We have decided some brain quirks are disorders (and get accommodations, as is compassionate), whilst others are flaws (and get slurs). But no one picks their hardware. You cannot earn a better prefrontal cortex or deserve a calmer amygdala. Nor does one get to pick the environment they are born in, which will inform their choices later in life. Even the capacity to “learn better” is a roll of the dice, some brains start the race with sprinting shoes, others with lead weights.
So when we call someone stupid, lazy or insane we are not describing a choice, but simply announcing which kinds of unlucky we’ve decided are worthy of scorn.
okay, idiot
Noone calls anyone stupid, lazy or insane in an attempt to accurately describe them. They are all insults used on normal AND neurodivergent people or to describe “bad” behavior.
Also, occasionally I might make a stupid choice. And I know it is harder for me to make the right choice because of how my brain is wired, but it is still objectively the stupid choice and I knowingly show stupid behavior. Although I might have compassion for myself because of my neurodivergence, it doesn’t change the fact that my behavior is stupid.
Oh but there certainly are people who wield every one of those insults against another with the intent to describe the core of their being. The difference between calling someone stupid, and calling someone’s action stupid is a vast one. I am glad you see it, but many do not.
Oh no, some stupidity is definitely a choice and deserves to be called out as such.
Also, I don’t think insane is always used as scorn. Just a description.
This thread certainly is full of interesting takes.
“People who get called stupid are just the result of the luck of the draw”
“REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE NOOOO I WANNA CALL PEOPLE STUPID HOW DARE YOU BAN WORDS PEOPLE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE ASSHOLES”
Yes, of course they stay, because there are stupid, lazy, crazy idiots. need words for them too.
Oh look another war on words, surely there is nothing else to focus attention on
If one values the well-being of people, and if one has time and resources to be on Lemmy, I’d say reflecting upon one’s conduct in the world is a fine place to put attention in.
If one values the well-being of people
I get what you’re saying, but it’s quite difficult when people are constantly doing so many stupid, stupid things.
Yeah exactly, the mentioned words like ‘stupid’ or ‘lazy’ aren’t exclusive to describing neurodivergency at all. In fact I’d argue that’s a tiny minority of their use.
I think in most cases people are using stupid to describe the action or thing a person is doing and not the person themselves, people are doing stupid stuff all the time, it’s both bad and good of course, because often times the stupid things can be delightful as well. I guess it’s just a part of being human but it’s so very frustrating that we rely on some of those people to vote when they have chose to not take life seriously or think about the consequences for other people.
How do you know? How can you be so certain in your judgment, and declare that another’s “stupidity” or “laziness” is not the shadow of a mind wired differently? Can you see the gears turning askew?
What is stupidity to your mind? What is laziness? If they were born stupid, if they were raised without care, would you fault them? When did Gods descent from heavens and bestow you with the wisdom to always do what is right? Why may not all have this privilege?
If you are wrong, if that “laziness” is exhaustion, that “stupidity” a misfiring synapse: then you’re not just cruel, you are part of the problem.
deleted by creator
If I am wrong, the result is that everyone gets treated with more kindness.
If you are wrong, people who cannot help themselves get treated with cruelty.
deleted by creator
I command not for policing of language. I put forth the request for people to examine if shaming and name calling impacts behavior towards a more desirable outcome.
(Spoilers: It does not)
deleted by creator
Did you accidentally reply to the wrong post? I said something about word use and language, not about judgement and observations or decisions.
Surely bonhoeffer would want the word stupid to stay in the vocabulary.
He contends that Christians have relied so much on Christ’s forgiveness that they do not challenge themselves enough in actually following his word to their best ability, instead relying on God’s grace to save them when they fall.
Whoa that guy nailed it.
You don’t believe in free will, OP? Just curious.
No.
Why not, if I may ask?
So far as I have been shown:
People ask not to be born.
People ask not to be born to the parents they are blessed or cursed with.
People ask not for the environment within which their formative formative years occur.
So far as I have been shown, no angel descents from the heavens to bestow upon everyone equally the magical gift of just knowing right from wrong. Indeed, the very idea of right and wrong are wholly dependent on the circumstance of one’s birth. Did their mother whisper them tales of evil men who would lay with another, or did a kindly neighbor teach them the value of kindness and friendship? Or were they beset by men addled by inherited hatred and were they taught to wield a gun before they even knew love? 'Tis true most people will know pain from pleasure, but even what you perceive as pain and what as pleasure depends upon how you formed before you set eyes on the world. As we share most other features that make us human, we can assume what hurts you will hurt another, what pleases you will please another - but there is ever an exception to every rule. It is but a human tendency to associate most pleasure with good, and most pain as evil. Useful one to be sure, if one values the well-being of one’s kin. But an universal truth it is not.
If you say some people turn to evil no matter how they were taught: how then could they choose to be different? If you say some people turn kind regardless of any suffering they had to endure: how then could they have chosen otherwise?
Furthermore, you yourself do not even know the nature of the next thought before it has already revealed itself. Think now of an animal.
Did you know what animal would manifest in your mind before it already found purchase within it?
If you say you may deliberate a thought before a choice is made, how did the choice to deliberate come about? You do not know if you will ponder a choice for an eternity before you have already done so. You may say “I’ll think about it” but you do not know if you have thought about it, before you have thought about it. You did not choose the tendency. And if you say, you chose to learn: how did you know you were going to choose to learn, before you were learning it?
No, I do not believe in free will. It is but an artifact of ideologies that cater to our more base desire of being utterly beyond reproach of other women and men. It pleases the zealot in our hearts who wants to think of itself as the paragon of virtue. For if there is no absolute good or evil, and no inherent ability to choose one from the other, how would it partake in the joy of judging others to be lesser than it? It could not. It would have to see itself as no better than the most heinous of criminals, but for the circumstances of its life. This is the bitterest of pills to swallow, and thus even those of us most conscious to these realities gag when faced with that which truly offends us. Which is why this is no mere lever you pull in your brain and have it be set once and for all. No, it takes lifelong vigilance, facing the zealot every time it reaches for the gavel and fixing it with your unrelenting attention, until it recedes back into the darkest corner of your heart. There is may merely be an advisor to your desire to do good in the world, but no more.
Could this comment then maybe affect the chain of your future thoughts, and result in you seeking a psychologist?
You suggest I see a psychologist, yet psychology confirms my point: we are the products of our neurobiology and our environments.
If you believe there is a part of the human mind that exists outside of cause and effect, I’d love to see the clinical study that located it.
There is no point, you’re correct. The problem is, these kind of rants remind me of my friends who either say they want therapy, or needed therapy (though that was probably more severe? Saying they’d be friends with murderers and all that, which is technically fine in right circumstances, but, who the hell talks like that?), or me on lonely, depressing nights.
We don’t have free will. So what? Even if you’re aware of this, that could make you appreciate the complexities life even more, but the whole thing comes off as pessimistic.
Since you mention lonely, depressing nights, I’ll drop the act.
I actively worked to understand the things I wrote because that finally let me forgive myself for not being perfect. I’m the perfectly natural consequence of everything that ever happened, so I had no reason to beat myself up anymore. But of course, the requirement for that realization was to allow others the same grace.
You are exactly right that it made me appreciate the complexity much more. It was much easier to think there was some objective “good” (that I always failed to be), and it definitely was easier to think people I didn’t like were “evil”, instead of coming to the very sad understanding that I could be them if not for luck. But having that understanding doesn’t lead me to depression, it leads me to write bizarre pompous manifestos on Lemmy for fun. And working in health and wellness industry, because I realized also that I’ll never know what could happen, before it has happened (as there’s a difference between determinism and fatalism).
I hope you don’t have too many lonely and depressing nights. Probably my sentiment won’t land but I mean it.
Now then, you’re only upset about this because you were programmed to be. Those people calling other aren’t bad for calling someone stupid or lazy if they don’t have free will.
If you assume free will doesn’t exist, evil or good doesn’t either. Murder or curing cancer, it’s like the sun shining, and inavoidable, neutral fact. Of course you may dismiss this as rambling idiocy, but I won’t hold it against a clockwork automaton.
Those people calling other aren’t bad for calling someone stupid or lazy if they don’t have free will.
You have grasped it.
If you assume free will doesn’t exist, evil or good doesn’t either.
Correct.
Murder or curing cancer, it’s like the sun shining, and inavoidable, neutral fact.
Correct.
Of course you may dismiss this as rambling idiocy, but I won’t hold it against a clockwork automaton.
No, you have grasped exactly what I said, at least on the level of the intellect. I realize of course you resist as it goes against what you merely WISH to be true. This I cannot do anything about, as you said. But you have understood perfectly. Well done!
Well, this conversation is really pointless then. Kind of embarrassing that the universe compelled you to post this drivel regarding a fight against nothing, but it can’t be helped.
I wonder why you insist on a language of agency if it isn’t what you believe.
Oh if only humanity did have an universally agreed upon meaning and point, so much strife could be avoided. Alas, such a thing does not exist in reality, but only in the minds of people. Those ever malleable and shifting minds.
I do as I do because because I am compelled, indeed! Because I wish to see less cruelty in the world. It is simplicity itself. And if I spoke in full truth, I would never say anything at all.
That makes sense.
You can be autistic, ADHD, have some horrible upbringing, have some other genetic thing… you can have any of those things, but you’re still accountable for your actions.
Knowing that someone has those things absolutely helps increase empathy and understanding and assist them with those things.
But a killer is still a killer, even if they did it while suffering with other issues.
Accountability? Yes, accountability is good. It’s proper and necessary to address harmful actions and ensure steps are taken to prevent recurrence. This is entirely possible, and likely more effective, without resorting to insult.
Insults are just punitive justice in a social context: a counterproductive way to discharge outrage rather than foster change. It is to temporarily soothe the egoic zealot lurking within the hearts of all. The research is clear: whether in criminal justice or interpersonal conflict, rehabilitative approaches (clear boundaries, restorative dialogue, support) reduce harm more effectively than punishment alone.
To believe that hate may be remedied with further hate is to mistake fire for water.
Stupid, idiot, crazy, and lazy(?) have not been used for mental health long enough that their meaning has diverged significantly enough that they are no longer comparable to words like retard.
Ah, first world boredom.
It seems like every single person these days is neurodivergent so I just treat them normal. I guess thats normalising it.
When we call people stupid/lazy we aren’t describing them as a person its usually describing their behaviour or actions in the moment. If an “normal” person doesnt want to get out of bed thats lazy. If an adhd person doesnt want to get out of bed thats still lazy.
There is genuinely a prevailing theory which basically asserts that the genes that make us neurodivergent are uniquely human, that neurodivergence doesn’t exist in other species, etc.
Sci show did a little video on it the other day. Better info here than what I know, undoubtedly. Sci show is well vetted content. Im some guy laying in his bed avoiding the start of his day.
Interesting I’ll check that out. Also I’m some guy laying in bed avoiding the end of my day
Sry, but afaik there are some flaws with this hypothesis. Neurodivergence is no defined Illness but a catch-all-term for deviations from the norm. The thing with normality is, nobody really wants to be a normalo, and only very little people fit there. Everyone has his deviations. Neurodivergence refers to mental deviations from the (statistical) norm.
Whether you Like it or not, Person A with schizophrenia and Person B with depression only have in common that they both suffer from a ICD-defined Illness. That aside, theres not much in common between the two.
Calling the ability to be mentally ill, a defining trait of humanity is kind of strange. That would make normal people less human?
I think ‘normal’ needs to be interpreted in evolutionary context. What population traits and prevalence helped with thousands of generations? Not what traits helped individuals in the last handful of generations of modern lifestyle.
But anyone can fuck right off if they try to stop me swearing at them for doing dumb shit. Or more likely, I’ll be the one to fuck right off and minimize my exposure to them - since many of them likely have uncontestable social or economic power over me.
deleted by creator
You state that words like “stupid” or “lazy” are mere descriptors for common traits, and in this, you are correct. But let us be explicit: these words are not neutral. They are not clinical. They are not even accurate. They are judgments masquerading as observations, and their function is not to describe, but to dismiss, belittle and shame.
It is not the existence of laziness or folly that demands scrutiny, it is the impulse to label a human being as such, as though their value hinges on productivity or flawless reasoning. When you call a person “lazy,” you are not documenting a transient state; you are rendering a verdict. A judgment from a throne no higher than theirs. You ignore the depressed individual for whom movement is a Herculean task, the neurodivergent mind locked in executive dysfunction, the exhausted worker crushed beneath systems designed to extract labor without regard for humanity. The word “lazy” does not describe a choice. It erases a context.
Likewise, “stupid” is not a measure of intellect, it is a weapon. It presumes intelligence is a moral achievement, not a confluence of biology, environment, and luck. It assumes that those who fail to meet an arbitrary standard of competence deserve contempt, rather than inquiry. If a machine malfunctions, we do not call it “stupid”; we examine its design. Why, then, do we reserve such charity for objects, and withhold it from people?
The question is NOT whether we should “ban” these words. It is whether we recognize their purpose: to punish, not to understand. Language does not merely reflect reality, it constructs our perception of it. When we default to scorn, we architect a world where struggle is met with derision, where complexity is flattened into moral failure, and where the burden of proof always lies with the accused. This is not how justice works. This is not how compassion works.
Furthermore, if one desires a change in the conduct of one they would deem a fool, has shaming been shown to work? NAY! It has been demonstrated time and time again that shaming yields not the behavior of a distinguished individual but a seething hatred towards those that inflicted the wound. A resentment that easily turns what was once a mere human folly into a vitriolic conviction. You may then have no hope of opening this fortress of bitterness to see the harm their actions wrought, indeed they may feel justified in their actions. So as have been done unto them, they will do unto others.
https://drdevonprice.substack.com/p/laziness-does-not-exist
https://neurosciencenews.com/guilt-shame-behavior-neuroscience-30065/
Of course, if your desire is merely to feel good for a moment as you unleash an insult upon another, by all means. But this is not the behavior of a paragon of virtue, rather it is base.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Dude.
You are literally arguing for the right to be mean to others without consequences.
deleted by creator
You realize the OP is doing a melodramatic bit, right? It’s funny, at least to me.
You say that they are full of false assumptions but your arguments against them hinge on the assumption that they have been asking for banning for words. Can you point to a single instance where he says this?
I very much like the framing you used here. Words are to communicate about the world and the persons in it. This shouldn’t be made unduely difficult and complicated. Individuals wishing a special treatment don’t have a right to it, people should still try to respect the (handicapped) persons, with the respect comes a willingness to accomodate their wishes (within reason like with everyone else).
An important detail though ist the differenciation between calling someTHING stupid (action or words) and calling someONE stupid.
Every person has their right to be happy and at peace, everyone needs their self esteem (and this includes people with mental handicaps). Calling them stupid is a quality about them as persons. Calling what they said stupid leaves their quality as a person intact, next time they can choose again.
Someone might inform you about a handicap to explain their behaviour, it doesn’t make the shortsighted actions any less shortsighted. But it might help to understand the reasons and limitations of said person.
Actually that ist also put into words how i feel about extreme reactions to someone mislqbeling or misgendering someone else. You can be whatever you like, if it stays reasonable i will accomodate your preferences. If you need me to make a handstand to accomodate your preferences i might choose not to.
deleted by creator
I’m not one to call people names with the intention of hurting their feelings, and I don’t even believe in free will to begin with. But if I were to call someone an idiot, it wouldn’t come from the assumption that they actively choose to be one or that they could choose otherwise. No, they’re helplessly an idiot - and I’m just making a factual statement about the world.
This is why I try to be mindful of using those words. They’re really stuck in there but I understand that it would be hypocritical of me to call for understanding towards mental health and cognitive issues and then fault people for not having the cognitive capacity I think they “should” have.
I definitely fail frequently because I get angry when people spout total nonsense, even hateful stuff. I try not to let that get the better of me though.
Unless there’s some Tourette syndrome going on I don’t see why anyone should have to tolerate hateful speech.
There’s a difference between drawing a boundary and insulting others.
