - NIH
Here, we provide evidence for SAI and IQ associations based on 278 effect sizes from 115 independent samples (N = 36,833) using a multi-level meta-analysis, ...
[58]
Does IQ Really Predict Job Performance? - PMC - NIH
Hundreds of studies prior to the 1970s reported that correlations between IQ tests and job performance were low (approximately 0.2–0.3) and variable (reviewed ...
[59]
Intelligence and socioeconomic success: A meta-analytic review of ...
Decades of research on human mental abilities have demonstrated that the scores of intelligence tests are positively correlated with several desirable outcomes ...<|separator|>
[60]
Intelligence Testing and Cultural Diversity: Pitfalls and Promises
Tests can be biased if they treat groups unfairly or discriminate against diverse groups by, for example, “underestimating their potential or over-pathologizing ...
[61]
The Predictive Validity of Four Intelligence Tests for School Grades
Mar 12, 2017 · In sum, Roth et al.'s (2015) meta-analysis revealed that intelligence test scores correlate moderately to strongly with school grades in ...
[62]
Opinion | The Difference Between Rationality and Intelligence
Sep 16, 2016 · A person with a high I.Q. is about as likely to suffer from dysrationalia as a person with a low I.Q. In a 2008 study, Professor Stanovich and ...
[63]
The Rationality Quotient - MIT Press
The Rationality Quotient explains that these two traits, often (and incorrectly) thought of as one, refer to different cognitive functions.
[64]
The Rationality Quotient: Toward a Test of Rational Thinking
The Rationality Quotient explains the components of rational thought assessed by the CART, including probabilistic and scientific reasoning.
[65]
[PDF] The Comprehensive Assessment of Rational Thinking
Apr 20, 2016 · Stanovich, K. E., West, R. F., & Toplak, M. E. (2016). The Rationality. Quotient (RQ): Toward a test of rational thinking. Cambridge, MA: MIT ...<|separator|>
[66]
The rationality quotient: toward a test of rational thinking, by Keith E ...
Jul 11, 2017 · Stanovich and Richard West were early pioneers in this field, creating a space for aspiring young researchers to conduct research and begin to ...
[67]
Cognitive Reflection Test - Society for Judgment and Decision Making
The CRT was designed to assess a specific cognitive ability. It assesses individuals' ability to suppress an intuitive and spontaneous ("system 1") wrong answer ...
[68]
Investigating an alternate form of the cognitive reflection test
Jan 1, 2023 · It is designed to measure a person's propensity to override an intuitive, but incorrect, response with a more analytical correct response ( ...<|separator|>
[69]
Does the Cognitive Reflection Test Actually Capture Heuristic ...
The CRT is a numerical problem solving test thought to capture a disposition towards either rapid, intuition-based problem solving (Type I reasoning) or a more ...
[70]
Twin study suggests rationality and intelligence share the ... - PsyPost
Mar 16, 2025 · New research suggests irrational thinking is largely a reflection of lower intelligence, with both traits heavily influenced by genetics.
[71]
Cognitive reflection is a distinct and measurable trait - PNAS
Nov 27, 2024 · We show that the cognitive reflection test predicts a wide array of beliefs, preferences and judgments better than more typical math tests.
[72]
Frames, Biases, and Rational Decision-Making in the Human Brain
We found that the framing effect was specifically associated with amygdala activity, suggesting a key role for an emotional system in mediating decision biases.
[73]
Rationality versus Intelligence by Keith E. Stanovich
Apr 6, 2009 · The mental skills that intelligence tests measure do not include rationality. Yet it is the development of our rational capacities.
[74]
On the Distinction Between Rationality and Intelligence: Implications ...
In short, as measures of rational thinking, IQ tests are radically incomplete. The Requirements of Rational Thinking and Their Relation to Intelligence.Introduction · Evolution Does Not Guarantee... · The Requirements of Rational...<|control11|><|separator|>
[75]
Intelligence tests and the individual: Unsolvable problems with ...
Dec 8, 2023 · In this article, we will discuss whether the current Dutch policy is justified by examining the validity and reliability of IQ tests.
[76]
The Looking Glass for Intelligence Quotient Tests: The Interplay of ...
Dec 17, 2019 · This critique of the IQ tests leads to the rise of the broad theories of intelligence.
[77]
How flawed IQ tests prevent kids from getting help in school
Mar 28, 2024 · IQ tests face a long-standing criticism that they measure a child's early education opportunities, rather than “innate” intelligence. Credit ...
[78]
Sources of measurement error in pediatric intelligence testing
Mar 28, 2022 · Current estimates of measurement error for most IQ tests rely solely on internal-consistency reliability and therefore the standard error of ...
[79]
IQ: can intelligence really be measured? - Polytechnique Insights
May 22, 2024 · IQ is not an objective measure of intelligence. In fact, it is a relative measurement which has its own errors, measures only certain facets ...
[80]
A limitation of the Cognitive Reflection Test: familiarity - PMC - NIH
Sep 6, 2016 · Because the CRT has only three items, it often lacks high reliability values (range between 0.60 and 0.74; Weller et al., 2013; Liberali et al., ...
[81]
Investigating an alternate form of the cognitive reflection test
We developed and tested the CRT-2. CRT-2 questions appear to rely less on numeracy than the original CRT but appear to measure closely related constructs in ...
[82]
Key Issues in Psychological Assessment: Challenges and ...
Jun 13, 2024 · Time and effort in selecting and using appropriate tests · The impact of technology on test reliability · Potential misuse or overuse of tests ...Time and effort in selecting... · Potential misuse or overuse of...
[83]
Reliability and Validity of Measurement - BC Open Textbooks
Reliability refers to the consistency of a measure. Psychologists consider three types of consistency: over time (test-retest reliability), across items ( ...
[84]
Don't waste your time measuring intelligence: Further evidence for ...
This often results in the use of abbreviated measures or proxies, potentially compromising their reliability and validity. ... Measurement invariance testing.
[85]
Dysrationalia - Keith E. Stanovich, 1993 - Sage Journals
The concept of selective deficit is the foundation of most conceptual definitions of learning disability. Such definitions have tended to implicate the ...
[86]
[PDF] FEATURE ARTICLES - Keith Stanovich
Dysrationalia is the inability to think and behave rationally despite adequate intel- ligence. It is a general term that refers to a heterogeneous group of ...
[87]
The Dunning–Kruger Effect: On Being Ignorant of One's Own ...
As empirical evidence of meta-ignorance, I describe the Dunning–Kruger effect, in which poor performers in many social and intellectual domains seem largely ...
[88]
Dunning–Kruger Effect - The Decision Lab
Jonathan Jarry, MSc2.
[89]
The Dunning-Kruger Effect Shows that People Don't Know What ...
Apr 15, 2024 · The Dunning-Kruger effect describes a disturbing cognitive bias that afflicts us all. ... stupid that they don't even know how stupid they are.
[90]
Cognitive Bias That Explain Why We Make Stupid Decisions
Jul 27, 2017 · These biases make us act irrationally and make decisions, often stupid or incorrect ones. It was Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman who first ...
[91]
What Is Cognitive Bias? 7 Examples & Resources (Incl. Codex)
Dumb. I wish the author would have used the “4 Ways to Overcome Bias” prior to writing this irrelevant article. Then maybe the contradictions could have ...
[92]
The science of decision-making: why smart people do dumb things
The science of decision-making: why smart people do dumb things. Anne-Laure ... Your decision-making is the result of a fight between two kinds of cognitive ...
[93]
Rational and Irrational Thought: The Thinking That IQ Tests Miss
Jan 1, 2015 · I coined the term “dysrationalia” (analogous to “dyslexia”), meaning the inability to think and behave rationally despite having adequate intelligence.
[94]
[PDF] The Thinking that IQ Tests Miss - Keith Stanovich
I coined the term “dysrationalia” (analogous to “dyslexia”), meaning the inability to think and be- have rationally despite having adequate intelligence, to ...
[95]
Why do smart people do dumb things? - Big Think
Dec 12, 2017 · Keith Stanovich:Dysrationalia is the inability to think and behave rationally despite having adequate intelligence. I coined the name based ...
[96]
[PDF] A Stupidity-Based Theory of Organizationsjoms_1072 1194..1220
In folk psychology stupidity is usually equated with some kind of mental deficiency. To be stupid at work is to suffer from what might be called an ' ...
[97]
The Pros and Cons of Functional Stupidity - Meetings International
Nov 22, 2022 · Functional stupidity can be catastrophic. It can cause organisational collapse, financial meltdown and technical disaster. And there are ...
[98]
Why people get more stupid in a crowd - BBC
Weather · Newsletters · Watch Live. Why people get more stupid in a crowd. 13 January 2016. Share. Save. Michael BondFeatures correspondent.
[99]
Exploring the roots of stupidity: first understand the psychology of ...
Mar 26, 2024 · Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. To argue against stupidity only seems ...
[100]
Signs of Low Emotional Intelligence - Verywell Mind
Jun 24, 2024 · Low emotional intelligence refers to the inability to accurately perceive emotions (in yourself and others) and use that information to guide ...
[101]
Psychology and the Rationality of Emotion - PMC - NIH
Mar 7, 2011 · In common usage, being “rational” is assumed to be good, whereas being “irrational” or “emotional” is assumed to be bad and to lead to error.
[102]
Irrational Beliefs and Psychological Distress: A Meta-Analysis
Irrational beliefs were positively associated with various types of distress, such as general distress, anxiety, depression, anger, and guilt.
[103]
New Study Finds Alarming Lack of Civic Literacy Among Americans
Feb 12, 2024 · The survey finds more than 70% of Americans fail a basic civic literacy quiz on topics like the three branches of government, the number of Supreme Court ...
[104]
The political consequences of uninformed voters - ScienceDirect.com
We study the electoral consequences of political ignorance by experimentally informing voters. · Uninformed voters systematically vote out of line with their ...
[105]
The Problem of Political Ignorance - The Regulatory Review
Feb 3, 2014 · Political ignorance is a ubiquitous and persistent problem in modern democracy. It strengthens the case for limiting and decentralizing political power, and ...
[106]
[PDF] Democracy and Political Ignorance: Why Smaller Government is ...
Many perverse moral judgments made by voters are in part a result of ignorance of factual issues. For example, public hostility towards gays and lesbians is ...
[107]
What Americans know about their government | Pew Research Center
Nov 7, 2023 · Fewer Americans correctly answer questions about the filibuster, the length of a Senate term and how a presidential election is decided in the ...
[108]
(PDF) Irving L. Janis' Victims of Groupthink - ResearchGate
Aug 6, 2025 · Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign Policy Decisions and Fiascoes by Irving L. Janis was published for the first time in 1972.
[109]
Assessing political group dynamics: A test of the groupthink model.
Janis (1982) contrasted these groupthink decisions with two examples of vigilant decision making: the Marshall Plan and the Cuban Missile Crisis. In both cases, ...
[110]
a psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes
Jan 1, 1972 · The four fiascoes analyzed against groupthink theory are: President Roosevelt's failure ... His two case studies of where successful give ...
[111]
A Theory of Collective Stupidity in Organisations – and Possible ...
Jun 3, 2025 · Collective stupidity is fairly common in organisations. Firms full of very smart individuals who act in reckless ways that destroy them.
[112]
Groupthink in Government: A Study of Small Groups and Policy Failure
Aug 6, 2025 · This study deals with decision making in high-level policy-making groups. In particular, it analyzes an important cause of policy failure: groupthink.
[113]
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3007987
[114]
[PDF] Working memory, intelligence, and life success
Dec 14, 2022 · In this chapter, we focus on one individual difference characteristic that explains considerable variance in life suc- cess: cognitive ability.<|separator|>
[115]
Intelligence, Personality, and the Prediction of Life Outcomes - NIH
May 15, 2023 · The abstract of their paper states that “personality is generally more predictive than IQ on a variety of important life outcomes” (p. 13354).
[116]
[PDF] Intelligence Predicts Health and Longevity, but Why?
A robust relation between childhood IQ and late-life morbidity and mortality remains after analyses control statistically for deprived living conditions ...
[117]
Higher IQ in childhood is linked to a longer life - PMC - NIH
It is clear that, on average, individuals with higher IQs have tended to live a little longer than those with lower IQs.
[118]
The association between intelligence and lifespan is mostly genetic
Jul 26, 2015 · Several studies in the new field of cognitive epidemiology have shown that higher intelligence predicts longer lifespan.
[119]
The Impact of Cognitive Biases on Professionals' Decision-Making
A dozen cognitive biases impact professional decisions, with overconfidence being the most recurrent. Other biases include risky-choice framing, disposition, ...
[120]
How Cognitive Biases Influence the Way You Think and Act
Oct 16, 2025 · Cognitive biases influence how we think and can lead to errors in decisions and judgments. Learn the common ones, how they work, and their ...
[121]
[PDF] Predicting real-world outcomes_ Critical thinking ability is a better ...
Jul 1, 2017 · Individuals with higher critical thinking scores and higher IQs reported fewer negative life events. Critical thinking more strongly predicted ...
[122]
Intelligence as a protective factor against offending: A meta-analytic ...
Low intelligence is a well-known risk factor for criminal behavior, violence and conduct problems (e.g., Ellis and Walsh, 2003, Hirschi and Hindelang, 1977, ...
[123]
Association between intelligence quotient and violence perpetration ...
Conclusions: Lower IQ was associated with violence perpetration in the UK general population. Further studies are warranted to assess how low IQ can lead to ...
[124]
Association between intelligence quotient and violence perpetration ...
Jul 30, 2018 · Lower IQ was associated with violence perpetration in the UK general population. Further studies are warranted to assess how low IQ can lead to violence ...<|separator|>
[125]
[PDF] IQ and the Wealth of Nations
IQ and the wealth of nations / Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen. p. cm ... weakened the correlation between national IQs and GDP per capita to some ...
[126]
National IQ and economic outcomes - ScienceDirect.com
The results show that high IQ is associated not only with high per-capita GDP and fast economic growth, but also with more equal income distribution.
[127]
The impact of low, average, and high IQ on economic growth and ...
In this study, the effect of IQ was controlled for the levels of economic freedom, GDP per capita, freedom of corruption, and tertiary education.
[128]
Exponential correlation of IQ and the wealth of nations - ScienceDirect
In both cases they observe a significant correlation between IQ and GDP, with linear correlation factors R2 = 0.537 for the 81-nation group and 0.389 for 185 ...
[129]
(PDF) The impact of low, average, and high IQ on economic growth ...
IQ) have been shown to generate relatively more national income and are more innovative, with those that have the lowest levels of IQ being less influential on ...
[130]
New estimates on the relationship between IQ, economic growth ...
We find that IQ is a statistically significant (5% or better) and economically important predictor of welfare growth.
[131]
https://oxfordre.com/politics/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-1022
[132]
Democracy and Political Ignorance | Cato Unbound
Oct 11, 2013 · It is mostly the result of rational behavior, not stupidity. Such widespread and persistent political ignorance and irrationality strengthens ...
[133]
[PDF] Rational Irrationality and the Microfoundations of Political Failure
In cases like this, the price of irrationality is strictly positive: the expected wealth of an agent who becomes a little bit more irrational definitely falls.
[134]
Looking for Flynn effects in a recent online U.S. adult sample
A reverse Flynn effect was found for composite ability scores with large US adult sample from 2006 to 2018 and 2011 to 2018.
[135]
Americans' IQ scores are lower in some areas, higher in one
Mar 20, 2023 · A new study from Northwestern University has found evidence of a reverse “Flynn effect” in a large U.S. sample between 2006 and 2018 in ...
[136]
Flynn effect and its reversal are both environmentally caused - PMC
Jun 11, 2018 · Based on data from birth cohorts born before 1985, prior research has reported this as a slowdown or leveling off of the Norwegian Flynn effect ...
[137]
PISA 2022 Results (Volume I) - OECD
Dec 5, 2023 · This is one of five volumes that present the results of the eighth round of assessment, PISA 2022 ... Global and regional development trends.United States · Australia · Full Report · Indonesia
[138]
OECD PISA Results: Maths and reading skills in 'unprecedented drop'
Dec 21, 2023 · Compared to the last edition, in 2018, the mean performance in reading fell by 10 score points, while maths fell by nearly 15.
[139]
U.S. scores drop in international assessment but rankings rise
Jan 11, 2024 · While United States math achievement fell by 13 points, that beat the average decrease in score of 15 points, thus raising the U.S. ranking ...Missing: decline | Show results with:decline
[140]
Research Confirms It: We Really Are Getting Dumber | HowStuffWorks
Mar 7, 2024 · Research indicates this decline in IQ scores is due to environmental factors rather than genetic changes, with trends observed in Norway, ...<|separator|>
[141]
Inconsistent Flynn effect patterns may be due to a decreasing ...
Inconsistent Flynn effect patterns may be due to a decreasing positive manifold: Cohort-based measurement-invariant IQ test score changes from 2005 to 2024.
[142]
New Evidence Reveals Training Can Reduce Cognitive Bias And ...
Oct 8, 2019 · One-shot de-biasing training can significantly reduce the deleterious influence of cognitive bias on decision making.
[143]
Battling bias: Effects of training and training context - ScienceDirect
Overall, the results of these studies suggest that game-based training was more effective at cognitive bias mitigation than learning from a video lecture. The ...
[144]
Retention and Transfer of Cognitive Bias Mitigation Interventions
Game playing was overall more effective in reducing both biases than the training video. Playing the game in the single-player mode yielded greater confirmation ...
[145]
Systematic review and meta-analysis of educational approaches to ...
Aug 26, 2025 · Here we synthesized the effects of debiasing training in educational settings. Our systematic review found 54 randomized controlled trials ...Missing: techniques | Show results with:techniques
[146]
(PDF) Systematic review and meta-analysis of educational ...
Sep 6, 2025 · Our meta-analysis of educational interventions showed a small, yet significant, improvement in reducing the likelihood of committing biases ...
[147]
Believing in Overcoming Cognitive Biases - AMA Journal of Ethics
Using guided reflection and cognitive forcing strategies, medical trainees at all stages can be taught to acknowledge the risk of potential biases during ...Abstract · Metacognition And Clinical... · Potential Debiasing...
[148]
Enhancing Rationality: Heuristics, Biases, and The Critical Thinking ...
Aug 9, 2025 · This paper develops four related claims: 1. Critical thinking should focus more on decision making, 2. the heuristics and bias literature ...
[149]
Decision Making - Evidence Based Practice - NCBI Bookshelf - NIH
The Nominal Group Method and the Delphi Method are two well-established mechanisms for achieving group consensus in decision making. These methods are ...Bounded Rationality · Heuristics · Consensus-Forming Techniques · Decision Trees
[150]
How to Make Rational Decisions in the Face of Uncertainty
Aug 28, 2020 · Summary. · 1. Identify the category of historical data you are working with. · 2. Recognize which cognitive biases are triggered by each category.
[151]
Is it time for studying real-life debiasing? Evaluation of the ...
The aim of this study was to initiate the exploration of debiasing methods applicable in real-life settings for achieving lasting improvement in decision ...
[152]
Can Rationality Be Learned? | Center for Inquiry
May 20, 2019 · The teaching of considering alternative hypotheses is a relatively easy strategy that promotes rationality. To perpetuate the idea of thinking ...
[153]
Just How Effective is Direct Instruction? - PMC - PubMed Central
The BESD for this finding demonstrates that with the use of DI student success rates increase by 43.6%. In other words, DI benefits an additional 44 per 100 ...
[154]
https://digitalcommons.lib.uconn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1027&context=nera_2008
[155]
Phonics Instruction | Reading Rockets
Across all grade levels, systematic phonics instruction improved the ability of good readers to spell. The impact was strongest for kindergartners and ...
[156]
Effects of Systematic Phonics Instruction Are Practically Significant
The largest effects are associated with reading instruction enhanced with components that increase comprehensiveness and intensity.
[157]
A Classroom Intervention to Reduce Confirmation Bias - QUBES Hub
However, habitual metacognitive techniques show promise for correcting cognitive biases, such as confirmation bias, a maladaptive cognitive strategy that ...
[158]
[PDF] Integrated Curriculum Reform and its Impact on Science Education
Dec 7, 2024 · Abstract: This paper investigates why western nations underperform in PISA and TIMSS compared to. East Asia and explores the root causes of the ...
[159]
Learning to Improve: Using Writing to Increase Critical Thinking ...
Results indicated that the writing group significantly improved critical thinking skills whereas the nonwriting group did not.
[160]
Declining test scores should teach policymakers about school ...
Jan 1, 2024 · In particular, the sharp decline in math scores continues a longer-term decline where scores have dropped 30 points from 2006 to 2022. Half of ...
[161]
Beyond inquiry or direct instruction: Pressing issues for designing ...
The existing meta-analyses are the clearest source of available evidence, and they show that guided inquiry-based learning yields better learning outcomes than ...
[162]
Seven Theses for Viewpoint Diversity | American Enterprise Institute
Oct 2, 2025 · in Behavioral and Brain Sciences found that political diversity reduces confirmation bias and sharpens reasoning. When scholars encounter ...
[163]
Viewpoint Diversity in the Academy | The Righteous Mind
Our goal is to make the case, consistently and forcefully, that the academy must increase viewpoint diversity in order to function effectively. We launched the ...
[164]
Skin in the Game: Hidden Asymmetries in Daily Life by Nassim Taleb
Nov 30, 2019 · ... stupid works (and makes money), it cannot be stupid. Now skin in the game brings simplicity—the disarming simplicity of things properly done.
[165]
Making Dumb Groups Smarter - Harvard Business Review
Making Dumb Groups Smarter. Behavioral research suggests some fairly simple ways to achieve “the wisdom of the crowds.” by Cass R. Sunstein and ...
[166]
Heterodox Academy Releases Report Tracking Institutional ...
Mar 11, 2025 · The HxA report shows: 148 institutions had adopted a version of institutional statement neutrality by December 31, 2024;; 97% of statement ...
[167]
Coping With Ignorance - Imprimis - Hillsdale College
If the chief problem of economic decisions is one of coping with the inevitable ignorance, the task of a science of economics trying to explain the joint ...
[168]
Arthur Schopenhauer Quotes About Stupidity
Arthur Schopenhauer Quotes About Stupidity ; Stupid · Silly · Doctors ; Funny · Fate · Destiny ; Dog · Stupidity · Mankind ; Clever · Stupid · Quality.Missing: views | Show results with:views
[169]
The doctor sees all the weakness of mankind; the lawyer ... - Facebook
Aug 27, 2025 · The doctor sees all the weakness of mankind; the lawyer all the wickedness, the theologian all the stupidity. ~ Arthur Schopenhauer Source;
[170]
Quote by Fyodor Dostoyevsky: “The more stupid one is ... - Goodreads
The more stupid one is, the clearer one is. Stupidity is brief and artless, while intelligence squirms and hides itself. Intelligence is unprincipled, but ...
[171]
The Praise of Folly | Western Humanities I - Lumen Learning
Folly has got, even among the most foolish, yet that I am that she, that only she, whose deity recreates both gods and men, even this is a sufficient argument.<|control11|><|separator|>
[172]
45 Stupid Comedy Movies That Are Actually Ingenious - Collider
From Zoolander to Borat, the characters may be dumb, but don't go thinking the stupid funny movies themselves are too.
[173]
Beautiful Buffoons: The 25 Best Comic Idiots in TV History
May 23, 2014 · A true sitcom idiot incorporates elements of stupidity, eccentricity, egomania, and misplaced self-importance.
[174]
Top 10 Dumbest Characters In Movies & TV - IMDb
Top 10 Dumbest Characters In Movies & TV ; 1. Parks and Recreation. 2009–2015124 eps ; 2. Home Alone. 19901h 43m ; 3. The Office. 2005–2013188 eps ; 4. That '70s ...
[175]
Laughter and the Brain - The American Scholar
Jun 10, 2013 · Finally, the superiority theory emphasizes how mirth and laughter so often involve a focus on someone else's mistakes, misfortune, or stupidity.<|control11|><|separator|>
[176]
Tom Segura - Some People Are Dumb - YouTube
Nov 19, 2021 · ... COMEDY:https://bit.ly/2UKbLM4 FOLLOW JFL : Facebook: http ... Tom Segura - Some People Are Dumb. 277K views · 3 years ago #JFL ...
[177]
Dylan Moran On American Stupid People | Universal Comedy
Apr 17, 2020 · Dylan Moran On American Stupid People | Universal Comedy 1.3M views 5 years ago #Dylan #Comedy #StandUp