Bertrand Russell is the author of the statement, which I turned into a question.
2006-06-25 14:53:59 · 9 answers · asked by In Honor of Moja 4 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
I think that is probably true. A less intelligent person analyzes facts in a simpler manner and has less expectations for proof.
A more intelligent person analyzes facts in a different manner. More intelligent people tend to have a more open mind, as opposed to a closed mind in a less intelligent person.
I think less intelligent people may tend to be somewhat naive to seeing the bigger picture, so to speak. I think they tend to avoid the extra knowledge required to analyze because it overloads their mind and they cannot sort it out.
We could also believe that less intelligent people have no reason to bother learning things. Or at least they think they don't need to learn.
I also think 'stupid' people are more influenced by cause and effect than an intelligent person. For example a stupid person could go outside at 5 am and pray for light and soon after the sun comes up. So they might be stupid enough to belive they made it happen. An intelligent person would know better.
A stupid person might believe everything that is on TV or in the newspapers. A smart person analyzes the facts, or determine if there are any or not before believing.
It's like if you found a dead body with a knife on the ground next to it and you picked up the knife, and right at that point the police showed up, they would think you were the killer. Cause and effect.
There are many ways you look at it. Take for instance the movie Flipper. There were hardly any fish for the fisherman to catch. There happened to be a dolphin in the waters. So the stupid people blame the dolphin for eating all the fish. But, it turned out one of the fisherman was dumping toxic chemicals in the water.
Cause and effect.
2006-06-25 15:29:12 · answer #1 · answered by jeffrey_meyer2000 2 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Yes. I think so. Stupids are always cocksure in everything because their intelligence is so limited and their grasp at something is just as limited. They wouldn't dare think out of the box because they're sure all the knowledge they need they already possess. Which is why they are always cocksure at everything, whether they are really right or, in fact, mistaken.
Intelligent people are full of doubt because they want their answers to be correct. They always think that there may be a better answer than what they already have, so they look for a better one still. That's why intelligent people are always doing research and studies so they we may have a better approach in solving our problems each time they come up.
Well, at least that's what I think at the moment. I'll look for something better and I'll edit my answer then. I'm sure there's a more convincing explanation to this, I think.
2006-06-25 22:26:28 · answer #2 · answered by malko 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pretty Much. The real trouble is the sages of psycological growth.
People usually go from egocentric, only caring about themselves, to dualim: black/white, good/evil. Trouble is without a bit of wit, or some extra time in school, people don't get past the idea of dualism, and believing in concrete 'truth.' Thank you, Organised-Religion. They continue believing that they are at least a little bit closer to the truth than everyone else (or at least anyone who disagrees with them). Eventually most get past that (around their early 20's), into the idea of Multiplicy, where you acknowldge that there are many diferent persepctives, and ideas, therefore 'truth' is more analagous to 'almost everyone agrees.'
Problem with that stage is that it means you have to acknowledge your own ignorance, and admit that no mater how sure you are of somthing, you just might be wrong.
The two types never get along very well...
Dualist : "It's either this, or that... and I KNOW it's THIS!"
Multiplist : **I KNOW that's not right... but I might not be right either** "I could be this or that, I think it's that thing there... but it could be anything!"
Dualist : ** I'm right! I know I am.. ** "YOU CALLING ME A LIAR!?!?!"
2006-06-25 22:08:49 · answer #3 · answered by dalinar7 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Russell's observation is correct in some sense, but people are people, and the goal is something different than acknowledging that there are people of all beliefs and behavior toward life. His theory lacks incorporation, in this case, I think.
More notes...
Man's output is measured differently. Sometimes intelligent people sit around and do nothing while cocky ones get things ready. I disagree with Russell, and go with Sartre, man's existence is much broader.
2006-06-25 22:18:26 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bertrand Russell said so, and he was one smart rebel philosopher mathematician poet.
2006-06-25 21:57:15 · answer #5 · answered by Tim 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who said the intelligent are full of doubt? I'm not. Well, I don't think I am. Actually you may be right.
2006-06-25 21:58:27 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. -- Albert Einstein
2006-06-25 22:05:42 · answer #7 · answered by notyou311 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
gosh, i don't really know... yes!
well, maybe no.
gosh, i don't really know...
2006-06-25 21:56:08 · answer #8 · answered by tikiboy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hell!! yes
2006-06-25 23:38:58 · answer #9 · answered by cactus 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋