On Provocatively Stupid Authority

[Daktoria]

Before starting, please understand that this thread is not anti-authority in general. It is about a very specific problem with authority. Many authorities are legitimate because they analyze on a universal basis instead of being prejudiced towards particular results. They recognize the artificial basis of authority in contrast to the random chaos of nature. They do not refer to history because they understand that a) history is written by people for people which can lead to cliques, and b) just because history followed a particular series of events does not mean it had to or that series must continue or repeat.

This thread is about authorities which deliberately get things wrong on purpose, neglect victims of deliberate stupidity, or either intentionally create or negligently tolerate conditions which lead to deliberate stupidity.

After that, they exploit the limits of human nature, get on the nerves of responsible people, and then claim responsible people are offensive for calling others stupid in light of actually being stupid. Then, they call responsible people "stupid" back despite how responsible people aren't stupid, and level between the two groups in claiming that responsible people don't like being called stupid either, so they're hypocrites for expecting the right to call others stupid while expecting others to not call them that.

How are these authorities supposed to be dealt with? Obviously, they can't be dealt with directly, so some alternate approach is necessary.

[Blaggard]

Democracy?

It's a damn fine question, but how would you of dealt with George dubbleya Bush.

It's an imperfect world, the only thing we have left is democracy and the right to protest- enshrined in any decent constitution. The right to loot and set the country on fire, is going, if I may say a little too far though, although America has done that for weeks on end because they had backward social policies. Not that I am anti American, far from it they have their good points, but humility is seldom one of them.

Sometimes Atlas Shrugged, sometimes he doesn't. But if The author of that dense tome was half as smart as she thought she was, she would of known atlas shrugged only moved the heavens, the Earth is not part of it. Atlas held up the stars and the moon and the rest of the universe, his feet never moved from the Atlas mountains.

[Daktoria]

To be clear, I wasn't talking about democracy, America, or economics.

I was just talking about the nature of authority in general, but thanks for saying something.

[Blaggard]

Your welcome, I just thought I'd get the ball rolling with something that is philosophical, if not apposite or even grammatically correct.

Where are you from would be a good start, so we can see what sort of shitty government you live under.

[Daktoria]

Well this wasn't even really about government. It's about politics. I'm just talking about the organization of people in society. Government is just one type of organization.

[tbieter]

Well this wasn't even really about government. It's about politics. I'm just talking about the organization of people in society. Government is just one type of organization.

Please give a concrete example of a "provocatively stupid authority".

[Daktoria]

Typically, people who ask for concrete examples are provocatively stupid authorities, so I'd rather not.

For example, there are authorities who turn a blind eye and allow wrongdoers in organizations to hide behind plausible deniability. They expect victims to keep records of what's going on in the organization instead of authorities doing so in the first place. That way, authorities can play favorites with members of organizations they like when they abuse other members and behave irresponsibly. Responsible members who are paying attention to getting tasks done don't anticipate they'd have to pay extra attention to keep records as being members of an organization. Instead, they expect authorities to their job in keeping records.

Another example is provocatively stupid authorities will manipulate the interpretation of rules that an organization is run according to. They'll only refer to parts of rules or go on tangents about definitions of words that don't apply. That way, they can avoid enforcing justice and again allow those they play favorites with to get away with wrongdoings.

[Blaggard]

Well this wasn't even really about government. It's about politics. I'm just talking about the organization of people in society. Government is just one type of organization.

Got it, where are you from. Everything is about the people, even democracy, if not the "race".

You can of course say people are just dumb and they don't learn from history, but that isn't true, people do learn from history it's just at the pace of a glacier when change is in the rub.

[Daktoria]

The point I'm making about history is history isn't everything. Maybe we learn from it, or maybe we don't. There's more to learn about than history either way.

[Blaggard]

So which planet are you from?

It would be better to ask or answer all questions, before you proceed to a point, but then what would any "thing" be if it wasn't flawed. If you live in the matrix you die in the matrix.

Etymology, ontology and possibly teliology is apposite. As for etiology well there's the rub.

One or two or even thousand probably wont predict how any thread will progress. Some may win but some may lose, and some will only sing the blues, but the song goes on and on and on...

2.
the investigation or attribution of the cause or reason for something, often expressed in terms of historical or mythical explanation.

Origin

I hate to argue but I love to digress.

"Stabbing food and helping humans eat is what forks are for."

Are they really?

[tbieter]

Typically, people who ask for concrete examples are provocatively stupid authorities, so I'd rather not.
A concrete example that came to mind was the Westboro Baptist Church people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church

For example, there are authorities who turn a blind eye and allow wrongdoers in organizations to hide behind plausible deniability. They expect victims to keep records of what's going on in the organization instead of authorities doing so in the first place. That way, authorities can play favorites with members of organizations they like when they abuse other members and behave irresponsibly. Responsible members who are paying attention to getting tasks done don't anticipate they'd have to pay extra attention to keep records as being members of an organization. Instead, they expect authorities to their job in keeping records.


Another example is provocatively stupid authorities will manipulate the interpretation of rules that an organization is run according to. They'll only refer to parts of rules or go on tangents about definitions of words that don't apply. That way, they can avoid enforcing justice and again allow those they play favorites with to get away with wrongdoings.

[Blaggard]

That's not a concrete example there are no foundations of stone or minerals on Earth. Or is that what you mean?

[Daktoria]

You guys are weird...

Haven't you ever belonged to a club or team where authorities play favorites and get things wrong on purpose so their favorites get ahead?

This isn't about religion or government or race or any of that. It's just about people getting together, authorizing others, and screwing around with authority to get what they want. You guys are overcomplicating things. This is a basic issue.

[mickthinks]

Favouring your friends at the expense of your opponents isn't stupidity, though. What is the basis of your complaint about stupidity here?

[Daktoria]

Yea it is. It involves not analyzing the rules on a context-free basis. It induces values from facts instead of deducing facts from values.

It's literally stupid because inductive reasoning isn't reasoning at all. It's a cop out for refusing to take the time, energy, and attention for figuring out a complete answer to problems.