Why are stupid people increasingly gaining influence over others?

[DarloRich]

I'm not really understanding your argument. From the sounds of it, people are going to university and getting jobs? Usually people are complaining these so-called 'soft subjects' are unemployable! Not everybody wants to become an engineer or a physicist.

The argument is that only decent chaps should go to university.

 

[Master Cutler]

What numbers? They don't exist!

They are useful though, you can bamboozle people with facts like e^iπ=1 (or us it 0? I can't remember!).

They are used to measure the height of unicorns and the velocity of fairies in flight.

 

[NLC1072]

People are as a mass more educated than ever, so you'd expect the quality of public debate to be getting higher - In particular in politics and the media. The compulsory reservations thread got me thinking of this:. Increasingly fake news,populist demagogues, celebrity trash culture and irrational argument are however on the rise.
Who and what is responsible for this? Personally I think that one aspect of education missed out upon is critical reasoning. It wasn't taught in any great level when I was at school until A Level General Studies and even then not to a massive extent until University. Yet how can we expect people to make key decisions as rational actors if they do not have these toolkits available?

Another sector I blame is the media, increasingly market driven. In the good old days when I was a boy, not too long ago, there were only four channels available to most,which all had a strong public service remit. Now it's all about chasing ratings and giving the viewer instant satisfaction. I'm not a believer in mass censorship or rolling back technological progress here though. But we do need to up standards somehow, to promote truth and reason and intelligent discussion.

Has anyone else any idea why it is we are in this mess and how we get out of it?

We've had mass democracy with reasonable policies before (be they left, right or centre) and there was a time when policymakers were more likely to give way to experts rather than tabloid newspapers and their ilk, which ironically seem to become more influential even as their sales decline.

Your mistake is assuming education makes people smarter... When in fact it can do the opposite and narrow a person's point of view.

 

[AlterEgo]

At first I thought this was going to be a reference to our very well-educated experts a year ago, who told us to wash our hands, that cancelling big events wasn’t a good idea, and that we definitely shouldn’t wear masks. It was just a year ago two firms got censured by the ASA for advertising masks as a way of controlling infection.

It’s maddening that you’d have been better off during the pandemic if you’d followed the advice of some very bonkers anonymous Twitter accounts as opposed to the actual Chief Medical Officer.

 

[peters]

One thing that shocked me is how the plastic cotton bud ban is credited to one environmental campaigner and she seems to hail it as mission accomplished. The underlying problem was people flushing cotton buds down toilets and with the plastic bits being small and not breaking up they were getting in to the sea. Changing what they are made of is better to something that can break down more easily is better for the sea life. However, cotton buds made of cardboard going down the drains isn't good and there's a risk that people who avoided flushing them when were plastic, now think they are OK to flush. Plus the cardboard ones are more flimsy so there's a risk of people using more than before, again not good for environmental reasons.

Instead of the campaigner addressing these issues, it seems she's moved on to campaigning for us to be charged deposits for plastic bottles and ignores questions about how that will affect some people (esp. the elderly and disabled) who currently use kerbside recycling but can't easily take plastic bottles to a bottle bank.

That's the issue with any campaigner, they don't look at the full picture and why should they if they aren't being paid to. However, if politicians look into their campaign, they should look at the complete picture not just the part that they gain popularity by implementing.

 

[JonathanP]

So what is your solution? Should we always ignore the 'experts'?

 

[RuralRambler]

Your mistake is assuming education makes people smarter... When in fact it can do the opposite and narrow a person's point of view.

Being educated, being intelligent and being wise are three completely different things!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I'm not convinced that stupid people are indeed gaining more influence over others than they have had in the past.

Maybe it's lockdown fatigue, but I feel as if the membership of this site have become more "glass half empty" of recent times. Several recent threads have been very pessimistic in their tone and outlook.

Worse things happen at sea...

 

[peters]

At first I thought this was going to be a reference to our very well-educated experts a year ago, who told us to wash our hands, that cancelling big events wasn’t a good idea, and that we definitely shouldn’t wear masks. It was just a year ago two firms got censured by the ASA for advertising masks as a way of controlling infection.

It’s maddening that you’d have been better off during the pandemic if you’d followed the advice of some very bonkers anonymous Twitter accounts as opposed to the actual Chief Medical Officer.

Could you provide further details on these instances of why these mask wearing ads were censored by the ASA. Did they clearly state that non-medical grade face coverings do not protect the wearer but can help prevent the spread if the wearer has the virus? If not what exactly is your point?

I remember in March 2020 experts were saying the risk of transmission is likely to be lower if you are watching football in a football stadium than watching football in a crowded pub because:
a) In a ground the people you are in close contact with don't keep changing.
b) The ground is outside.

Here we are a year later and that hasn't changed, despite further research and the discovery of new variants moving the goalposts.

Which Twitter accounts are you referring to? I don't suppose you are referring to the ones telling people to vandalise 5G transmitters, when the people who circulated that theory and committed the acts of vandalism didn't understand the difference between bacteria and a virus.

 

[DB]

Could you provide further details on these instances of why these mask wearing ads were censored by the ASA. Did they clearly state that non-medical grade face coverings do not protect the wearer but can help prevent the spread if the wearer has the virus? If not what exactly is your point?

The government propaganda tells us that masks help prevent the spread if the wearer has the virus - there's no actual evidence of this in practice and it's quite clear that this message was intended to encourage hassling of people not wearing masks as by setting people against each other the heat is off the governemt. And it worked.

There are creepy NHS propaganda adverts out there at the moment with a picture of a person in a mask and the caption 'every covered face makes a difference'. In any other field the ASA would be very likely to rule against that on the grounds of lack of evidence for the claim, but with this they are clearly doing the government's bidding.

But back to the stupidity thing, the whole way in which a large part of the population has unquestioningly accepted what they are told throughout the past year indicates at the very least an unquestioning mindset.

 

[AlterEgo]

So what is your solution? Should we always ignore the 'experts'?

I think the pandemic has exposed the limits and fallibilities of technocracy and credentialism. Obviously “never listen to experts” is incredibly silly.

 

[DB]

I think the pandemic has exposed the limits and fallibilities of technocracy and credentialism. Obviously “never listen to experts” is incredibly silly.

And of simplistically prioritising one viewpoint ("beat the virus") over absolutely everything else.

 

[Westcountryman]

I don't suppose you are referring to the ones telling people to vandalise 5G transmitters, when the people who circulated that theory and committed the acts of vandalism didn't understand the difference between bacteria and a virus.

I think the issue here is that some people do not understand the difference between a virus and a virus

 

[TRAX]

Social media.

Social media gives a way of expressing thoughts to people who, twenty years earlier, would not have been able to as they wouldn’t’ve been considered worth listening to.

 

[Cowley]

Although it may be a bit difficult at times let’s try and keep this thread away from the Covid subject where possible please.
Thanks everyone.

 

[birchesgreen]

Social media.

Social media gives a way of expressing thoughts to people who, twenty years earlier, would not have been able to as they wouldn’t’ve been considered worth listening to.

There have always been pub bores and the type who spout nonsense loudly, now with SM they can reach an audience of millions

 

[TRAX]

There have always been pub bores and the type who spout nonsense loudly, now with SM they can reach an audience of millions

Absolutely.

 

[peters]

There have always been pub bores and the type who spout nonsense loudly, now with SM they can reach an audience of millions

I think an importance difference is when Stephen Hawking was a young scientist his theories did make light of day, outside the science community, until they were proven and he had convinced many other scientists. Now someone with a PhD can set up a Twitter profile and post anything and even if we presume no-one without a PhD sets up a Twitter account saying they hold one, less well educated people will use the tweets of those holding a PhD as proof their claim is correct, even when different holders of the same PhD can have opposing views.

 

[Altrincham]

Whilst watching TV quiz shows in recent years, it’s becoming more evident that there’s a growing lack of general knowledge. Contestants who are unable to answer some fairly high-level questioning of general knowledge seem more concerned with making their lack of knowledge a subject of amusement.

One example this week that highlights this was when I happened to be flicking through the channels and landed on BBC1 and a quiz show, where at that moment the question was asked: “Name a book of the Old Testament”. The joint contestants were given some time to talk it through and gave their answer, which was: “...we’re going to say The Book Of Icarus”.

Now, I completely understand that not everyone could provide a correct answer to this question, but what really irked me was the amount of sniggering that ensued when these 2 contestants were told that the answer was wrong. I immediately turn off BBC1.

The other get-out clause that seems to be used by some TV quiz show contestants when faced with a question about certain periods within the 20th century, is to respond with: “that’s before I was born so I don’t know the answer”.

Parts of social media, too, highlight people’s lack of knowledge, but in a different way. I often see people posting questions where the answer could easily be found on the internet. A lot of this seems to pinpoint towards a reliance on other people knowing the information, or possibly an unwillingness to explore the internet beyond social media. Generally, this tends to be things like “Anyone know what time ASDA opens?”, “Anyone know why the bins haven’t been collected?”, and so on. I think in this particular instance it relates to something someone further up the thread posted about people wanting to be part of a community. But at the same time it also shows that despite the massive amount of information available on the internet, people seem reluctant to explore, or be curious, beyond places like Facebook.

Perhaps it reflects the wider lack of general knowledge in that people just aren’t curious enough these days. And TV and social media are the 2 main places where this is amplified.

 

[peters]

Whilst watching TV quiz shows in recent years, it’s becoming more evident that there’s a growing lack of general knowledge. Contestants who are unable to answer some fairly high-level questioning of general knowledge seem more concerned with making their lack of knowledge a subject of amusement.

One example this week that highlights this was when I happened to be flicking through the channels and landed on BBC1 and a quiz show, where at that moment the question was asked: “Name a book of the Old Testament”. The joint contestants were given some time to talk it through and gave their answer, which was: “...we’re going to say The Book Of Icarus”.

Personally I think what people know is changing, rather than people becoming less knowledgeable.

At one time most people went to church, now most people don't so in the case of that question instead of having to remember something from last Sunday they are having to remember something from years ago. However, at the time most people went to church most people knew little about computers and nothing about the internet. Now you are expected to be able to use a computer and the internet if you are applying for an entry level office job.

Another change is travel. I know the answer to "What was Francesco Petrarca famous for?" from a visit to Italy. Had I not gone on that visit I not only wouldn't know the answer, I also wouldn't know anyone who might know if I was on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire and I had a phone a friend lifeline available.

Most TV quiz shows allow people of all adult ages to enter, so a 25 year old might not look that intelligent to an older person if they can't name a book of the Old Testament but that older person might not look that intelligent to a younger person if they are asked to name one of the products available in the Microsoft Office suite and can't name one.

Generally, this tends to be things like “Anyone know what time ASDA opens?”, “Anyone know why the bins haven’t been collected?”, and so on. I think in this particular instance it relates to something someone further up the thread posted about people wanting to be part of a community.

For supermarket opening time I would Google it. I actually did that just today when I wanted to check if Boots opened at 10am, I found it didn't, it opened at 10:30.

I found on my local authority website if you go to report a missed bin collection, after entering your property number and postcode it might display a message saying they are aware of it and also telling you why the bin collection was missed e.g. badly parked cars prevented bin lorry getting through. If that option didn't exist it might be worth talking to your neighbours, as there's no point reporting it if your next door neighbour has already done so.

 

[WessexEclectic]

Has anyone else any idea why it is we are in this mess and how we get out of it?

Shameless plug for Adam Curtis' excellent new BBC six-part documentary Can't Get You Out of My Head (currently available on BBC iPlayer and some video sharing websites) - you don't have to agree with everything to find some interesting nuggets of information contained therein.

"Everybody agrees that the world is full of a***holes. It's just that no one can agree on who exactly the a***holes are..." - Anon.

 

[RuralRambler]

Parts of social media, too, highlight people’s lack of knowledge, but in a different way. I often see people posting questions where the answer could easily be found on the internet. A lot of this seems to pinpoint towards a reliance on other people knowing the information, or possibly an unwillingness to explore the internet beyond social media. Generally, this tends to be things like “Anyone know what time ASDA opens?”, “Anyone know why the bins haven’t been collected?”, and so on. I think in this particular instance it relates to something someone further up the thread posted about people wanting to be part of a community. But at the same time it also shows that despite the massive amount of information available on the internet, people seem reluctant to explore, or be curious, beyond places like Facebook.

Perhaps it reflects the wider lack of general knowledge in that people just aren’t curious enough these days. And TV and social media are the 2 main places where this is amplified.

Not just social media. I'm an accountant and regularly get clients phoning/emailing me for their own personal information, i.e. their national insurance number or tax reference number or a reminder of the amount/date of tax due. They are just too lazy to look at their records (it's on emails, letters etc) and too lazy to make a note of it in their phone. If I don't reply quickly, and, say, take an hour or two to reply to their email, they will usually reply "it's ok I've found it". They just default to the easiest option (i.e. ask someone else) rather than the "hard" option of finding it for themselves.

 

[DB]

Not just social media. I'm an accountant and regularly get clients phoning/emailing me for their own personal information, i.e. their national insurance number or tax reference number or a reminder of the amount/date of tax due. They are just too lazy to look at their records (it's on emails, letters etc) and too lazy to make a note of it in their phone. If I don't reply quickly, and, say, take an hour or two to reply to their email, they will usually reply "it's ok I've found it". They just default to the easiest option (i.e. ask someone else) rather than the "hard" option of finding it for themselves.

Similar in IT - a large proportion of the queries which users send are for things where the answer is the first item on the google search results!

 

[87electric]

Back in primary school in 1975 a local theatre company visited the school and performed a series of short plays, they would be called sketches these days, all under the banner of being TOP DOG. Basically, it was teachings on capitalism and to make headway in life you would only be successful if you only thought of yourself and disregarded everyone else. This of course would relate to the incoming Thatcher years.
Even at the tender age of 10, I could see the problems with this ideal. Critical thinking at the age of 10?
Maybe. But empathy at a young age certainly sets you up for a more balanced life.
The irony of course is the amount of information at everyone’s fingertips.....and it isn’t used to its potential. People seem to dumb themselves down.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Whilst watching TV quiz shows in recent years, it’s becoming more evident that there’s a growing lack of general knowledge. Contestants who are unable to answer some fairly high-level questioning of general knowledge seem more concerned with making their lack of knowledge a subject of amusement.

One example this week that highlights this was when I happened to be flicking through the channels and landed on BBC1 and a quiz show, where at that moment the question was asked: “Name a book of the Old Testament”. The joint contestants were given some time to talk it through and gave their answer, which was: “...we’re going to say The Book Of Icarus”.

Now, I completely understand that not everyone could provide a correct answer to this question, but what really irked me was the amount of sniggering that ensued when these 2 contestants were told that the answer was wrong. I immediately turn off BBC1.

The other get-out clause that seems to be used by some TV quiz show contestants when faced with a question about certain periods within the 20th century, is to respond with: “that’s before I was born so I don’t know the answer”.

Parts of social media, too, highlight people’s lack of knowledge, but in a different way. I often see people posting questions where the answer could easily be found on the internet. A lot of this seems to pinpoint towards a reliance on other people knowing the information, or possibly an unwillingness to explore the internet beyond social media. Generally, this tends to be things like “Anyone know what time ASDA opens?”, “Anyone know why the bins haven’t been collected?”, and so on. I think in this particular instance it relates to something someone further up the thread posted about people wanting to be part of a community. But at the same time it also shows that despite the massive amount of information available on the internet, people seem reluctant to explore, or be curious, beyond places like Facebook.

Perhaps it reflects the wider lack of general knowledge in that people just aren’t curious enough these days. And TV and social media are the 2 main places where this is amplified.

I wouldn't say that not being able to name a book of the old testament would decisively classify someone as stupid. In any case, daft answers on TV quiz shows can often be more entertaining than correct ones, see the "Dumb Britain" feature in Private Eye for example.

 

[AlterEgo]

Whilst watching TV quiz shows in recent years, it’s becoming more evident that there’s a growing lack of general knowledge. Contestants who are unable to answer some fairly high-level questioning of general knowledge seem more concerned with making their lack of knowledge a subject of amusement.

One example this week that highlights this was when I happened to be flicking through the channels and landed on BBC1 and a quiz show, where at that moment the question was asked: “Name a book of the Old Testament”. The joint contestants were given some time to talk it through and gave their answer, which was: “...we’re going to say The Book Of Icarus”.

Now, I completely understand that not everyone could provide a correct answer to this question, but what really irked me was the amount of sniggering that ensued when these 2 contestants were told that the answer was wrong. I immediately turn off BBC1.

The other get-out clause that seems to be used by some TV quiz show contestants when faced with a question about certain periods within the 20th century, is to respond with: “that’s before I was born so I don’t know the answer”.

Parts of social media, too, highlight people’s lack of knowledge, but in a different way. I often see people posting questions where the answer could easily be found on the internet. A lot of this seems to pinpoint towards a reliance on other people knowing the information, or possibly an unwillingness to explore the internet beyond social media. Generally, this tends to be things like “Anyone know what time ASDA opens?”, “Anyone know why the bins haven’t been collected?”, and so on. I think in this particular instance it relates to something someone further up the thread posted about people wanting to be part of a community. But at the same time it also shows that despite the massive amount of information available on the internet, people seem reluctant to explore, or be curious, beyond places like Facebook.

Perhaps it reflects the wider lack of general knowledge in that people just aren’t curious enough these days. And TV and social media are the 2 main places where this is amplified.

There are just lots of quiz shows now, far more than there ever were! The quality of contestant has therefore trended downwards. There are still some absolutely formidable trivia brains out there.

 

[Bevan Price]

Regarding quiz shows, one needs to consider:
1. Not everybody has the type of memory that can instantly recall everything they know (or once knew).
2. Some people who do not appear regularly on TV enter a state of near-panic when placed in front of cameras & microphones, temporarily they might even be unable to name close relatives. I have even seen this happen to "celebrities" when they sit in that black chair on Celebrity Mastermind.
3. Some things are not worth trying to remember. ("Which" things will depend on your personal likes or dislikes. )

 

[peters]

There are just lots of quiz shows now, far more than there ever were! The quality of contestant has therefore trended downwards. There are still some absolutely formidable trivia brains out there.

Bradley Walsh did a series on the history of game shows and one point brought up in that is relevant here. In the past you didn't apply to be a contestant on a TV show to win money but to show off your intelligence, the most you got for winning was a trophy or goody bag. It was generally seen that quiz shows were for those with degrees or other professional qualifications to enter, when a black cab driver won Mastermind it was seen as a victory for the working class.

For applying to be on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire the question is really can you complete fastest finger first in a competitive time. If you can then you could win thousands of pounds, even if you have to use all your lifelines to reach £16,000. Getting to £16,000 gets you enough to get you a new car, even if it isn't enough to make you stand out as someone with excellent general knowledge.

What "soft subjects" are those? Things like media studies are often a subject of ire, but do teach skills like critical thinking and analysis.

Two things that people often overlook when they refer to 'soft subjects' are:
1. To undertake any degree there's certain transferable skills you need to develop and use. I've worked for one company where most employees had degrees and another where most employees did not and the differences are obvious, especially with those in their 20s. The younger people without degrees generally need big tasks breaking down in to sub tasks for them, while those with degrees don't generally need that level of additional support. Additionally someone with a degree and 2-3 years experience can be just as valuable to a business as someone with 10 years plus experience and no degree, even if a degree isn't specifically required to undertake the role the graduate has been employed in.
2. Art and design courses generally get referred to as soft subjects. However, many people aren't artistic so for many an art and design course wouldn't be the easiest one for them.

 

[DarloRich]

There have always been pub bores and the type who spout nonsense loudly, now with SM they can reach an audience of millions

Absolutely - in the past the pub bores and street corner ranters had limited reach. Now they can amplify their reach with social media. Some even make a living out of being what are essentially pub bores having worked out there is an army of badly educated people happy to lap up their nonsense and ask ( and pay) for more.

It is alarming that these people don't even know they are being used and being radicalized to accept reductions in their rights and opportunities. They don't seem to grasp that the people ranting about elites are the elites and are the ones coining it in because of the choices they are conditioned to make.

 

[nlogax]

Absolutely - in the past the pub bores and street corner ranters had limited reach. Now they can amplify their reach with social media. Some even make a living out of being what are essentially pub bores having worked out there is an army of badly educated people happy to lap up their nonsense and ask ( and pay) for more.

The louder pub bores become (ie on social media) the more I disconnect from it all. Honestly.. they've done me a huge favour, I rarely burn through my phone's data plan anymore.