Logical fallacy around the mantra “Never assume malice when stupidity will suffice”.
In reality, acting like “Whoops, sorry! Stoopid me!”, so the victim is willing to forgive you for longer, is the oldest trick in the book of evil.
Mostly used by anxious sheltered people when overwhelmed by reality .
Not necessarily wrong. But not necessarily right *either*. There simply is no rational basis for it. It is useless. Its false sense of security can itself be harmful again. Purely exists as a coping fantasy. Same thing as conspiracy theorists (−1) , but with an opposite polarity (+1).
Risen in popularity in late 2010s, due to an anxiety epidemic in young people caused by over-sheltering parents, for-profit fear media, over-prescription abuse, and several bad events (pandemic, wars, …).
The real way to tell evil from stupid is:
*Evil has a goal*. Its actions *converge* towards that.
Stupid is incompetent. Its actions *diverge* (into chaos).
Catch 1: Stupid people can *still* be useful pawns for evil people, and follow them. (See example.)
Catch 2: There doesn’t *have* to be an evil person. It may be emergent behavior in a group. (Proof: Your body’s cells aren’t smart. Yet together they can act smart.)
Usually it’s more complex, but that’s the gist.
In the end, stupid is already harmful. It wastes resources and slows advancement down. That is evil.
While evil is already stupid. As teamwork (being nice) is clearly an evolutionary advantage.
In reality, acting like “Whoops, sorry! Stoopid me!”, so the victim is willing to forgive you for longer, is the oldest trick in the book of evil.
Mostly used by anxious sheltered people when overwhelmed by reality .
Not necessarily wrong. But not necessarily right *either*. There simply is no rational basis for it. It is useless. Its false sense of security can itself be harmful again. Purely exists as a coping fantasy. Same thing as conspiracy theorists (−1) , but with an opposite polarity (+1).
Risen in popularity in late 2010s, due to an anxiety epidemic in young people caused by over-sheltering parents, for-profit fear media, over-prescription abuse, and several bad events (pandemic, wars, …).
The real way to tell evil from stupid is:
*Evil has a goal*. Its actions *converge* towards that.
Stupid is incompetent. Its actions *diverge* (into chaos).
Catch 1: Stupid people can *still* be useful pawns for evil people, and follow them. (See example.)
Catch 2: There doesn’t *have* to be an evil person. It may be emergent behavior in a group. (Proof: Your body’s cells aren’t smart. Yet together they can act smart.)
Usually it’s more complex, but that’s the gist.
In the end, stupid is already harmful. It wastes resources and slows advancement down. That is evil.
While evil is already stupid. As teamwork (being nice) is clearly an evolutionary advantage.
Leader figure A: Evil (scapegoat group B) are invading our (group A), destroying our (values) and taking our (valuables)! = Evil. Goal: Power
Group B, Pawn 2: Durk urr durr! Kill all (group B)! =Stupid. Goal: Whatever dear leader A says.
Group A, Anxious traumatized person 3: OMG, (group B) is destroying our (group A)! They are evil! Hyper-focused on anything remotely similar to the previous trauma: “It *must* be real!” Goal: Safety through avoidance.
Group A, Anxious *black-eyed* person 4: Calm down, it’s just Hanlon's Razor! Everything is fine. Nothing to see here, move on. Hyper-focused on anything remotely similar to the previous *safe space*: “It CAN’T be real!” Goal: Safety through ignorance.
(As you can see, everyone in this example is wrong, and merely driven by their anxiety, clinging to what they grew up with that seemingly lets them handle reality.)
Group B, Pawn 2: Durk urr durr! Kill all (group B)! =Stupid. Goal: Whatever dear leader A says.
Group A, Anxious traumatized person 3: OMG, (group B) is destroying our (group A)! They are evil! Hyper-focused on anything remotely similar to the previous trauma: “It *must* be real!” Goal: Safety through avoidance.
Group A, Anxious *black-eyed* person 4: Calm down, it’s just Hanlon's Razor! Everything is fine. Nothing to see here, move on. Hyper-focused on anything remotely similar to the previous *safe space*: “It CAN’T be real!” Goal: Safety through ignorance.
(As you can see, everyone in this example is wrong, and merely driven by their anxiety, clinging to what they grew up with that seemingly lets them handle reality.)
by Evi1M4chine April 3, 2023
when a conspiracy theorist ignores logic and reputable sources to keep believing their silly theory.
Matthew ignores Ackam's razor and thought that Jenga was a more representative model of a building than physics.
by TheMindsEye February 3, 2017
The act of making a cumcicle then breaking off a small piece of said frozen cum till it gets a sharp edge and then slicing your sexual parter with the dirty cum razor
Tanner: come here baby I made a gift for you
Prostitute: oh baby slice me up with your dirty cum razor
Prostitute: oh baby slice me up with your dirty cum razor
by Lookatmetantan October 14, 2023
razor mains have the worst internet EVER. Istg we be doing a boss and they randomly stuck in the center. Like get better internet mf
by MikaMiika July 22, 2022
It a act of sucking a Big Dick While Making a Black Guy Suck You Horse Cock Then making him take it up his ass
by Zslayer March 17, 2017
The correct answer is the opposite of whatever was just said. A principle created from the observation of former hedge fund manager and finance commentator Jim Cramer's history of investment advice; where the opposite of whatever is recommended was almost always the best option.
Investment Bro: Cramer was on tv today saying Florba-Skipp is a failing company and to sell immediately.
Financial Planner: Cramer's Razor...
Investment Bro: Dump everything into FBSK immediately
Financial Planner: Cramer's Razor...
Investment Bro: Dump everything into FBSK immediately
by Ecclesies August 10, 2023
"Never attribute to oppression that which is adequately explained by free choice."
A philosophical razor proposed by computer scientist Stuart Reges in Quillette's essay "Why Women Don’t Code. A variation of Hanlon’s Razor.
A philosophical razor proposed by computer scientist Stuart Reges in Quillette's essay "Why Women Don’t Code. A variation of Hanlon’s Razor.
"I suggest a variation of Hanlon’s Razor that one should never attribute to oppression that which is adequately explained by free choice. If men and women are different, then we should expect them to make different choices." - Stuart Reges defining Reges' razor
by Dronte June 26, 2018