Principles for navigating stupidity

[trenton]

Leo recently posted on his blog two videos about the nature of stupidity. Most people cannot be reasoned with because it is more efficient for them to just take in information and not question it.

I oftentimes have difficulty communicating with people no matter how transparent I try to be. Sometimes the truth is threatening to them, and I therefore may need to be content with giving simplified lies that are true enough to be useful. I have a few principles in mind that might be refined for such communication.

I believe it starts with a combination of simplicity, confidence, humor, agreeableness, emotionality, and possibly vague appeals to morality. This kind of reminds of what I have studied in psychopaths. They often appear charming and likeable even if what they say doesn't hold under logical scrutiny. So long as you say it with confidence and charisma, that is enough for most people to believe in your character even if you are a serial killer. The psychopath thinks people deserve it for being stupid.

Currently, I am thinking about things like calculated stupidity. The point is that in human affairs, people find it funny when you act as stupid as you can get away with. This sometimes rises to the level of sexual assault performed for peers. My calculated stupidity would have to account for the possibility of causing harm for the amusement of others as I would prefer to avoid unnecessary boundary crossing.

Navigating stupid people might change depending on the domain. Politics is interesting because I normally look into with depth for the sake of understanding. I often learn a lot, but it depends on the situation in that many people prefer an ally. Therefore, I think the optimal public position might be to say that I am an independent and I don't get into political debates. I would have to debate whether or not to tell someone that I have done enough research to know that none of the simple narratives offered are enough to contain the full truth and in fact they often obscure it on either side especially when emotions are high. I'm not entirely sure how to handle stupid people in political debates. It often seems futile. The main goal seems to be virtue signaling and tribalism.

I'm not entirely sure how to apply to my family. The way the operate depends on denial of reality. They also use coercive control through shouting and threatening. The one who performs enough outrage to provoke others to try to soothe them seems to be the strategy in that environment. I think I would rather just live on a college campus and finish my degree before going away forever. At least my brother is decent and more open minded.

The last context has to do with institutions. I find that I have repeatedly ended up with friction against rigid institutions because I question authority and notice the flaws in their reasoning. Their reasoning objectively does not stand against various counter examples. However, the medical staff among other authority figures move to discredit my position as subjectivity along with insistence that they must follow through with spreading information the courts told them to spread even if that information doesn't hold under scrutiny.

Institutional inertia stunts my creativity on various fronts and it makes it hard to find meaningful work. Essentially I'm supposed to not think and don't show any signs of innovation and then believe that hard work will lead to self advancement despite any evidence to the contrary.

Therefore, I am trying to understand institutional survival more clearly. I'm trying to find in what ways can my creativity be channeled without threatening authority figures who depend on their lies not being questioned. It would be nice to have in depth conversations with people, but it is hard to find people interested in learning.

What other suggestions might there be for navigating stupid people? Is it smart to act authentically smart in the presence of people who cannot receive or understand your perspective? Or are there other principles we might consider for this dilemma?

[Terell Kirby]

Development of independent thought and critical thinking is inversely related to fitting in into group conformity within human social relationships.

There are trade offs, pros/cons between the two. Being an independent thinker is no easy feat, and comes with its own inherent risks, especially in the social domain.

Independent thought should not be seen or adopted as an absolute good. One should weigh their value system and what is important to them before going down the path. 

[yetineti]

Stop trying to navigate ‘stupidity.’ It assumes a lot. Assume nothing. Talk to people about what they want to talk about or shared interests.

Work your way back. Chances are what you want to talk about does not resonate with 99%. But taking a step back will help reintegrate.

The real problem is you dunno how to talk to people. Not stupid people. 

Figure out why. What was the tradeoff? Did you choose it or was it unconscious? What can you do now? Why do you even want to talk to people?

[LastThursday]

A good way to start is to not underestimate your own stupidity. What I mean by that is that tomorrow, in a week, a month, a year, you'll look back and cringe at certain things you did and said and believed about yourself. Look inward first before you look outward, there is the greatest learning.

[Lila9]

2 hours ago, LastThursday said:

A good way to start is to not underestimate your own stupidity. What I mean by that is that tomorrow, in a week, a month, a year, you'll look back and cringe at certain things you did and said and believed about yourself. Look inward first before you look outward, there is the greatest learning.

Definitely. Looking outward too much is a distraction.

[Lila9]

On 5/23/2026 at 0:49 AM, trenton said:

What other suggestions might there be for navigating stupid people? Is it smart to act authentically smart in the presence of people who cannot receive or understand your perspective? Or are there other principles we might consider for this dilemma?

I think that if you feel that people may not have the intellectual, emotional, and psychological basis to understand you, it is better to talk to them at their level or not to talk to them at all. Because most people don't like to feel unknowledgeable, stupid or incompetent. Even if it is technically true in some aspects. Talking to people with tact, at their level, to not make them feel uncomfortable is also a form of intelligence, social/emotional intelligence (and also self protection). 

It is also depends on the person and yourself. If they are open to truth, thinking, conversing, and learning, and trust your intelligence and that you will not judge them for their lack of knowledge, then this is another thing.

Question: If you meet a stranger which is a very intelligent alien dressed as a human, who is so advanced in all measures of intelligence (but you don't know it), had a conversation with you that made you feel very stupid and incompetent, literally deconstructing your entire worldview and perception of reality and pointing out all the flaws in it, in a very smooth, natural, casual and elegant way, would you enjoy this conversation? Would you be defensive, fascinated, or confused? How would you react to and treat this stranger? With kindness, curiosity and an open heart, or with some anger and impatience?

Edited 11 hours ago by Lila9

[trenton]

2 hours ago, Lila9 said:

Question: If you meet a stranger which is a very intelligent alien dressed as a human, who is so advanced in all measures of intelligence (but you don't know it), had a conversation with you that made you feel very stupid and incompetent, literally deconstructing your entire worldview and perception of reality and pointing out all the flaws in it, in a very smooth, natural, casual and elegant way, would you enjoy this conversation? Would you be defensive, fascinated, or confused? How would you react to and treat this stranger? With kindness, curiosity and an open heart, or with some anger and impatience?

I would be interested in learning this perspective. I am aware that there are different perspectives that highlight my blindspots. These perspectives might lead me to a more complete understanding of reality. Of course, I know there are assumptions baked into everything I just wrote, but I do enjoy improving my broader understanding of life.

The problem is that in my case, I don't have people pointing out flaws in my perspective or my worldview at all. Instead I have people who seem to be resistant to academic perspectives or academic sounding language. They might even be anti-intellectual such that they dismiss the perspective entirely without engaging with it at all while overlooking all of its implications in terms of how it applies to the present situation. Oftentimes they show signs of preferring relational communication with an emphasis on feelings. In my case I have autism which both leads to difficulty identifying emotions and to complex mixed feelings which I believe I described perfectly, but only some managed to comprehend it.

Additionally, I often deal with people who use motivated reasoning to project ill faith where there is none. This is used to misrepresent what I say, such that in some situations there is no such thing as a correct method of communication.

[trenton]

5 hours ago, LastThursday said:

A good way to start is to not underestimate your own stupidity. What I mean by that is that tomorrow, in a week, a month, a year, you'll look back and cringe at certain things you did and said and believed about yourself. Look inward first before you look outward, there is the greatest learning.

In my case, I have done plenty of inner work. Inner work can become it's own distraction. In fact it might even be used to gaslight me by misrepresenting me in a variety of ways. All that needs to be done is to project a script onto me that doesn't apply while obscuring any relevant factors or complexity. Then it is easy to make me look unreasonable no matter what I say.

In my case I am struggling with people who are close minded or who refuse to learn.

Let's start with, how would you manage a Trump supporter if they had a racist rant? Surely some people are dumber than others if some are less willing to educate themselves.

[trenton]

On 5/22/2026 at 8:31 PM, yetineti said:

Stop trying to navigate ‘stupidity.’ It assumes a lot. Assume nothing. Talk to people about what they want to talk about or shared interests.

Work your way back. Chances are what you want to talk about does not resonate with 99%. But taking a step back will help reintegrate.

The real problem is you dunno how to talk to people. Not stupid people. 

Figure out why. What was the tradeoff? Did you choose it or was it unconscious? What can you do now? Why do you even want to talk to people?

Talking about shared interests is much easier for me. One of the problems I encounter is that most people are not interested in deeper understanding or lengthy research. It becomes a mismatch in terms of my interests and what is available to me.

In the case of the stupidity framing, I was borrowing from the framing in the videos in the blog. I don't know if you watched those videos or not. There are other frames that can be used like communication styles, spiral dynamics in terms of cognitive development, or maybe something else. Autism is a relevant frame because people with autism often don't follow social cues that are intuitive to neurotypicals and are instead blunt or literal in many cases. Apparently, there has been enough research on this issue done to know that it is unreliable to try to teach people with autism to communicate like neurotypicals. Instead it is more reliable to teach neurotypicals how to communicate with people who have autism. In my case, autism support is unavailable and I must instead design my own methods of communication knowing that simply saying things as they are will be seen as a sign of bad faith.

In terms of my choice to largely avoid talking to people, it was a conscious choice. Part of the problem was that I was afraid of being sexually violated again. This is why it is especially difficult to talk in dating contexts which is harder with autism but compounded by the fear of violation. The reason I want to talk to people at all is because I am alone and suffering in silence. Connection and warmth is possible, but safety is a necessary prerequisite and it is much easier to connect from within safer domains such as mutual interests.

My interests have been broadened partially by necessity. The advantage is that if I have broader interests then it also gives me more methods of connection depending on which interests are being discussed. That would be the easy part. The harder part is when I start integrating multiple fields of studies to map out a complex picture that defies any simple narrative. The other hard part is communicating in terms of feelings as it makes assumptions about people with autism that don't apply even if it applies to neurotypicals.

Of course I don't mean stupid in a way of meaning such people should be held with contempt. A simple counterexample might be someone who is severely disabled. In terms of their capacity for learning, it would make sense to say they are stupid, not by character fault but by circumstances beyond their control. Stupid people don't necessarily deserve contempt. This needs to be clarified in terms of the framing used.

[Lila9]

5 hours ago, trenton said:

I would be interested in learning this perspective. I am aware that there are different perspectives that highlight my blindspots. These perspectives might lead me to a more complete understanding of reality. Of course, I know there are assumptions baked into everything I just wrote, but I do enjoy improving my broader understanding of life.

I see. This is a very positive characteristic of yours.

What do you think about someone so intelligent that you simply can't understand their thought process or what they are speaking about at all? I know that IQ is not the only measure of intelligence, but what if you talked to someone whose overall intelligence gap between you and them was like the gap between someone with an IQ of 70 and 170? Or 70 and 700? Their concepts and view of life would be so alien that you might start to think they are the stupid ones. Sometimes humans project stupidity (as well as insanity) onto those they simply do not understand.

5 hours ago, trenton said:

The problem is that in my case, I don't have people pointing out flaws in my perspective or my worldview at all. Instead I have people who seem to be resistant to academic perspectives or academic sounding language. They might even be anti-intellectual such that they dismiss the perspective entirely without engaging with it at all while overlooking all of its implications in terms of how it applies to the present situation. Oftentimes they show signs of preferring relational communication with an emphasis on feelings. In my case I have autism which both leads to difficulty identifying emotions and to complex mixed feelings which I believe I described perfectly, but only some managed to comprehend it.

Additionally, I often deal with people who use motivated reasoning to project ill faith where there is none. This is used to misrepresent what I say, such that in some situations there is no such thing as a correct method of communication.

Ok, you mentioned your autism, and it explains a lot. You describe a common issue among autistic and neurodivergent people overall. The thing is that most people are focused on emotions in their interpersonal communication and on feeling good, bonded, and emotionally validated, which also often includes having their biases go unquestioned.

Most people do not tend to see conversation with others as an opportunity for a good intellectual discussion (especially in this anti-intellectual age), but rather as something more casual and cathartic.

Not that this is ideal, especially in institutions or environments where you would expect more intelligence and integrity, so in that regard I understand your frustration.

The tendency you describe, of people to project is unfortunately inescapable. 

Edited 2 hours ago by Lila9