cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/2313987

I have noticed that alot of people think the majority of people are stupid based on the things they read online or maybe even experience in real life but I think that there is better explanation than just assuming people are stupid.

A common example people bring up to show that other people are stupid is mentioning how a lot of people believe in conspiracy theories ( such as Qanon or Flat earth) and point out how they are objectively false therefore the people that believe it are stupid.

However when you examine these beliefs in more depth there is obviously some amount of internal logic that is used to justify these beliefs to themselves and others in the group.

You can go to flat earthers forum and they can give huge amounts of “evidence” about how light shouldn’t be visible after 50 kms if the earth was round or how in Qanon there are probably people who have whole boards detailed with connections between how and where democrats participate in satanic rituals but my point is that all conspiracy theories tend to form one cohesive narrative like a collective story that are building.

To be able to make a story that is this detailed it definitely required some amount of forethought and reasoning to make it so everyone in the group reaches the same collective understanding.

This then might lead you to ask why are people susceptible to these ideas and what makes them stick. Well I think that it boils down to three different things.

  1. Our collective feeling that things aren’t going well
  2. Our general distrust in current authorities
  3. Our collective belief that an authority is good/necessary

When you look at how people tend to be influenced into accepting these beliefs it also follows this same general pattern.

  1. People feel that some part of their life isn’t going well and that current institutions aren’t helping them anymore.
  2. A guru/influencer shows up and offers advice (sometimes good advice) to fix their problem
  3. People then start trusting these gurus/influencers and seeing them as authorities
  4. Finally these people take what these gurus/influencers say at face value and build internal lore for their community that makes sense to them given that they accept what the new authority says as fact.

If you want to tackle the root of what makes people susceptible to these ideas you have to tackle those three things or else people will fall into those same traps just with different authorities saying different things.

Also as a semi-related point there are a million and one things that an individual can choose to focus on and become knowledgable about so whilst some people spend that mental capacity on understanding tech or politics others spend that mental capacity on flat earth theory or UFOs.

Main point:

So all of this is to say I think that people aren’t stupid and that we should not treat them as they are such instead if we understand that they are capable of complex reason but they are starting with different base knowledge it’ll be easier to empathize with others. Also if we want society to be less susceptible to this we need to fix one or all of the three things I mentioned that makes us susceptible.

  • towerful@beehaw.orgEnglish
    6·
    1 year ago

    The 3 things to fix:

    1. Our collective feeling that things aren’t going well
    2. Our general distrust in current authorities
    3. Our collective belief that an authority is good/necessary

    …

    Also if we want society to be less susceptible to this we need to fix one or all of the three things

    Ok, so:

    1. Fix things that aren’t going well (or make people feel things are going well).
    2. Have authorities we can trust (or make people trust our current authorities).
    3. Reject authority (or make people believe that needing authority is a good thing).

    I have no idea what you are trying to say.
    It all seems really wishy-washy.

    But I agree that people aren’t stupid.
    I mean, on average, at least half the people are stupid. By whatever metric that is.
    Chances are - however - they are irrational.
    Despite all the evidence, they still want something to be true.

    Irrational:

    If you describe someone’s feelings and behavior as irrational, you mean they are not based on logical reasons or clear thinking

    https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/irrational

    99% of conspiracy theorys are irrational.
    By the time you know about a conspiracy theory, it is probably being tested and will likely be disproven. Or it has already been tested and proven to be wrong. Otherwise the conspiracy/theory would be a working scientific theory.
    Believing otherwise makes you irrational.

    Look at LK99. Huge deal, claimed proof, seemed legit. Within 2 months it was disproven to the satisfaction of the scientific community.

    Now there will be stories about LK99 being legit, and the “scientific community” (read government) rejecting it because UFOs are going through US court whatevers. And LK99 came from extraterrestrial origins, or whatever.
    This is irrational (edit: as pointed out in a comment, this is actually rational. It follows logic. But it is based on an irrational premise: that aliens exist).

    Or … scientists made a mistake.
    This is rational.

    ( Never mind the extremely infinitesimally small chance that extraterrestrial sentient life exists and coincides with our time, travelled across the universe and failed to survive an encounter with our planet (or that they successfully contacted only the government via means they were able to keep quiet, who then successfully kept that a secret). )

    Rationality is different from stupid.
    You can be stupid and rational.
    You can be intelligent and irrational.

    • Danterious@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPEnglish
      2·
      1 year ago

      Now there will be stories about LK99 being legit, and the “scientific community” (read government) rejecting it because UFOs are going through US court whatevers. And LK99 came from extraterrestrial origins, or whatever. This is irrational.

      Or … scientists made a mistake. This is rational.

      I think both are rational (consistent with or based on reason) it is just that one of them is using the right premises.

      Ok, so:

      1. Fix things that aren’t going well (or make people feel things are going well).
      2. Have authorities we can trust (or make people trust our current authorities).
      3. Reject authority (or make people believe that needing authority is a good thing).

      The solutions I’d suggest would be

      1. Exactly the same as yours
      2. Teach people to be selective with the sources they trust and base it off of reasons why someone should and shouldn’t trust a source in specific situtations.
      • towerful@beehaw.orgEnglish
        2·
        1 year ago

        I think both are rational (consistent with or based on reason) it is just that one of them is using the right premises.

        Man, I had a whole thing typed out when I re-read what you wrote.
        I’m assuming you mean “aliens are real” is the false premise here…
        Because I’m glad I re-read. I had massively mis-interpreted your comment!

        2… [Snip]

        The way to teach this is critical thinking of “follow the money, follow the power”.
        And it’s pretty murky.
        I’m fairly certain “ban plastic straws” got so much traction because it diverted from actual issues.
        Fishing nets cause more issues and pollution. People now hate pasta straws, and blame it on environmentalists.
        Oil companies divert attention for another 5-10 years.

        Maybe I’m just cynical.

        • Danterious@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPEnglish
          1·
          1 year ago

          I’m fairly certain “ban plastic straws” got so much traction because it diverted from actual issues.

          This is a tactic first used (and probably popularized) by the CCP to drown out dissent. It is called the 50 cent party.

          They shift the focus off of specific events like uprisings and riots to things that are more palatable like parades and philosophical discussions.

          And what makes it worse is that the more people know about it the more effective it is because it just makes the public distrust others more and default to whatever the social norm is which is CCP control.

          I bet that other countries and corporations do the same thing and use the idea of bots to sow distrust in the general public.

          Edit: The false premise would be that intelligent alien life is on earth and the government has been able to hide it this well. I bet that it is likely that somewhere in the cosmos there is at least a proto-proto bacteria floating in a shallow pond minding its own business.