My "Are you presuming most people are stupid?" test

What “stupid” means in the thread

• Several commenters distinguish:
  • Knowledge vs intelligence vs self-control vs values.
  • “Stupid” as: acting against one’s long‑term interests when better options are available, even while knowing this.
• Others argue the word is unhelpful, undefined, and mostly a moral insult; many prefer to say “people do stupid things” rather than “are stupid.”
• Some explicitly assert that large segments of the population are cognitively limited, citing IQ distributions and personal/work experience.

Value of “obvious” research

• Multiple comments defend studies that “prove the obvious,” likening them to foundational theorems in math.
• In psychology, “boring” results tend to replicate while flashy ones often don’t; this supports building a hierarchy of small, verified claims rather than chasing surprising findings.
• Others note that what “everyone knows” is often wrong or never really examined.

AI chatbots, usefulness, and respect for users

• One line of argument: if hundreds of millions use chatbots, it’s unreasonable to say they are always useless; that presumes users are idiots.
• Critics push back:
  • Popularity ≠ value (tobacco, TikTok, etc.).
  • Something can be “useful” in a narrow, immediate sense yet net harmful; disagreement centers on what “useful” should mean.
• Some see the article as a bait‑and‑switch defense of AI that dismisses strong AI criticism by framing it as contempt for ordinary people.

Students, cheating, and rationality

• Several disagree with the article’s claim that AI‑cheating students aren’t stupid:
  • Knowing cheating is bad but doing it anyway is itself a form of stupidity or at least self‑sabotage.
  • School teaches meta‑skills (research, writing, time management); skipping them via AI may be rational only in a very short‑term, grade‑maximizing sense.
• Others emphasize structural incentives: grades, credentials, and hoops make cheating a predictable response, not pure intellectual failure.

Everyday irrationality: food, health, and habits

• Examples cited as counters to “people are smart about their own lives”:
  • Widespread poor diet and obesity despite awareness of health consequences.
  • Addictions (gambling, tobacco, alcohol) where people know the harm but can’t or won’t stop.
  • Belief in pseudoscience and misinformation.
• Some attribute this to evolved shortcuts and high discounting of the future rather than low IQ; others label it straightforward stupidity.

Driving, competence, and practice

• Driving is used as an example: many people do it constantly yet remain bad at it, suggesting limits to learning or lack of deliberate practice.
• Counterpoints:
  • Much driving is on “autopilot”; repetition without feedback doesn’t improve skill.
  • Standards differ by region; “bad” driving is partly norm‑based.
  • By accident statistics, average drivers might actually be “good enough,” indicating that “driving is hard” more than “most are hopeless.”

Politics, ignorance, and stakes

• Some commenters care more about abstract/factual ignorance (civics, minority sizes, etc.) because it affects voting and policy.
• Democracy relies on ignorance being roughly random; commenters worry that systematic misinformation and uncuriosity break this assumption.

Meta‑critiques of the article and test

• Several see the “are you presuming most people are stupid?” test as:
  • A check on arrogance when explaining human behavior.
  • But also as a potential strawman: many critics don’t assume most people are stupid, only that enough are misinformed or short‑sighted to cause real harm.
• Others feel the article projects the author’s own cognitive style onto everyone else, ignoring people who function only by memorizing scripts and avoiding problem‑solving.