zlacker

Smart is not a one dimensional variable. And critical thinking != corporate politics.

Stupidity is defined by self-harming actions and beliefs, not by low IQ.

You can be extremely smart and still have a very poor model of the world which leads you to harm yourself and others.

>>TheOth+(OP)
Stupidity is defined as “having or showing a great lack of intelligence or common sense”. You can be extremely smart and still make up your own definitions for words.

>>TheOth+(OP)
I agree. It's better to separate intellect from intelligence instead of conflating them as they usually are. The latter is about making good decisions, which intellect can help with but isn't the only factor. We know this because there are plenty of examples of people who aren't considered shining intellects who can make good choices (certainly in particular contexts) and plenty of high IQ people who make questionable choices.

>>brigan+i4
https://liamchingliu.wordpress.com/2012/06/25/intellectuals-...

>>TheOth+(OP)
Stupidity is not defined by self-harming actions and beliefs - not sure where you're getting that from.

Stupidity is being presented with a problem and an associated set of information and being unable or less able than others are to find the solution. That's literally it.

>>ameist+Ij
Probably from law 3: https://principia-scientific.com/the-5-basic-laws-of-human-s...

But it's an incomplete definition - Cipolla's definition is "someone who causes net harm to themselves and others" and is unrelated to IQ.

It's a very influential essay.

>>suodua+or
I see. I've never read his work before, thank you.

So they just got Cipolla's definition wrong, then. It looks like the third fundamental law is closer to "a person who causes harm to another person or group of people without realizing advantage for themselves and instead possibly realizing a loss."