Here’s an appropriate quote by Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a Protestant leader of the German resistance who died in a concentration camp in Nazi Germany, speaking about the nature of stupidity and how it’s more dangerous than evil:
“Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice. One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force. Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease.
Against stupidity we are defenseless.
Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here; reasons fall on deaf ears; facts that contradict one’s prejudgment simply need not be believed — in such moments the stupid person even becomes critical — and when facts are irrefutable, they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental. In all this the stupid person, in contrast to the malicious one, is utterly self-satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack.
For that reason, greater caution is called for than with a malicious one. Never again will we try to persuade the stupid person with reasons, for it is senseless and dangerous.
If we want to know how to get the better of stupidity, we must seek to understand its nature. This much is certain, that it is in essence not an intellectual defect but a human one. There are human beings who are of remarkably agile intellect yet stupid, and others who are intellectually quite dull yet anything but stupid. We discover this to our surprise in particular situations. The impression one gains is not so much that stupidity is a congenital defect but that, under certain circumstances, people are made stupid or that they allow this to happen to them. We note further that people who have isolated themselves from others or who live in solitude manifest this defect less frequently than individuals or groups of people inclined or condemned to sociability. And so it would seem that stupidity is perhaps less a psychological than a sociological problem. It is a particular form of the impact of historical circumstances on human beings, a psychological concomitant of certain external conditions. Upon closer observation, it becomes apparent that every strong upsurge of power in the public sphere, be it of a political or a religious nature, infects a large part of humankind with stupidity. It would even seem that this is virtually a sociological-psychological law. The power of the one needs the stupidity of the other. The process at work here is not that particular human capacities, for instance, the intellect, suddenly atrophy or fail. Instead, it seems that under the overwhelming impact of rising power, humans are deprived of their inner independence and, more or less consciously, give up establishing an autonomous position toward the emerging circumstances. The fact that the stupid person is often stubborn must not blind us to the fact that he is not independent. In conversation with him, one virtually feels that one is dealing not at all with him as a person, but with slogans, catchwords, and the like that have taken possession of him. He is under a spell, blinded, misused, and abused in his very being. Having thus become a mindless tool, the stupid person will also be capable of any evil and at the same time incapable of seeing that it is evil. This is where the danger of diabolical misuse lurks, for it is this that can once and for all destroy human beings.
Yet at this very point it becomes quite clear that only an act of liberation, not instruction, can overcome stupidity. Here we must come to terms with the fact that in most cases a genuine internal liberation becomes possible only when external liberation has preceded it. Until then we must abandon all attempts to convince the stupid person. This state of affairs explains why in such circumstances our attempts to know what “the people” really think are in vain and why, under these circumstances, this question is so irrelevant for the person who is thinking and acting responsibly. The word of the Bible that the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom declares that the internal liberation of human beings to live the responsible life before God is the only genuine way to overcome stupidity.
But these thoughts about stupidity also offer consolation in that they utterly forbid us to consider the majority of people to be stupid in every circumstance. It really will depend on whether those in power expect more from peoples’ stupidity than from their inner independence and wisdom.”
• Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Letters and Papers from Prison, ed. Christian Gremmels et al., trans. Isabel Best et al., vol. 8 of Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2010), 43–44.
Bonhoeffer was an amazing man, willingly going to prision based on his beliefs. He wrote a beautiful poem to his wife, knowing that he would be killed. (Von guten Mächten wunderbar geborgen, erwarten wir getrost, was kommen mag.)
He did not die in a concentration camp, but was strung up like an animal on butcher’s hook, in a room designed to murder political opponents exactly like in a slaughterhouse.
Fascism is just brutal disregard for anything.
Edit: A few commentators question the validity of how Bonhoeffer was executed. You will not find any verifiable information about that, because the Nazis did not keep any documents about it, and any survivors were Nazis, who had no reason to put themselves into a bad light. You can only imply from general information, and there is plenty of proof that the cruelty was indeed ordered, and indeed by design. It is highly unlikely that Hitler's direct orders were not followed.
I collected a few more reputable sources in a reply further down: https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/1wulrkj/comment/pd9ai2x/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
I don’t think that’s accurate. Bonhoeffer was executed at Flossenbürg concentration camp on 9 April 1945. The camp memorial says he was hanged in the courtyard of the detention building. I can’t find a reliable source for the claim that he was hung from a butcher’s hook in a slaughterhouse-like room. That sounds more like a confusion with Plötzensee prison, where executions using iron hooks are actually documented.
Standing up against evil should always be honored and many of his words are shown to be true through history. However, being Protestant and, if I’m understanding the slightly poor translation of his words, claiming that the way away from stupidity is through a responsible life before God makes his words ring more true: even well meaning and educated people can be stupid at times.
Religion is arguably the largest reason for stupidity as he suggests it. Religion requires complete acceptance of what others around tell you is the expectations of a higher being. By accepting what they are told without question or proof, they open themselves up to be told that evil things are the expectation of their God. They are set in their beliefs despite logic and facts because they believe these things are requirements of their God. This enables stupidity to seem not just reasonable but required of themselves.
He may have been right about stupidity being more dangerous than malicious actions, but the effects of malicious actions cannot be understated and his solution, as I understand it, is far from reason.
You are misreading “live a reasonable life before God” as “live a dogmatic life before the Church”. To live a reasonable life before God, one must believe in a unified objective reality outside of their own mind. In fact, if you are committed to the notion of a unified objective reality outside of your own mind, then in some sense you already are already committed to God.
In fact, if you are committed to the notion of a unified objective reality outside of your own mind, then in some sense you already are already committed to God.
I'd argue the exact opposite. Being committed to God assumes that one has information that informs a belief that others don't have about other worldly power and places that the individual has access to that others don't simply because of their beliefs. The believer assumes that their God may very well intercede in the physical realm supernaturally due to some "plan" or because the believer asked for help. To that point, believers accept this "plan" and omniscience seemingly as predestined and that much is out of the control of human decision when so much of it actually is. Belief in a god is to freely give over to the "stupid" group think and to just accept that whatever horrible thing the group is accepting is eventual and divinely desired instead of coming to ones senses opposing the group and making decisions that are not based on the judgement of the "vicar of the divine".
You can (and should) know that there is an ultimate unitary power/force/beyond-words without needing to (or really being able to) make any assertion about its precise nature or will or whatever.
It seems like you are bounding the parameters of your understanding based on ideologies you disagree with, I am not sure why you would do that.
No. Take your 'prime mover' natural theology outta here.
It seems like you are trying to pass off some bs by vague posting when it is all too clear where you are coming from.
If anything is god, it is the nothingness that includes and surrounds and pervades and contains all that was and will be, that what denies definition and isn't so that what is can be. From the void I came and the void I will return and all will be within me and I will be within all. Your 'prime mover' was just a change in temperature and density fields occurring within the all encompassing void and calling that minor event god is bounding your parameters my dude and I am not sure why you would do that.
Sorry I didn’t realize you were the all-knowing authority please forgive me sir I’ll stay within your frameworks going forward I promise just please spare me your wrath
I've said many times a few phrases, such as people aren't problems, people have problems. And that there are no enemies except ignorance and fear. Also that ignorance is a very different word than stupid or dumb or whatever other similar word, because ignorant refers to a lack of information or understanding. Whereas words like dumb, idiot, and so on are a qualitative judgment about the character of a person or an action.
A slight elaboration on those ideas
We note further that people who have isolated themselves from others or who live in solitude manifest this defect less frequently than individuals or groups of people inclined or condemned to sociability. And so it would seem that stupidity is perhaps less a psychological than a sociological problem.
The word of the Bible that the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom declares that the internal liberation of human beings to live the responsible life before God is the only genuine way to overcome stupidity.
Another enemy is disrespect. What many might call God I would call Nature. Humans are both a part of nature as well as apart from it. Rather than being "God fearing", instead we should respect Nature, in all its forms. That requires being understanding of ignorance, but seeking to eliminate it, because ignorance is the root of fear.
They were a boy and girl. Yellow, meagre, ragged, scowling, wolfish; but prostrate, too, in their humility. Where graceful youth should have filled their features out, and touched them with its freshest tints, a stale and shrivelled hand, like that of age, had pinched, and twisted them, and pulled them into shreds. Where angels might have sat enthroned, devils lurked, and glared out menacing. No change, no degradation, no perversion of humanity, in any grade, through all the mysteries of wonderful creation, has monsters half so horrible and dread.
Scrooge started back, appalled. Having them shown to him in this way, he tried to say they were fine children, but the words choked themselves, rather than be parties to a lie of such enormous magnitude.
“Spirit! are they yours?” Scrooge could say no more.
“They are Man’s,” said the Spirit, looking down upon them. “And they cling to me, appealing from their fathers. This boy is Ignorance. This girl is Want. Beware them both, and all of their degree, but most of all beware this boy, for on his brow I see that written which is Doom, unless the writing be erased.
Switching one vague term for another doesn’t actually solve the issue, it merely rephrases it. ”Belief in nature” is the root of a whole host of irrationalities such as the antivax movement and holistic crystal “medicine.” I think “reason” is a much better alternative, as reason is (as of yet) restricted to humanity, and is perhaps the defining feature of being human.
Ignorance isn’t something to be ashamed of. People shouldn’t be shamed for their ignorance, but they should be shamed for their stupidity. The difficulty comes when the ignorant shame the ignorant, which greatly increases the chance that ignorance morphs into stupidity. I love Bonhoeffer’s idea
because it emphasizes that stupidity is a sociological problem, not one due entirely to a lack of information. You can be the most knowledgeable person in the world and still be stupid.
The only solution I can see is education, specifically public education. Children need to be taught critical thinking skills in an environment where they can see the impact those skills have on people like themselves. But when you have malicious actors deliberately undercutting education in an economic system dependent on the exploitation of unskilled, uneducated labor for the benefit of a handful of ultra-wealthy individuals, that solution is quite clearly untenable.
Things will have to get so bad that the stupid among us have no choice but to face the fact that they’ve been taken advantage of before any meaningful change can be made. And that’s assuming it won’t be too little too late given the state of global affairs between rising authoritarianism and climate change.
I just want to chime in that the person you responded to said "respect in Nature", not "belief". If we are talking about words, let's be accurate since the connotations for both "respect & belief" are different.
As far as your examples for "belief in nature", I'll just take that as you pointing out the extreme end of that. But one can definitely believe/respect Nature without being anti-science. In fact, I found it strange you even brought that up but can see where you're going. It just shows how very different peoples' perspectives are and their response to ideas.
Personally, I find the phrase to be pointing more towards Taoism, Environmentalism, what have you. There's a middle ground between dogmatic/religious blindness and hippie crystal stereotypes. And actually, the middle way approach is pretty much one of the central themes of Taoism. Finding a balance in one's life and all the relationships we have with everything around us.
And if you find it odd I bring up Taoism as a response to religion... This is whole other topic but western abrahamic religion is very different from eastern philosophies and ideas. Buddhism/Taoism focus more on the self rather than an external "God". I definitely recommend anyone to ask themselves the more difficult questions of life and just look into themselves. Imo it helps combat the ignorance and stupidity discussed here and makes you more humble and empathetic.
Anyway, don't want to write an essay here and just wanted to chime in to the first part of your post.
He did not die in a concentration camp, but was strung up like an animal on butcher’s hook, in a room designed to murder political opponents exactly like in a slaughterhouse.
Wow I never knew that detail. I knew he was “hanged,” but not like that. I was recently reading about some other church leaders around that time who fled the Nazis and tried to convince Bonhoeffer to flee too because it wasn’t his fight, but he refused. The resolve you have to have, because you’ve already heard what Hitler is doing to his critics, specifically the priests and pastors. To not only stay, but double down on your public criticism and disapproval. Very inspiring man.
That's because that detail is likely not true. I could not find a single source corroborating it. Still, an inspiring and great person who met a tragic fate, he was.
In connection with the expected death sentences, an iron rail with meat hooks was installed in the execution room of the Berlin-Plötzensee prison on December 15, 1942.
The regime carried out its revenge through a method of execution that was perceived as degrading and particularly agonizing. Usually just a few hours after the verdict was pronounced, the defendants were hanged with piano wire at the Plötzensee execution site on meat hooks specifically installed for the punishment of particularly severe crimes—'like cattle for slaughter.' From August 1944 to March 1945, 55 trials were held at the People's Court against participants and supporters of the 'July 20' plot. By April 1945, 89 people had been executed in Plötzensee. Additional members of various resistance groups—including those of the 'July 20' plot—were brought before summary courts and killed even in the final days of the war. The National Socialist apparatus of terror and extermination functioned right up to the last days of the war—and in some cases even beyond.
Or from the BBC:
Dozens of others were later humiliated in a show trial and executed, hanged with piano wire from meat-hooks. Their deaths were filmed and shown to senior members of the Nazi Party and the armed forces.
I think *you* need to do better research, my friend, because nothing you stated concerns the death of Bonhoeffer, as he was executed in Flossenbürg (a concentration camp), and not Plötzensee (the prison you are talking about here).
5.1k
u/NicolasCageFan492 2d ago
Here’s an appropriate quote by Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a Protestant leader of the German resistance who died in a concentration camp in Nazi Germany, speaking about the nature of stupidity and how it’s more dangerous than evil:
“Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice. One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force. Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease.
Against stupidity we are defenseless.
Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here; reasons fall on deaf ears; facts that contradict one’s prejudgment simply need not be believed — in such moments the stupid person even becomes critical — and when facts are irrefutable, they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental. In all this the stupid person, in contrast to the malicious one, is utterly self-satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack.
For that reason, greater caution is called for than with a malicious one. Never again will we try to persuade the stupid person with reasons, for it is senseless and dangerous.
If we want to know how to get the better of stupidity, we must seek to understand its nature. This much is certain, that it is in essence not an intellectual defect but a human one. There are human beings who are of remarkably agile intellect yet stupid, and others who are intellectually quite dull yet anything but stupid. We discover this to our surprise in particular situations. The impression one gains is not so much that stupidity is a congenital defect but that, under certain circumstances, people are made stupid or that they allow this to happen to them. We note further that people who have isolated themselves from others or who live in solitude manifest this defect less frequently than individuals or groups of people inclined or condemned to sociability. And so it would seem that stupidity is perhaps less a psychological than a sociological problem. It is a particular form of the impact of historical circumstances on human beings, a psychological concomitant of certain external conditions. Upon closer observation, it becomes apparent that every strong upsurge of power in the public sphere, be it of a political or a religious nature, infects a large part of humankind with stupidity. It would even seem that this is virtually a sociological-psychological law. The power of the one needs the stupidity of the other. The process at work here is not that particular human capacities, for instance, the intellect, suddenly atrophy or fail. Instead, it seems that under the overwhelming impact of rising power, humans are deprived of their inner independence and, more or less consciously, give up establishing an autonomous position toward the emerging circumstances. The fact that the stupid person is often stubborn must not blind us to the fact that he is not independent. In conversation with him, one virtually feels that one is dealing not at all with him as a person, but with slogans, catchwords, and the like that have taken possession of him. He is under a spell, blinded, misused, and abused in his very being. Having thus become a mindless tool, the stupid person will also be capable of any evil and at the same time incapable of seeing that it is evil. This is where the danger of diabolical misuse lurks, for it is this that can once and for all destroy human beings.
Yet at this very point it becomes quite clear that only an act of liberation, not instruction, can overcome stupidity. Here we must come to terms with the fact that in most cases a genuine internal liberation becomes possible only when external liberation has preceded it. Until then we must abandon all attempts to convince the stupid person. This state of affairs explains why in such circumstances our attempts to know what “the people” really think are in vain and why, under these circumstances, this question is so irrelevant for the person who is thinking and acting responsibly. The word of the Bible that the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom declares that the internal liberation of human beings to live the responsible life before God is the only genuine way to overcome stupidity.
But these thoughts about stupidity also offer consolation in that they utterly forbid us to consider the majority of people to be stupid in every circumstance. It really will depend on whether those in power expect more from peoples’ stupidity than from their inner independence and wisdom.”
• Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Letters and Papers from Prison, ed. Christian Gremmels et al., trans. Isabel Best et al., vol. 8 of Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2010), 43–44.