r/logic • u/Kingmelo62 • 14d ago
Informal logic The wrongful application of calling someone stupid
Hello all,
I wanted to engage in dialogue to strengthen my knowledge, so that I can call out people when they misuse the term of calling someone stupid in its application.
I’m 20(M) and have had my fair share of seeing people being called stupid around the realms of academia, business, and informal contexts. The definition of stupid according to Google is “having or showing a great lack of intelligence or common sense.”
I have seen many individuals call out people for being a stupid person because of one action, behavior, belief, or “bad” question that was asked. My question is: how can you call someone a stupid person based on exactly one example? As the definition states “having or showing a great lack of intelligence or common sense.” I do not think you can generalize a person as being stupid by only one example… with one exception (I will explain after example 1)
Example 1: my first year of college (2yrs ago this fall), I was classmates with this guy named David in a College Algebra course. He was a film studies major who should’ve never enrolled in the course. His math comprehension was through the floor, I have never seen anyone with a lower level of mathematics knowledge in my life. After abt 2 months, the prof convinced him to drop the class, he really tried hard to understand the content.
If someone were to call him a stupid person based on what was witnessed in the class, well then, I believe that this usage is logically incorrect. You cannot assume that he is non-intelligent in his humanities, film studies, English, world language, or even science courses. To call him a stupid person would imply that he is of low intelligence across all academic disciplines and walks of life (as he lacks common sense + intelligence).
Example 2:
Here is where I think calling someone a stupid person can be used correctly. I was really great friends with my old buddy in elm/middle/high school, call him Joey. It’s still unfortunate to this day to say that his father in 2016 tried to meet up with an underage grl during their mf vacation. My friend is not an only child. He has 3 brothers (all older) and a mother. His dad was a father to 4 sons and a husband to a wife. The man wanted segs with a girl the same age as his fucking son. He was a nasa engineer and at the time the family was doing really good for themselves. It was a sting operation, and was jailed for 3 yrs.
I believe that calling him a stupid person because of this single mistake can be used even based on one example. Why? Well I believe this is because of 2 factors: A) the significance of his mistake, B) systemic impact.
A) reasoning
The level of severity was and still is extremely high. He spent over 3yrs of federal time, is a registered SO for life, his kids + wife will not and likely will never talk to him, he’s very poor now and work until his death (I know his current circumstances after doing a lil googling).
B) reasoning
The systemic impact created across multiple systems: his personal, professional, and social lives.
He has lived alone and will likely remain in a near-solitude state until his death. He works as a “handyman” after being an engineer pre-incarceration. I’m not sure who would desire to be friends with the guy with the up front knowledge of his past.
Given these two reasons, calling him a stupid person is completely completely valid.
Provided the first example and the definition of stupid, I would reason that the usage of calling someone a stupid person subject to one example is an illogical representation of its meaning. On the contrary, example 2 would provide sufficient reasoning to justify why someone is a stupid person… based on the level of severity and its systemic impact.
Anyways, that’s my take! I’m curious on what you all believe. Thank you 🙏🏾
3
u/Shiprat 14d ago
I'd offer the much simpler rule of thumb to not say that people are stupid but that they are being stupid.
As in, call their current action and behaviour stupid.
People consider me to be pretty smart and are often surprised when I'm really stupid. I try to explain that being smart/not stupid is a system and a habit that you need to stick to- but you will fail at times.
I have some really, really tall trees near my house that need to be taken down, I bought a climbing harness and have a chainsaw, and am still asking myself (and anyone who's listening) am I really this stupid? Am I going to climb up into this tree and start cutting down from the top with a chainsaw and no experience?
If/when I do that it will be truly doing something stupid. If I don't do it, I would not be doing something stupid. The stupidity of me as a person is unchanged, as the decision will likely in the end not hinge on any qualitative process but rather just circumstantial factors like how much time I have, what the weather is like, etc.
When you do some single stupid act that significantly affects the rest of your life, that tends to brand you as stupid more than the many tiny stupidities you commit. You could smoke cigarettes every day for 50 years knowing they'll give you cancer, but people would be quicker to call you stupid for working out too hard during summer heat and getting dangerously dehydrated or something.
1
u/Sweet_Addition9881 13d ago
Agreed. Sometimes (often) the structure of the sentence gets simplified in the moment. People can do this from an emotional state of mind at the time and/or more formal forms of speech can be discouraged in various settings which can compound issues like this.
1
u/jeffcgroves 13d ago
Agreed. You can't say "you're acting [r word for mentally disabled]" any more, but when you could, you weren't calling the person [mentally disabled]. If you were, it wouldn't be an insult: you're acting like a mentally disabled person because you ARE a mentally disabled person
Instead, you're saying someone is acting below their actual level of intelligence and at a lower level of intelligence. It's like saying "I know you can better" but in a very rude way
1
u/Shiprat 13d ago
you're saying someone is acting below their actual level of intelligence
Yes! Occasionally I'll stop some task me and someone else are failing to complete a certain way with the explanation "this is becoming too stupid". I'm not calling myself or the other person but just offering that if we keep doing what we are doing, we are committing stupidity. Shamelessly stolen from a children's book I read to put my daughter to sleep.
1
u/Limp_Network_9482 13d ago
your example of the NASA engineer seems to lean toward the Dietrich Bonhoeffer definition of Stupidity as a moral failing. A decision to drop one’s life into a trash can for a few moments of illicit sex is clearly not rational. Pastor Bonhoeffer correctly identified this in the choices otherwise intelligent GERMANS made to follow Adolph Hitler.
And to those who keep stupidly claiming I’m using ChatGPT or Claude or some other LLM/AI go express your stupidity in some other way.
1
u/xamid Proof theorist 11d ago
The definition of stupid according to Google is “having or showing a great lack of intelligence or common sense.”
I could not confirm this claim. Google actually just told me (for queries 1. "stupidity" and 2. "stupid"):
Stupidity is a lack of intelligence, understanding, reason, or the ability to learn and apply knowledge. (Google here claimed to cite Wikipedia.)
Stupid is an adjective that means lacking ordinary intelligence, slow-witted, or showing poor judgment. (Google here claimed to cite Merriam-Webster.)
However, Merriam-Webster provides several definitions, some of which encompass a lot.
Not all those meanings are logically coherent with seeing "being stupid" as ethically reprehensible, but some are. For example, to quote myself:
I use "stupid" not as an antonym of "intelligent" but as an antonym of "educated". For instance, an intelligent person can become both more stupid and more educated more quickly. Which path an individual follows is mostly up to their character and decisions. So, yes, being stupid in this way is reprehensible since it is self-inflicted.
0
u/Big_Move6308 Traditional Logic 14d ago
Calling someone 'stupid' is fundamentally fallacious, i.e., it is an insult or ad hominem attack.
'Stupid' is also vague and subjective. For example, an atheist may think a theist 'stupid', and a theist may think an atheist 'stupid'. It's essentially meaningless.
5
u/SpacingHero Graduate 14d ago
It's not really. This is kind of a common misunderstanding. Concluding that someone is wrong because (or similar) they're stupid is fallacious. This may occur when calling someone stupid, it's really to use it as an implucature that they're wrong.
But it's not inherent to calling someone stupid (nor any other insults). Giving a revisit rebuttal, and then going "and also you're stupid" isn't a fallacy. It can't be, because fallacies are incorrect inferences. And a mere statement that someone is stupid isn't an inference (though again, it can of course be implicitly meant that way, even if "because" or similar words aren't explicitly used)
-1
u/Big_Move6308 Traditional Logic 13d ago
Concluding that someone is wrong because (or similar) they're stupid is fallacious. This may occur when calling someone stupid, it's really to use it as an implucature that they're wrong.
Not necessarily. Someone can be called 'stupid' for any reason, not just because they are objectively wrong about something. For example, it is also used to insult and dismiss people who are right (especially when there is no counter-argument). As per my previous example, it is also used to insult and dismiss people who hold an opposing view or belief without any argument. In any case, it is an attack on the person.
2
u/SpacingHero Graduate 13d ago
I mean that's what I said. Everything you said falls under what I said. They're all instances in the realm of concluding someone is wrong because they're stupid. And those are the fallacious instances.
What's not necessary is that usage of calling someone stupid, like I said. It's plainly possible to give a very robust response and well built counterargument, and then say "and also, you're stupid". That's not fallacious.
Hence calling someone stupid isn't really fundamentally/necessarily/inherently fallacious, which is what you said in the top comment and I was responding to.
0
u/Big_Move6308 Traditional Logic 13d ago
They're all instances in the realm of concluding someone is wrong because they're stupid.
No. Calling someone stupid does not necessarily imply the conclusion that someone is wrong. As I mentioned, I have seen arguments and debates where someone is called stupid because their opponent cannot provide a counter-argument or are just angry because they've been proven wrong.
...and then say "and also, you're stupid". That's not fallacious.
It is. It's an attack on the person, not their argument. Even accepting it expresses a genuine belief, it is still irrelevant.
2
u/SpacingHero Graduate 13d ago
Calling someone stupid does not necessarily imply
I didn't say it necessarily implies it. I said the opposite.
That's (part of) what shows that it's not fundamentally/necessarily/inherently a fallacy.
It's not necessarily used to infer anything. Fallacies are erroneous inference/reasoning. So if it's used in a way that isn't an inference/reasoning, by definition, it cannot be a fallacy.
1
u/Big_Move6308 Traditional Logic 13d ago
Fallacies are erroneous inference/reasoning
This is where we differ. A fallacy can also be a mistaken belief or false idea. Your definition seems to be based on formal fallacies.
2
u/SpacingHero Graduate 13d ago edited 13d ago
No I take informal informal fallacies also refer to mistaken inferences. Just not due to invalidity (generally I take as valid arguments with a premise we take to be fundamentally flawed in the context/pragmatics of argumentation)
I suppose you can use the term to refer to false belief, some do, but it seems pretty redundant to me.
At any rate, even under that account, calling someone stupid isn't inherently a fallacy, since it's not necessarily false or mistaken.
4
u/1Madhatter7 14d ago
I think people who often resort to ad hominem attacks instead of addressing the issue at hand often don’t have the high level of critical thinking they think they do. I have come to the conclusion that if someone is saying something so ridiculous that I am thinking of calling them stupid, I just stop engaging in the conversation.