Stupidity: Our biggest threat?

Stupidity is not so much lack of intelligence as failure of intelligence

(The above is a 4 minute recording as I test voice and reading combined…)

Is stupidity our biggest threat?

Stupidity can at first be a derogatory term, it can also seem judgemental when cast from others and indeed it  can be somewhat subjective. In Artificial Intelligence and behavioural economics we are very interested in stupidity. As Amos Tversky quipped:“My colleagues, they study artificial intelligence; me, I study natural stupidity.”

My curiosity into the subject of ‘stupidity’ was triggered based on a specific type of stupidity, which is a different concept to irrationality. Danny Kahneman used to differentiate stupidity and irrationality by saying he was more interested in peoples “susceptibility to erroneous intuitions.” Likewise, stupidity is not ignorance, which I define as lack of knowledge and understanding.

Here we are in the 21^st century, we can launch and catch rockets descending from the sky, we have instant communication systems, we can buy and sell goods globally with a click on our incredibly powered personal computers, our money is transferred in nanoseconds, our medical advancements are helping to cure diseases, we have self-driving taxis that have covered millions of miles. Yet, we still have a myriad of shortcomings and imperfections, especially around choices and decision making, systematically across governments, institutions, business and personal. The crux lies in the quality of these decisions: are they optimal and aligned with human aspirations, the laws of nature, and societal norms? If they are, we can deem them wise; if not, they fall into the category of “stupidity”.  

The Study of Human Stupidity

The scientific and popular literature on human stupidity is surprisingly wide and across many disciplines. There is even the study of: “Functional stupidity in organizations.” Where the authors posit that “stupidity is a normal feature of organizational life.” Kant believed that stupidity can “never be ameliorated.” And Jonathan Haidt postulates that social media platforms have “rewired” users toward mass stupidity.

Trying to understand how stupidity is defined and ‘quantified’ in scientific studies is not so easy. Measuring the causation of stupidity is another story, and replicating the studies even more so.

I am not interested in the stupidity characterized by certain ‘mental incapacity’ such as Launce in Shakespeare’s Two Gentlemen of Verona, but rather stupidity as described by Robert Musil, particularly what he considered as institutionalized stupidity that is found in everyday life, such as in politics, education, the arts (mass entertainment) and business. In his 1937 lecture and essay "On Stupidity" (Uber Dummheit). He writes:

“Stupidity is not so much lack of intelligence as failure of intelligence.”

Whislt fictional, Shakespeare was a magician in writing about such people that we could all identify in real life. Think of Polonius in Hamlet, or outside of fiction, Boris Johnson!

So how is human stupidity defined and what does the literature say about it?

In Understanding Stupidity, James F. Welles defines stupidity this way:

"The term may be used to designate a mentality which is considered to be informed, deliberate and maladaptive." 

By maladaptive, Welles was referring to self-defeating, counterproductive, unhinged, flawed, or ill-conceived. In The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception, Adorno and Horkheimer, define stupidity as ‘an acquired “blind spot’, defined not in relation to knowledge but to all capacities, “It can relate to one faculty among many or to them all, practical and mental”. They go on to state that  

“To be stupid is not[1] to lack knowledge, it is to lack the ability or willingness to use or process knowledge.”

We can find another interesting definition of stupidity in Walter B. Pitkin’s 1932 book: A Short Introduction to the History of Human Stupidity:

"Defective dissociation of the significant factors and phases in the situation"

In simple terms, "stupidity" can be defined as:

… a persistent inability or unwillingness to understand, adapt, or recognize important factors in a situation, often resulting in self-defeating or counterproductive actions.

Hence, a defining characteristic of stupidity is that those affected by it are unable to recognize their own stupidity.

The Danger of Stupidity

Locked away in a Nazi prison cell, theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer managed to write a short article on the true enemies of humanity. His conclusion was unnervingly direct:

"Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice."

Bonhoeffer did not see stupidity as a mere intellectual failing. He described it as a sociological phenomenon, a mass psychological condition that flourishes under conditions of conformity, fear, and unchecked power. He was not theorizing in abstract: he was a prisoner of the Nazi regime, living amidst a terrifying example of collective blindness. Under these conditions, people do not just lack understanding; they lack the will to understand. They become "mindless tools" in the hands of those in power, stripped of what Bonhoeffer called "inner independence." The stronger the herd, the less the thinking person will be inclined to oppose it, and possibly even join it.

Inner independence is, simply put, the courage to think for oneself. For Bonhoeffer, this concept was deeply rooted in his theological beliefs. Bonhoeffer believed that cultivating inner independence involved practices like writing, reflection, and community support, which helped individuals maintain their moral compass even in the face of oppressive forces. He saw virtues like humility, courage, and integrity as essential for nurturing this independence, allowing individuals to resist the allure of conformity and stand firm in their convictions.

He considered the lack of inner independance not a matter of IQ or innate cleverness, but rather a failure of character, an inability to resist the tides of collective behavior that suppress dissent and erode the foundation of moral action. Under pressure from authority or the allure of belonging, the individual can relinquish their most precious freedom: the freedom of thought. This was Bonhoeffer’s warning, that stupidity, more than deliberate evil, allows injustice to thrive.

“Against stupidity we are defenseless.” ~ Dietrich Bonhoeffer

The Economics of Stupidity

Carlo Cipolla, an Italian economist, approached the question of stupidity from a different direction. Born in 1922 in Pavia, Italy, Cipolla was a distinguished scholar who spent much of his career examining the history of economics and its societal impacts. He studied at the University of Pavia and the Sorbonne in Paris, eventually becoming a professor of economic history at the University of California, Berkeley. Cipolla's fascination with human behavior and economic outcomes led him to consider the less quantifiable aspects of economics, namely, the stupidity of human actions and their broader effects on society. His groundbreaking work on the 'Basic Laws of Human Stupidity' emerged from this interdisciplinary interest, where he combined economic theory with social psychology to understand the consequences of stupid behavior. He wasn’t locked in a prison cell nor writing in the shadows of history’s darkest moments. He studied human behavior through a lens of economics. In Cipolla’s opinion, stupidity is a force that is humanity’s greatest existential threat.

According to Cipolla’s "Basic Laws of Human Stupidity," a stupid person is one whose actions result in negative consequences for both themselves and those around them, irrespective of intent. However, some critics argue that Cipolla's definition is too broad, as it does not fully consider the complexities of human behavior, such as unintended consequences or the influence of systemic issues. The simplicity of his model may overlook factors like context, power dynamics, and the role of ignorance versus willful disregard, which can all contribute to actions that appear 'stupid' but have deeper underlying causes, e.g. Bonhoeffer’s thoughts on stupidity. Nevertheless, Cipolla writes:

“It is my firm conviction, supported by years of observation and experimentation, that men are not equal, that some are stupid, and others are not.” ~ Carlo Cipolla

Picture someone who recklessly spreads misinformation online, sharing a sensational but false news story without checking its validity. This action can cause widespread confusion, damage reputations, and fuel unnecessary conflict. While the individual may gain a fleeting sense of influence or validation, the broader consequences are harmful to society, creating division and misinformation. In Cipolla’s view, true stupidity is not measured by intellectual capacity but by the damage inflicted, by blind actions that serve no one’s good, not even the perpetrator’s.

He essentially posits that the most dangerous people are the stupid ones.

The Pervasiveness of Stupidity

The perspectives of Bonhoeffer and Cipolla intersect in their understanding of how pervasive and unpredictable stupidity can be. Stupidity is dangerous precisely because it is unpredictable, it does not follow rational self-interest or moral principle. Its power lies in its ability to spread silently, comfortably, under the guise of confidence, conformity, or misplaced good intentions.

Our modern world faces a particular vulnerability to this creeping menace. The rise of misinformation, echo chambers, and tribal online (and offline) behavior illustrate Bonhoeffer’s fears of conformity and Cipolla’s assertion of stupidity’s destructive potential. We crave easy answers, simple, black-and-white explanations that provide comfort in the face of a complex and often chaotic world. This desire for simplicity makes us susceptible to narratives that reduce complicated issues into digestible, but misleading, forms. Stupidity thrives when we prefer the ease of a tidy story over the hard work of critical thinking. Many of us unknowingly give up our independence of thought when we click "share" without reflection, when we accept simplified narratives because they offer comfort in an uncertain world. The consequences can be just as destructive as any malicious action, polarization, social unrest, or harmful collective decisions. In the words of Adorno and Horkheimer:

“…the flood of precise information and brand-new amusements make people smarter and more stupid at once.”

Humility and Vigilence

But, Bonhoeffer believed there was a solution: humility. An openness to recognize our limits. It’s a form of humility that admits we do not have all the answers, that our perspective is inherently incomplete. This openness cultivates the inner independence he found essential to resist the force of stupidity. It’s the humility to doubt, to listen, to engage with new ideas rather than simply reject them.

Cipolla, too, gives us a framework to fight stupidity: vigilance. We must learn to recognize the signs of harmful stupidity in ourselves and others, to guard against it when we see it, especially when it rises to positions of power. When we accept that stupidity can be found in any of us, regardless of intelligence, we begin to see it as a shared human challenge rather than a fault of others.

The fight against stupidity is not one of intelligence versus ignorance, but of character versus conformity, humility versus certainty. It’s about refusing to surrender our minds to collective thoughtlessness, about questioning easy answers, and remembering that complexity is not something to fear but something to explore. When we cultivate this inner independence, when we question rather than comply, we become, in Bonhoeffer’s words, dangerous in the best way, a threat to the machinery of mindless obedience.

Our world faces numerous complex, interlinked challenges, from wars to global disease, inequality to political unrest and maybe soon job obsolescence. To get through these, we need the ability to think critically, to question authority, and to remain open to different perspectives.

Addressing these perspectives strengthens our understanding of the unique and pervasive threat that stupidity poses, as it often operates without awareness or intent, making it harder to counteract. If we are to combat it, we must do so with courage, humility, and relentless independence of thought.

“Day after day, with unceasing monotony, one is harassed in one's activities by stupid individuals who appear suddenly and unexpectedly in the most inconvenient places and at the most improbable moments.” ~ Carlo M. Cipolla

It is easy to mock stupidity, to see it as an affliction of others. But it lurks within all of us, waiting for the moment when we lower our guard, when we let the comfort of conformity replace the effort of understanding. The battle against stupidity is, ultimately, a battle for the future of humanity, a future that will be determined by our willingness to resist not just malice, but our own complacency and laziness.

A Sixth Sense against Stupidity

A crucial part of this battle lies in cultivating what could be described as a "sixth sense" against stupidity. This sixth sense is not some supernatural power, but rather an intuition that sharpens with practice and vigilance. For instance, it can manifest as the ability to notice when discussions are veering into uncritical agreement or when emotions are driving decisions rather than reason. It could be the gut feeling that prompts someone to fact-check a sensational claim before sharing it or to question a group's consensus when it feels too convenient. Cultivating this sixth sense requires deliberate habits, such as regularly challenging one's own beliefs, seeking out dissenting viewpoints, and practicing mindfulness to remain aware of one's emotional states. These strategies help to strengthen our mental resilience and foster the type of awareness needed to identify and counteract the subtleties of stupidity.

It involves developing an awareness of the patterns and triggers of stupidity, both in ourselves and in others. It means recognizing when we are being led by impulses rather than rational thought, when we are defaulting to the comfort of groupthink instead of independent reflection.

As Queen Victoria's prime minister, Lord Melbourne, bitterly quipped after a policy fiasco:

“What wise men had promised has not happened. What the damned fools predicted has actually come to pass.'"

Stay curious and guard against stupidity.

Dr Colin W.P. Lewis

Images made with Ideogram

---

[1] (as is ignorance)