How much should we protect people from their own stupidity?

Posted by: sirromj

↑

But surely there is nothing new in STW's contempt for the great unwashed?

Of all the people to equate intellect with cleanliness! You should know better... perhaps have a shower?

Too right I do. Give them a bathtub and they'll fill it with coal.

Posted by: sirromj

↑

But surely there is nothing new in STW's contempt for the great unwashed?

Of all the people to equate intellect with cleanliness! You should know better... perhaps have a shower?

Too right I know. Give them a bathtub and they'll fill it with coal.

I'd be up for letting people suffer the consequences of their actions but nothing's ever in isolation.

Like, there a big online rumpus right now because Farmer Johns have introduced a (admittedly poorly thought out) requirement for "downhill certified" full face helmets, and knee pads. And people are losing their shit, but what it really comes down to is "no no-brand internet helmets", they're happy with basically anything from a quality brand in good condition, they just haven't managed to explain their actual requirement. And seriously, who rides dh without kneepads?

Of course the point isn't to protect idiots' knees, it's to stop the park from having to deal with loads of minor injuries, from having staff tied up, trails closed, bad press, being seen as a burden on the nhs, and of course insurance problems. I doubt they care very much about the actual idiots but idiots have consequences.

OP you're assuming we have the capability to do so 

Posted by: boriselbrus

↑

These people are genuinely brilliant in their own fields but absolutely need protecting from some aspects of modern society.

We employed a guy just out of uni who had a theoretical chemistry knowledge second to none. He put some experienced PhD's to shame. Unfortunately, he also had absolutely zero people and practical skills and simply did not fit in a collaborative research environment, literally unable to work with anyone else or deal with some aspects of normal day-to-day working life.

It's handy protecting people from their own stupidity. Partly because it's expensive and messy cleaning up after them and partly because you might be part of the collateral damage when it all goes wrong for them. And partly just from general humanity and empathy.

Posted by: Harry_the_Spider

↑

Was talking about this sort of thing with a colleague the other day after he brushed his teeth with mosquito repellent.

No flies on me 🤔

IMO what is going on here is one person with a chip on their shoulder is getting wound up by someone else with a corresponding amount of arrogance.

You are certainly allowed your opinion. And I am allowed mine, I'm certainly not wound up. 

So what level of stupid should we decide its not their fault then? If you are picking and choosing who you should care about based on how intelligent they are you have failed at a very basic level of care for your fellow man IMO.

He showed more concern when i said i thought Stonehenge was shit, got quite stroppy and hurled some minor insults if i recall. 🤣 

Posted by: binners

↑

that definitely hadn’t been medically tested

TBH, about half my job is trying to protect the general public from themselves, and other members of the general public.

So what level of stupid should we decide its not their fault then? If you are picking and choosing who you should care about based on how intelligent they are you have failed at a very basic level of care for your fellow man IMO.

It's not so much about how intelligent they are as much as what actions they have taken that then get them in trouble. I was at Uni with some highly intelligent, high functioning nutters. One would climb the scaffolding on the cathedral whilst pissed - for thrills. Very intelligent. But had an accident happened, it would have been hard to be too sympathetic. I only saw him do it once - at least saw him start. I really begged him not to, but once he started, I left. I didn't want to see an accident like that. I heard he did it on a fairly regular basis.

He showed more concern when i said i thought Stonehenge was shit, got quite stroppy and hurled some minor insults if i recall.

So there was some previous. That makes sense.

And FWIW, I found Stonehenge a bit meh, TBH.

Posted by: Oakwood

↑

In a world where you can pay to have one of nature's most toxic substances (botulinum toxin) injected into your face for cosmetic reasons, it isn't hard to see how some people could be this daft.

 

Botox is great, if used for genuine medical applications - I had 500 units in my calf muscles, thigh muscles, and hamstrings yesterday......max dose is usually 400 units but I've been on 500 units every three months for the past couple years

Botox is great, if used for genuine medical applications

As is morphine, digitalis, atropine and all sorts of nasties in the right dose and out of necessity.

Recreationally or for non-essential reasons, not so much.

But had an accident happened, it would have been hard to be too sympathetic

see you've just done it. "Intelligent enough to know better"

Now without getting all baby robins face about it. What if that person for whatever reason can't make that connection between their actions and the potential outcomes. Plenty of medical reasons for impulsiveness and suggestibility. See also... Teenage boys and pack mentality.

The question raised at the start was effectively "should we put signs up saying  "don't climb the scaffolding silly"?"

Hands up who thinks thats a bad idea?

see you've just done it. "Intelligent enough to know better"

Nope. Your initial contention was that not doing stupid things is somehow the preserve of people who regard themselves as intelligent (and indeed are regarded as such by others). My example shows this to be false IMO. That is the only point I was making.

You seem to want an argument by missing the point either deliberately or not. One of my rules of thumb is that having an argument with people who simply like arguing is pointless. Get yourself down your local and start chatting to a few folk - I'm sure you'll find a like-minded sort to argue with until the cows come home.

👍

The question raised at the start was effectively "should we put signs up saying "don't climb the scaffolding silly"?"

I always thought those signs were to protect the scaffolder's wallet, not the stupid. I read them to say "Now I've pointed out the bleeding obvious, if you dick about anyway, you can go full cabbage and I'll not be having to shell out for your care."

Your initial contention was that not doing stupid things is somehow the preserve of people who regard themselves as intelligent (and indeed are regarded as such by others). My example shows this to be false IMO. That is the only point I was making.

It absolutely was not. It was define stupid and more specifically where these people who say leave them to it draw the line between deserving of contempt or not.

You can believe what you want but i don't think its be who is missing the point deliberately or otherwise.

OK, chap.

👍

Are we agreeing to disagree?

🙂

Posted by: bigdugsbaws

↑

I'm sure there are millions of people regularly snorting unknown chemicals up their noses in the pursuit of fun each weekend.

And as a heavy drug user myself, I would say they're mostly dickheads.

Walking through Brum it struck me that the most common thing people need protecting from is the processed junk food they eat. But plans to address that have been dropped.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/ng-interactive/2025/may/17/uk-government-drops-healthy-eating-push-after-lobbying-by-ultra-processed-food-firms

Are we agreeing to disagree?

Yes.

For me it comes down to the overall cost of dealing with the idiocy vs the cost of preventing it