The Power of Stupidity

by Igor Gazdík, MSPE

Many times daily, we denote persons, events, In brief, knowledge is what we know. It is
or result as “stupid,” meaning that they lack stored in our brains, which can be thought of
wits, knowledge, or rational justification. But, as our private encyclopedia. This
what is stupidity, and how can it represent representation helps us find the locations of
power? The word is of Latin origin and chunks of knowledge. It also stores our beliefs
means “amazed or stunned.” Some 127 and expectations, linked together into a vast
synonyms1 of stupidity are available in network of ideas, memories, predictions, and
dictionaries (a few examples in English are a the like. The brain updates this map
dolt, idiot, dullard, pillock, poor fish, pudding continually, using data and signals delivered
head, etc.), but there is only one antonym by our senses. But, we do not base our
known (bad ass). decisions on the real world; we take them
from this imaginary encyclopedia.
What is stupidity? A shortcut to answering
the question might be comparing stupidity to The brain stores interconnected pieces of
knowledge, although knowledge is not an knowledge (as well as data and information).
exhaustive antonym to stupidity. Besides, But in this respect, the brain differs from the
knowledge, too, is defined in fuzzy terms, at computer. Computers are not man-made
least in philosophy. It is referred to as a brains. They do store facts and information
justified true belief ( JTB, for short). What and manipulate them as zeros and ones, but
this belief is based on varies, depending on they have no idea about what they are doing
the circumstances. It might be a belief with the data or what the information is good
justified by observations, formal proofs, some for. They do not “understand” the underlying
processes, and cannot make any independent
preconceived ideas, dogmas, or whatever else.
decisions unless the man-made software leads
The justification seems to be the factor that
them to make specific decisions.
makes the belief true. This construct is so-
called propositional knowledge, described by The crucial aspect here is that we are
phrases of the form “knowledge that p,” with expecting “independent decisions.” The
“p” representing some indicative sentence. For computer cannot make them; humans can.
instance “sparrows fly.” In this form, a What matters is the quality of these
justified true belief has been sufficient to decisions: are they optimal and compatible
enable space exploration, burning or with human aspirations, the laws of nature,
drowning witches, starting or averting wars, the laws of human society, etc.? If yes, they
and many other human exploits. In 1963, the are wise decisions; if not they are “stupid”
so-called Gettier problem (consisting of two decisions. This division, at long last, brings us
cases) appeared. This problem points to the into the realm of stupidity as exclusively
fact that justification, truth, and belief are human property.
insufficient for establishing knowledge. It is, What is surprising is the small amount of
therefore, important to ask what knowledge study dedicated to such an important subject.
is. If we do not fully understand what it is, Looking back, the history of stupidity
can we fully understand ourselves? And can research illustrates the scarcity of information
we understand what stupidity is? Questions on the topic in the pre-computer age. In the
of this kind are ancient: they go all the way United States, A Short Introduction to the
back to Plato. History of Human Stupidity was published in

TELICOM XXX.2 – Second Quarter 2018 33

 1934 by a Columbia University professor,
Walter B. Pitkin.2 His book is still topical, in
spite of the 80+ years since its publication.
The author claimed that before his book, only
two other books on the subject were available,
both published in Germany between the First
and the Second World Wars. They were the
books by Max Kemmerich (2013, re-edition)3
and Leopold Loewenfeld (1921),4
respectively. At this point, the reader probably
exclaims, “WHAT?!? Is it true that some
60,000 years after the appearance of Homo
sapiens in Europe and the Old World, there
were only two books dedicated to Homo’s
most salient property?”
Fortunately, it is not particularly challenging Fig. 1: Human behavior in the light of Cipolla’s
laws
to find the answer. A brief review of books in
German, French, and Latin in Google Here are citations of Cipolla’s fundamental
Scholar reveals that, in reality, quite some laws of human stupidity taken from the 1987
books had existed, many of them in the 19th edition of the Laws in The Whole Earth
century, for example, Baillarger 1843,5 Review:
Bateman 1897,6 Chaslin 1895,7 Étoc-
Demazy 1833,8 and Sauze 1852.9 One big Law 1: Always and inevitably everyone
problem nowadays is that the bibliography of underestimates the number of stupid
those books is not complete, and few exact individuals in circulation.
data on the year of publication, the publisher, Law 2: The probability that a particular
etc., are available. In the post-WWII period, person be stupid is independent of any
interesting works were published, other characteristic of that person.
predominantly in German. My subjective Law 3: A stupid person causes losses to
selection includes the works by N. Sachser another person or a group of persons while
(2004),10 E. Kowalski (2017),11 R. Musil himself deriving no gain and even possibly
(1937, 1978),12 H. M. Enzensberger (2007),13 incurring losses.
and van Boxsel (2001).14
This law is, in Cipolla’s words, the Golden
The breakthrough in a systematic and Law of Stupidity. This law also introduces
targeted study of stupidity came as recently as three additional phenotypes that Cipolla says
1976. In that year, Carlo M. Cipolla, a co-exist alongside stupidity. A graph, shown
professor of economic history at the in figure 1, represents the set of the four
University of Berkeley, published his now- phenotypes.
famous Laws of Stupidity in an Italian
magazine.15 In Cipolla’s opinion, stupidity is Law 4: Non-stupid people always
a force that is humanity’s greatest existential underestimate the damaging power of
threat. Why? Because, as Cipolla put it, stupid individuals.
stupid people cause problems without an Most often, non-stupid people always forget
apparent benefit to themselves, they are that at all times and places and under any
irrational, and they are abundant. I would add circumstances, dealing and associating with
that they also are very self-centered. stupid people turns out to be a costly mistake.

34 TELICOM XXX.2 – Second Quarter 2018

 Law 5: A stupid person is the most As an illustration of the academic research
dangerous type of person. carried out in recent decades in the field of
Giancarlo Livraghi (1966, 1997) proposed “stupidity,” I have selected one set of results,
the following three corollaries to Cipolla’s obtained in 1999 by psychologists Justin
laws:16 Kruger and David Dunning (K&D) from
Cornell University.17 They carried out three
First Corollary: In each of us there is a factor experiments, with undergraduate students as
of stupidity, which is always larger than we their test subjects.
suppose.
Experiment 1 Humor. The authors asked
Second Corollary: When the stupidity of one 65 test subjects to rate how funny certain
person combines with the stupidity of others, jokes were. They then compared each test
the impact grows geometrically—i.e., by subject’s ratings with ratings done by eight
multiplication, not addition, of the individual professional comedians on a scale from 1 (not
stupidity factors. funny) to 11 (very funny). It turned out that
Third corollary: The combination of some test subjects had a very poor sense of
intelligence in different people has less what others find funny—but they viewed
impact than the combination of stupidity, themselves as very good at it.
because “non-stupid people always Experiment 2 Logical Reasoning. The test
underestimate the damaging power of stupid subjects were 45 undergraduate students.
people” (Cipolla’s Fourth Law). They took a 20-item test of logical reasoning
In figure 1, the horizontal coordinate based on a Law School Admission Test
represents a person’s self, with + being a gain preparation guide. The goal was to make
and – a loss. The vertical coordinate three estimates: (1) A comparison of a
represents the gain (+) or loss (-) other people student’s general logical reasoning ability
incur. These give rise to four quadrants with that of other students, expressed as their
having the following characteristics. percentile ranking; (2) the students’ estimate
Quadrant A illustrates a situation when a of how their score on the test would compare
person behaves in a LOSE-WIN manner. with that of their classmates; and (3) each
This person is naïve and helpless. His student’s estimate of how many questions out
behavior benefits others at his own expense. of 20 he thought he had answered correctly.
It is called Cretinous Behavior. Quadrant B
Experiment 3 – Grammar. In phase 1 of this
depicts a situation when a person’s behavior
test, the 84 participants had to complete a
results in gain (+) for others, as well as a gain
test assessing their knowledge of American
for the person in point. It is a WIN-WIN
Standard Written English; to rate their
situation, and the behavior is denoted as
overall ability to recognize correct grammar;
Intelligent. In Quadrant C, the person is the
to assess how their test compared with that of
winner, whereas others are losers. Cipolla
their peers; and to estimate how many test
called this behavior Bandit Behavior, i.e., a
items they had answered correctly.
WIN-LOSE situation. Finally, Quadrant D
shows Stupid Behavior, or a LOSE-LOSE In phase 2 of this test, using the Wason
situation, when the protagonist’s behavior (1966) test of logic,18 the participants had to
leads to losses both for himself and for the assess themselves similarly as in the previous
society. Also, one can develop a variety of experiments. Half of the participants took
combinations, such as smart bandits or stupid part in a short training session to improve
bandits, depending on the “benefit-damage their logical reasoning skills. To test their
ratio.” metacognitive skills, they had to indicate

TELICOM XXX.2 – Second Quarter 2018 35

 which items they had answered correctly and subjects’ intellectual performance into
rate their ability and test performance. quartiles, rather than assessing their
The results of the above experiments had “stupidity.” Since the test subjects were
many overlapping features, indicating that university students, they could hardly be
incompetence manifests itself similarly, no stupid, i.e., intellectually impaired in the
matter the task. The main findings of the sense some members of the general
research were as follows: population might be. For a more detailed
account of the K&D experiments, the reader
— gender does not affect the overall results might like to peruse the original article.
— the test subject’s assessments of ability
correlated modestly with the subject’s Confronting the K&D experiment with
actual ability Cippola’s laws, one thing that muddles the
— the subjects tended to overestimate their analysis is that in a given situation, it is
ability relative to their peers’ ability somewhat difficult to distinguish between
— those subjects that performed “incompetence” (that can be rectified) and
exceptionally poorly compared to their “stupidity” (that is irreversible). An
peers were unaware of this fact intermediate stage between the two seems to
— the participants in the bottom quartile be the “stupid action,” or a “stupid result.”
overestimated the number of correctly These are not an exclusive domain of “stupid”
answered test items by 50% (i.e., low-IQ) people, but intelligent and
— participants falling in other quartiles educated people can produce them, as well.
overestimated their ability much less than Therefore, prudence probably fits better as a
did those in the bottom quartile counterweight to stupidity.
— participants in the top quartile K&D’s findings confirm statements on
underestimated themselves stupidity pronounced by famous people. Here
— participants who received the training follows a brief selection of great quotations.
graded their tests more accurately; those The most ancient one is from Euripides:
who initially scored in the bottom quartile “Talk sense to a fool, and he calls you
were as accurate in monitoring their test foolish.”20 The famous English humorist
performance as those who had initially Jerome K. Jerome stated, “It is so pleasant to
scored in the top quartile come across people more stupid than
— the incompetent participants are incapable ourselves. We love them at once for being
of learning from life experience about so.”21 One more apt quotation is by Albert
their lack of skills Einstein: “Only two things are infinite, the
The results obtained by K&D show that universe and human stupidity, and I am not
incompetence is worse than it appears to be. sure about the former.”22
It most often concurs with cluelessness, i.e., a K&D’s experiments, combined with the
state when the majority of the consequences quotations stated above, lead us to believe
of an action are unpredictable at the time of that the etiology of stupidity is more
decision (Graeves 2016).19 The incompetent complicated and more multi-dimensional
persons do not perform up to speed. They do than is its reduction to a few symptoms. One
not recognize their lack of competence. relevant fact that follows from K&D’s
Moreover, they do not even acknowledge the experiments is that there is an affinity
competence of other people. between the magnitude of the stupidity
This quantitative study of stupidity is displayed and the intellectual environment in
interesting, although it might be more which a task is given, the subject’s handling
appropriate to talk about categorizing the test of knowledge, and the strength of the

36 TELICOM XXX.2 – Second Quarter 2018

 relationships between some critical accomplish something than when he does not
parameters. The affinity manifests as relations want to do it. In this case, the reduced
between curiosity, concentration, and other performance due to smartness and
values involved. cunningness should not be confused with
lack of intelligence or incompetence.
Is that all? In the discussion so far, stupidity
has been mostly exposed in negative terms as Thus, the above assertion results in two
a human property characterized by the models of stupidity. One is closely associated
absence of cognitive values. Few natural with vanity and cognitive impairment. It
phenomena, however, are only black or white. resides in quadrant D. The other,
Usually, they appear as shades of gray. Can it representing an intelligently applied stupidity
apply to stupidity, too? And can stupidity proffered by an intelligent person, can occur
have a bright side to it? in any of the quadrants A, B or C. Often the
latter variety of stupidity is the only way to
Cipolla had indicated that the stupid people
save one’s skin and make one’s autonomy and
even occur in quadrants A, B and C. This
freedom possible. Some authors make vague
idea, in fact, is not entirely new. In the 16th
references to irony as related to the
century already, Erasmus of Rotterdam, one
intelligently applied stupidity. The Praise of
of the greatest thinkers of his time,
Folly is full of irony.
considered human folly as a property
standing out prominently in human behavior. Where does the power of stupidity come
Human folly manifests as indifference or from? In the classical Cipolla setting, it
disaffiliation concerning cognitive values, and comes primarily from the feeling of
lack of bon ton, prudence, and foresight. Folly satisfaction and confidence the low-percentile
is thus vaguely related to stupidity. Erasmus decision makers get from their presumed
(1978), in The Praise of Folly, lays bare the decision-making and problem-solving
various manifestations of folly in society.23 excellence. Those in the uppermost
Examples include the folly of theologians, the percentile, by contrast, are not sure whether
ubiquity of folly in marriage and friendship, they have investigated all possible solution
self-love, delusion, ignorance, or academic alternatives and consequences in sufficient
and social classes. All these manifestations of depth, or perhaps have missed something of
folly fit into the quadrants A, B, and C. great significance.
Even more penetrating are Musil’s One of the intellectually most intensive
contributions (1937, 1978). In The Man parameters in dealing with stupidity is
without Qualities, an unfinished novel over intellectual curiosity. It incites man to
1000 pages long written between 1930 and investigate where the boundaries of what we
1943, he dissects a wide range of existential perceive are. The people we denote as “stupid”
topics related to feelings and humanity.24 lack, in my opinion, the capability to use
Musil discloses an intimate relationship curiosity to obtain information and convert
between stupidity and learning (education, that information into knowledge. The stupid
formation, cultivation). This link is most person is not very curious. In fact, he cares
conspicuously apparent in the dependence little about the boundaries. Instead, he
between stupidity and smartness. If the forces perceives fragments of information as wholes
in a segment of society act very and their constituent parts as closed entities of
asymmetrically, the weaker partner finds his which there is nothing more to know. That
salvation in pretending to be more stupid explains why the less-rational people have a
than he is. The stronger partner is less feeling of accomplishment even when
irritated when the weaker party cannot obtaining mediocre results and why they think

TELICOM XXX.2 – Second Quarter 2018 37

 their performance is outstanding. Nobody has The ubiquity of the stupid further aggravates
expressed this more succinctly than one of the this problem. They are represented in all sub-
greatest thinkers of the previous century, strata of human society and at all segments of
Bertrand Russell (1946): “The trouble with time.
the world is that the stupid are cocksure and
Destructive power. An increase in the number
the intelligent are full of doubt.”25
of the stupid members of a given society
Gleaned from Cipolla’s laws, the power of inevitably strengthens the destructiveness of
stupidity stemming from vanity and the stupid ones.
intellectual impairment can thus be explained
The power of the intelligently applied
by the following fundamental concepts:
stupidity in a given setting primarily depends
Consistency. No matter how the non-stupid on the cleverness with which the presumed
people act, they are somewhat erratic in their stupidity is presented and used, because, in
behavior. They can perform anywhere in the this case, the subject is gaining a personal
quadrants A, B, and C (or even D) for a advantage at the expense of the stronger and
while. The stupid, by contrast, are models of more unwelcome partner.
consistency. Cipolla explains it by the fact
There is a third combination, following from
that intelligent people find it challenging to
a different blend of the shades of reality.
understand irrational behavior. They do not
Smart “bandits” (quadrant C) may win
think it is impossible to understand the logic
significant power in society because of their
underlying a helpless person’s or a bandit’s
sophisticated application of pretended
behavior. The latter is not bright enough to
stupidity at the expense of others. Examples
increase his well-being creatively, so he
of such combinations are abundant in the
devises ways of doing so at someone else’s
circles of tax evaders, privatizers, and other
expense. It is not morally correct, but it is
speculators. A self-study of the various
rational and thus predictable.
combinations shown in figure 1 possibly will
Ubiquity. The actual number of stupid people warn us against the antics of selfish and
at any given place is impossible to estimate. unscrupulous individuals, because—like it or
However, from the First Law, it follows that not—stupidity is all around us. Knowledge
their number is higher than anyone thinks. and prudence are only its special cases.

NOTES
1. Power Thesaurus, “Synonyms: Studpidity entry, ” https://www.powerthesaurus.org/stupid_
person/synonyms.
2. Walter B. Pitkin, A Short Introduction to the History of Human Stupidity (New York, NY: Simon
& Schuster, 1932).
3. Max Kemmerich, Aus der Geschichte der Menschlichen Dummhei, Re-edition (Bremen: Dogma,
2013).
4. Leopold Loewenfeld, Über die Dummheit: Eine Umschau im Gebiete Menschlicher
Unzulänglichkeit, 2-e Auflage (Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, GmbH, 1921).
5. Jules G. F. Baillarger, Pathologie, Maladies Mentales: de l’état Désigné Chez Aliénés sou le nom de
Stupidité, (Paris: Bourgogne et Martinet, 1843).
6. Frederic Bateman, The Idiot: His Place in Creation and His Claims on Society, (London: Jarrold
and Sons, 1897). Available also from: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/39670/39670-h/39670-
h.htm.

38 TELICOM XXX.2 – Second Quarter 2018

 7. Philippe Chaslin, La Confusion Mentale Primitive, (Paris: Asselin et Houzeau, 1895).
8. Gustave François Étoc-Demazy, “De la stupidité considérée chez les aliénés, recherches
faites à Bicêtre et à la Salpêtrière,” 1833,
https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=M7dYAAAAcAAJ&rdid=book-
M7dYAAAAcAAJ&rdot=1.
9. V. Sauze, “De la Stupidité,” thèse, (Paris: Masson, 1852).
10. Norbert Sachser, “Neugier, Spiel und Lernen: Verhaltensbiologische Anmerkungen zur
Kindheit, ” Zeitschrift für Pädagogik 50, no.4, (2004): 475-486. Available as a pdf from
pedocs.de.
11. Emil Kowalski, “Dummheit: Eine Erfolgsgeschichte,” (Stuttgart: J.B. Metzler, 2017).
12. Robert Musil, Über die Dummheit: Ein Vortrag gehalten in Wien on 11 und 17 March 1937,
(Berlin: Berman-Fisher, 1937). The original is available from www.belletristik-
couch.de/robert-musil-ueber-die-dummheit.html; Robert Musil, Der Mann ohne
Eigenschaften, In: Gesammelte Werke, Bd. 1. Hg. von Adolf Frisé, (Reinbek bei Hamburg:
Rowohlt, 1978).
13. Hans M. Enzensberger, Im Irrgarten der Intelligenz: Ein Idiotenführer, essay, re-edition by
Edition-Suhrkamp 2532 (Berlin: Suhrkamp, 2007). Also available from ebook.de.
14. Matthijs van Boxsel, Die Enzyklopädie der Dummheit, (Frankfurt am Main: Eichborn, 2001).
15. Carlo M. Cipolla, “The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity,” Whole Earth Review 2, no. 7
(Spring 1987).
16. Giancarlo Livraghi, “The Power of Stupidity,” June 1996, http://serendip.brynmawr.edu
/serendipia/Stupidity.html (1966), and http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/serendipia/
Stupidity2.html (1997).
17. Justin Kruger and David Dunning, “Unskilled and Unaware of it: How Difficulties in
Recognizing One’s Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-assessments,” Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology 77, no. 6(Dec 1999): 1121-1134.
18. Peter C. Wason, “Reasoning,” New horizons in psychology, edited by Brian M. Foss (Baltimore,
MD: Penguin Books, 1966): 135-151.
19. Hilary Graeves, “Cluelessness,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 116, no. 3, (Dec 2016):
311-337.
20. The Quotations Page, “Euripides,” http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/449.html
21. Quotes, “Jerome K. Jerome,” https://www.quotes.net/quote/58547.
22. Brainy Quote, “Albert Einstein,” https://www.brainyquote.com/authors/albert_einstein.
23. Desiderius Erasmus, “The Praise of Folly: Translated by John Wilson, 1668,”
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/9371.
24. Robert Musil, Über die Dummheit: Ein Vortrag gehalten in Wien on 11 und 17 Maerz 1937,
(Berlin:Berman-Fisher, 1937).
25. Bertrand Russell, “Philosophy for Laymen,” Universities Quarterly 1 (1946): 38-49.

TELICOM XXX.2 – Second Quarter 2018 39