Is a person smart, but people dumb?

You know that saying… a person is smart but people are dumb?

I think that in almost all of the very important ways that matter, it’s the opposite.

A person is dumb. That’s why people believe there’s some magical thing about being smart. They look around them and it’s a wonder any given individual can even function. And if that’s true, and it sort of is, then how could people, in aggregate, be anything other than dumb-multiplied?

So we need that super smart person who somehow can assure us that even if life is messy and scary and chaotic, that someone does know better. We don’t have to be afraid.

Except that even a dumb person knows more about their own life, what they need, and what’s possible, than the smartest person who isn’t them. And the inability of that smart person to know more about any given person’s life than them… well, *that* is what multiplies.

People with the freedom to make and then change any number of sub-optimal choices, to try and then fail and try again, to respond to their own life as best they’re able, well, it might be *chaotic* but in aggregate it creates a robust and dynamic system that actually comes up with the best answers, the best use of resources, the speediest adaption to change, and all around better results than centralized planning by “smart” people.

A person is dumb. People are smart.

Comments

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it. This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice. If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o...

Some times some people.

What Cancel Culture is NOT

Maybe we should talk about what cancel culture isn't. It's not a boycott. It's not deciding to no longer go to a business. It's not giving a bad review for bad service. It generally involves two things. First, the offense is a matter of opinion. Second, secondary or even tertiary targets are threatened. Cancellation does not need to be successful, and often with very famous and wealthy people it is not successful. But it serves as a warning to vulnerable people who are not in a position to weather that kind of attack. The goal is terroristic in that it's about forcing social behavior in people who are not currently the subject of the attack. The message is always, this could happen to you. And the tactic invariably includes seeking out vulnerable people to threaten in order to put pressure on businesses or on the target of the attack. So it works like this: JK Rowling is invulnerable. But they can try, right? So what they do is they find out who works for the pub...

Synova

Search This Blog