A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
People will remain stupid. But I'm somewhat hopeful that in the next few decades we see AI develop enough that it truly constitutes superintelligence relative to us, and that the scalability of it tips the scales of the continual standoff between intelligence and stupidity forever.
Because I have little hope for humanity overcoming its own multiplying stupidity on its own.
You're talking about mostly religion. Not one specific but for all of them to work they have to dumb people down, otherwise why would you follow crazy rules if you can have your faith at home without crazyness?
I believe that in a far future, as humanity gather more and more knowledge keeping religion up will be kind of hard, but until them we will have to go through the "dark ages of christianism" where our lifes will be controled by some old conservarive people. But they will die out.
Unfortunately I don't think this is mostly religion. A lot of people are stupid. Sincere question, when was the last time you talked to a normie?
I chatted with my hairdresser yesterday. She didn't know:
For Halloween my girlfriend and I are going as SBF and Elizabeth Holmes. She commented that "no one outside [my] little circle is going to know who those people are." I started to disagree but, in a way, she's right.
Don't get me wrong, she's wonderful and hilarious and chill af. She's just a bit dumb. And that's okay but it's true.
No.
Itβs human nature to want to be the best, the most loved, the top dog. It helps to propagate the species.
If someone is smarter than you, it digs at the very core of that, and becomes a threat.
lol so you're saying that you think we're genetically programmed to mistrust "smart" people? I think you're really reaching here
I think 'human nature' is far too broad to define in such a way, and making objective statements about it is wrong. In my opinion, the only definite thing you can say is that humans act out of self-interest (as do all living beings), but the motivation derived from it doesn't have to be destructive.
I think the claim that the world is anti-intellectual is somewhat biased. I don't know if that's a sampling bias, a cognitive bias, or some other kind of bias. But one way or another, I feel like you're overblowing things.
