How to deal with people who are just plain stupid

Pseudonym

Regular Member
Legacy
Feb 26, 2014
802
8
13
Country
Nederland
In my daily life I tend to seek out discussion with people who at least somewhat agree with me on some of the basics and whom I believe to be intelligent and speak with those people. I tend to avoid talking with people I consider to be stupid (which, and this might say more about me than others, are a lot of people) or if I do talk to them, I talk about things I don't really care about or can avoid arguing over. Whenever I argue on the internet, which I can't really recommend anyway, I try to phrase myself in such a way as not to cause butthurt and/or confusion because I know how easy that goes on the internet and how easily such things cause discussions to become entirely devoid of any reason and sense. When on the internet I also pay special attention not to engage in very lengthy discussions with people of whom I'm not absolutely certain that they actually care about the point more than about their own ego.

That said, I'm not that great at avoiding lenghty discussions that lead nowhere for any of the people involved so clearly I'm still doing certain things wrong.
 

RicoADF

Welcome back Commander
Jun 2, 2009
3,147
0
0
LordJedi86 said:
Us IT professionals frequently ask ourselves and each other this same question.
The answer, with patience, nodding, umm'ing, ahh'ing, fixing their problem, training them at their level, and walking away.

In a case where there isn't a problem and nothing to fix or train (like your current one) I generally choose to live and let live. I don't care about issue X, thus I can ignore the ensuing flamewar. Theoretical situation Y is something I have an educated opinion about, but party 2 doesn't want to be educated, thus I can ignore the ensuing flamewar. I have a stake in the outcome of discussion Z with unreasonable party 1138, wait, perhaps it's me being unyielding and I need to step back and wonder if they know something I don't.

Anwyay, getting back on point, the best way to learn how to deal with stupid people is to work in IT.

Capcha: 'One fell swoop' .... Clever girl...
This sums it up, working in IT is literally volunteering to work with idiots and know it alls. If you want to test your patience and resolve, work in IT. I swear we take on the dahli lama when it comes to self control some days.
 

Barbas

ExQQxv1D1ns
Oct 28, 2013
33,804
0
0
thaluikhain said:
I never would have thought you were a 40k man. Life is full of surprises!

OT: Well, sometimes you just don't get the quality of discussion you were hoping for. You just have to focus on keeping it as polite and considerate as possible, then take your leave at the point at which you are certain the other person is wrong but being stubborn. That's all it is, really, just ignorance being compounded by stubbornness.

Ed130 The Vanguard said:
"A thousand years ago we thought the world was a bowl. Five hundred years ago we knew it was a globe. Today we know it is flat and round and carried through space on the back of a turtle. Don't you wonder what shape it will turn out to be tomorrow?"

Johnny Impact said:
I used to serve a lot of people like that. They tried my patience on a daily basis, but I've come to appreciate them in a strange sort of way. Without them, there would be absolutely no stories to tell.

...Or it could be that I'm just a masochist.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
18,714
3,597
118
Barbas said:
thaluikhain said:
I never would have thought you were a 40k man. Life is full of surprises!
Well...I was. My user name is "thalui" the eldar/elf word for "hatred" or "vengeance" and "khain" the Bloody Handed God (with an "e" dropped because in Mordheim Aenur had a sword called "Ienh-Khain" (with no "e") which means the Hand of Khaine, so I guessed it was a grammar thing).

Adopted that name way back on the old GW forums, then later the Black Library ones, where I tended to be consistently negative. Back in the day, losing sustained fire dice was annoying. Jonathan Green's books weren't very good. Then they brought out Tau and C'tan and CS Goto and I had real reasons to complain...which eventually got me suspended from the BL forum, and I never went back.

Bit of trivia, C.L. Werner kept saying he'd name a dark elf character "Thaul Festerheart" because of me...he did end up sticking the Festerheart in "Palace of the Plague Lord", though. Pity it was the least impressive of his books...
 

Barbas

ExQQxv1D1ns
Oct 28, 2013
33,804
0
0
thaluikhain said:
...That came as quite a surprise as well, because I think I can say you're one of the most rational and level-headed people I've met. It's a shame to see the way some aspects of Warhammer are going now...I can only seem to afford the books, but then again, the literature side of Warhammer is what I've come to see as its strongest point. Ciaphas Cain's adventures by Sandy Mitchell (Alex Stewart) were my thing back in the day, while Dan Abnett and Gav Thorpe's works have also given me a fair bit of joy. Dan's works are a cut above anything else I've read.

I don't think I'd mind having a character like that named after me...even if they are pure evil, that's a hell of a good name.

EDIT: Oh no, I read some atrocious Space Wolves book a while ago...I think it was written by three people. Ah, jayzus, it's coming back to me now...three dollars in a charity shop, [small]argh argh argh...[/small]
 

TheRightToArmBears

New member
Dec 13, 2008
8,674
0
0
Usually when I find myself talking to stupid people, I tell them what's actually right, then if they keep being stupid I'll mock them a bit and leave (although if they look like they might hit me I might just skip over the mockery part). Dumb people aren't worth getting pissy over, you might as well get a few laughs out of them though.

When I was younger and a bit more naive I would try and engage in a thoughtful debate, but I've realised that debates with most people just turn into arguments. No one ever changes their mind in an argument, so it's a waste of time and breath. That said, sensible (not necessarily smart, smart people can be stubborn assholes too) people are capable of recognising when their knowledge on a subject is lacking and it can be worthwhile. For instance, I'd never dream of arguing with my dad- who's been designing them for thirty five years- about jet engines.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
18,714
3,597
118
Barbas said:
EDIT: Oh no, I read some atrocious Space Wolves book a while ago...I think it was written by three people. Ah, jayzus, it's coming back to me now...three dollars in a charity shop, [small]argh argh argh...[/small]
A good example.

William King, who is an author who's published lots of stuff outside of the Black Library, writes a decent series about the Space Wolves, which I still reread regularly (though it dragged in bits, especially in the first book, and to a lesser extent, the second). Then he left BL (for a bit), so they gave his series to two people who've never written anything before, but who were big fans, and didn't seem too concerned with what they ended up with. There comes a time when a franchise can stick it's logo on anything and it will sell, and when they realised they'd reached that point, they stopped trying.

(They also gave King's Gotrek and Felix series to Nathan Long, who'd written 3 rather poor books for BL in the past. However, he was clearly really trying. I'd not recommend his G&F, the original stuff was much better (and I started re-reading them last month, as it happens, though got distracted by other books and I skipped the first two), but Long's heart was in it, so I can't fault him on that)

Barbas said:
Ciaphas Cain's adventures by Sandy Mitchell (Alex Stewart) were my thing back in the day, while Dan Abnett and Gav Thorpe's works have also given me a fair bit of joy. Dan's works are a cut above anything else I've read.
Yeah, though the Cain series tended to be one joke pushed too far, IMHO. A cowardly commissar had potential, but he makes a fuss to say that Cain isn't really a coward, he's just another boring hero underneath. I liked Caves of Ice, though. Also, his Blood on the Reik series, which seemed a lot like an updated version of the pre-BL Konrad.

Gav Thorpe is a bit hit or miss, but his Angels of Darkness was, IMHO, THE space marine story when it was written, later surpassed by Si Spurrier's Lord of the Night (with owed a lot to Angels of Darkness). The first Last Chancers book was so-so, the second rather dull (and really showing it's roots as The Dirty Dozen), the third started out quite good, but lots it and 2/3 of the way through (I re-read the first 2/3 about a month ago, it still holds up fairly well).

Abnett...for me he is very over-rated, and all his stories have similar endings. Either a Deus ex Machina saves the heroes, or they kill the enemy leader and the enemy army gives up, or both. Seemingly for every story he writes for BL. He also seems not to care at all for fluff consistency or sensible plots. However, he is very good at writing scenes. The Gaunt's Ghosts series got very OtT and they became terrible Mary Sues (people would complain he was so heartless in killing off characters they liked. He doesn't kill off anything like a major character until the 5th book, and it was maybe one a book from then on. The Ghosts would spend their time fighting horrific battles, and allied regiments would consistently be wiped out, mind. They were playing on god mode). I liked the early GG though.

Also, you'll note that Abnett has written everything for everyone, quite apart from his BL stuff. He does novelisations for Torchwood and Primeval, he did Doctor Who comics back in Sylvester McCoy's run etc. Likewise, Sandy Mitchell, not as prolific, but had a definite career before BL. He's not a games designer, or totally random they've got a book out of, he was successful as an author on his own merit.
 

Anget Colslaw

New member
Jul 26, 2012
95
0
0
Ignore whatever nonsense they insist on spewing while secretly hoping for their gruesome, untimely demise.

Unless it's the internet, then piss them the hell off. It's usually pretty funny.
 

geK0

New member
Jun 24, 2011
1,846
0
0
They're arguing about aspects of a fictional universe so I hardly see why it matters.......

Generally I avoid arguing with people who are stubborn because they usually wont acknowledge that they're wrong and the whole exchange is fruitless. I prefer discussing topics to arguing over them; freely exchanging ideas rather than trying to counter the others ideas tends to be more productive. The goal is to exchange ideas, not to win : \
 

Fasckira

Dice Tart
Oct 22, 2009
1,678
0
0
Drizzitdude said:
How do you stop yourself from getting involved or infuriated?
I too used to get irrationally angry over people making stupid comments or spouting nonsense. Then it occurred to me one day, "What does it matter to you if they're wrong?".

I realised that even if I succeeded in proving them wrong I would get no satisfaction (at least not enough to counter the stress involved previously) and they would end up feeling angry. If I gave a passive "Yeah? I didn't realise that was the case" and move on, my blood pressure stayed low, they stayed happy and everyone carried on happily.

I think unless the argument is required to resolve an actual issue (like you're playing a game and it could mean the difference between you winning and losing or similar) then its usually not worth getting too worked up over.

I know its easy to say, but once you learn to let it go life becomes so much easier. :)
 

Ihateregistering1

New member
Mar 30, 2011
2,034
0
0
Drizzitdude said:
Title.

But no really, how do you deal with people who are moronic, ignorant, stupid and the like? I constantly find myself surrounded by idiots spouting drivel about things they know absolutely nothing about like it is a fact. These are people who never think they have to prove anything, never have to feel like they should site their sources yet always back their opinion in complete disregard to any evidence brought up before them on the issue. Seeing as this is a gaming focused site lets use games as an example of recent discussions.

*Earlier this week three people were arguing over warhammer 40k lore: One saying that all space marines can die of old age, tau can obviously be psykers and grey knights are vulnerable to corruption and other such shit. The two other individuals bringing up every single piece of evidence imaginable to prove this person wrong before I got involved and yet it didn't even phase them at all. Not once could this person back up their claim, not once did they acknowledge the other persons evidence as solid.

"the wiki can be edited"
"The lexicanum isn't always right"
"I totally read the codex and there have been blood angels who died of old age" (not true)
"Anyone in warhammer can be a psyker the tau even have psyker units in the tabletop" (100% not true)

By the time this conversation ended everyone was pissed, and we couldn't just get distracted or ignore it because someone would post a link or something and get everyone going again and the absolute worst part is this happens ALL THE TIME, even when I am not involved I still have to listen to it. Does anyone else have the deal with this kind of thing constantly? How do you stop yourself from getting involved or infuriated?
Yeah, I'm gonna be 'that guy' in this thread. When I read the headline, I thought you were talking about arguing with people about history, science, politics, etc, not fictional characters and fictional races in a fictional universe, especially one that has been ret-conned and canoned and re-cannoned (are those words?) quite a lot.

Anyway, if you don't want to get 'involved or infuriated' then my only advice is to relax when it comes to arguing over stuff that isn't real. And 'evidence' is really sort of arbitrary when it comes to fictional characters and settings, sort of like how the power level of comic book characters seems to fluctuate depending on who the writer is.