Ignorance vs. Stupidity

My distinction between Stupidity & Ignorance. Yes there is a difference.

re: Comments asking if I was feeling lonely, without friends, while trying to carry on a rational discussion with the “Global Warming Skeptics” crowd.

“Not at all, as I feel surrounded by stupid people, engaging in rational ignorance within this discussion here.”

This could just as well be applied to; racists, the Hillary “sexist” group, bigots, many within the Republican Party, “Bible Thumpers,” Big Energy supporters, or any other group who defends Ideology over Reality.

Wikipedia says,

Stupidity is distinct from irrationality because stupidity denotes an incapability or [an] unwillingness to properly consider the relevant information.

If & when I use the term “stupid” towards a person, I intend the latter meaning as more often than not, they do not lack the capacity to learn the relevant information needed to make an educated opinion, as implied by the “incapability” connotation.

Wikipedia goes on to say,

Ignorance is the condition of being uninformed or uneducated, lacking knowledge or information.

If & when I use the term “ignorance” towards a person, I deviate from this definition, in implication that the person lacks education or knowledge, either through an incapacity to learn or a disconnect from sources of information, by which case making an informed decision or opinion is impossible to achieve.

An analogy to clarify my definition would be, expecting an indigenous Indian deep within the Amazon Basin, to know that Japan exists, let alone there is something called a television.

Wikipedia further states,

Rational ignorance is a term most often found in economics, particularly public choice theory, but also used in other disciplines which study rationality and choice, including philosophy (epistemology) and game theory.

Ignorance about an issue is said to be “rational” when the cost of [expense of energy required to] educating oneself about the issue [derivate from one's Ideology] sufficiently to make an informed decision [understand all sides or 'facts'] can outweigh any potential benefit one could reasonably expect to gain from that decision, and so it would be irrational [against one's closed minded beliefs] to waste time doing so. This has consequences for the quality of decisions made by large numbers of people, such as general elections, where the probability of any one vote changing the outcome is very small.

“Rational Ignorance,” for which I never knew a term existed to convey the sentiments of my beliefs, is the equivalent of Ideology over Reality, and I have no patience for this type of arrogant opinion used to convey “absolute truth.”

The best analogy that comes to mind is my father answering my questions about something going wrong, say for instance, the slumping economy, and him stating as fact & “absolute truth,” “Clinton got blow jobs in the White House.” True, but how does this defend you point, and you know it has nothing to do with what is causing X, Y or Z. In this example, I know he is an intelligent man, but his Ideology is blinding him from Reality, and thus I can say my father is “stupid” man without insulting him personally.

In conclusion, I have zero tolerance for stupidity & rational ignorance. As they have no moral qualm and lack integrity within themselves, I have zero guilt for “playing” at their level or insulting their statements of “Absolute Truth.”

On Republican Arrogance & Melding of Church & State

How to disprove an idiot the easy way done simply. No longer waste your time responding to those who have an agenda of keeping people stupid so they may gain. Cut and paste, save your time for better, more worthwhile battles to fight.

Demonstration of Stupidity:
Posting 2 week old stumble of “57″ States by Barack Obama as de facto proof of his inability to be President of the United States of America
[insert insignificant event upsetting fundamental tenants of reality here]

Excuse/Reason Given:
“I am a weekend blogger”
[insert who writer is here, i.e., white man not hating on black, black woman who cannot be racist or sexist either, BibleThumper unable to get over "Marriage" being a word, etc.]
[Translation:I have too much to lose to defend Democracy so I will trash it]

Because you are a weekend blogger [insert excuse for being an idiot here], that excuses you to post as “significant” a stumble of words as something of importance[insert any tripe not worthy of discussion] as to why a candidate is not viable? any idiot and most likely 70% of the world knows we have 50 states, so what is your point other than spreading stupidity and points back to the poster of the stupidity.

What do you gain by posting drivel, not even worthy of going on the same page as “Brittney’s next trip to rehab,” other than to give ignorant people, unable or unwilling to think for themselves something to “latch” onto like “God & Guns” as a reason to not even consider a candidates position and just do as they are told?

Where do you move the discourse forward, to understand what each candidate stands for, by posting BS that does not matter? You don’t and that is exactly your point of posting it, b/c you know people like yourself would rather idolize ideology instead of observing reality.

Does undeterred, unwavering support of Ideology put food on the table? Lets just look at Ohio, for example the “God & Guns” comment. Is their vote for GWB & Republicans over the past elections based on ideology & religious dogma, in their best interest? They continually vote for “god & guns” over “food & work,” then want people to feel sorry for them as factories close and jobs disappear, not to mention their population that is smart enough to leave this lunacy. This is not media “buzzwords” or “Obama-mania,” this is reality and these people you cater to with your garbage, instead of talking to them like humans, who need to realize their action[s] or lack thereof is directly related to the position they find themselves in, you keep them stupid and beat them down for your own selfish purposes.

Don’t lecture me, with your carbon copy statements of what I would say, when you don’t mean it and you know it. You support stupidity for the people so you may gain [something] by taking advantage of this. What is it you have to gain by selling ignorance-making sure people keep buying things they don’t really need, put themselves further into debt, etc., given your position in radio [anything that depends on ignorance to generate profit]?

Conservatism – is a term used to describe political philosophies that favor tradition and gradual change… also known as “maintaining status quo”…stay the same.

Republican Mantra is deeply rooted to Conservatism, “anchored to it,” and I can guarantee we agree on this point. Therefore, to maintain Republican power and the Conservative Ideology Symbiosys, it requires no changes be made, to maintain the same, preserve the Status Quo. Republicans require status quo and without they will perish, regardless of whether the current situation is good or bad, it must be maintained “as is” over all else. In the Republican Ideology a slow, gradual change in the negative direction is infinitely more important than a rapid change for the positive. This is the inherent downfall to the Republican Conservatism* Ideology.

Democracy is about discourse of the issues that effect all people in the democracy, not dumbing them down so those at the top can control them easier.

So what was it you were saying again? You posted this [any drivel of insignificance] because it was intellectually stimulating and “Obama not knowing the US has 50 states” will result in a family not able to feed their kids in Ohio because the factory left town? Or was it that God & Church will be forced out of Government & State were it does not belong, but is intertwined** with sayings & realities of “The Bible Belt” voting block or “The Compassionate Conservative” government party?

Honestly, the true question is “What do you have to gain?” from the position you lobby and and the status quo of “stupidity” you advocate?

* author’s note: Conservatism should not be in any way shape or form be misconstrued to mean “fiscal conservancy” as they are not the same.

** author’s note:I believe in separation of Church & State to ensure the safety & stability of both. My position is the same as The Reverend C. Welton Gaddy, Leader of the The Interfaith Alliance and The Interfaith Alliance Foundation, whom I quote from The Washington Post on April 9th, 2008,

“No candidate should seek, celebrate, or even accept endorsements from religious leaders.

For the sanctity of religion and the integrity of our democracy, religious leaders should avoid entangling houses of worship with partisan politics. Clergy must be free to speak about important issues of the day, and they should provide moral guidance to their congregations, but they lose credibility when they tie themselves to specific candidates.”