The English mob preferred their calendar to disagree with the sun than to agree with the pope.
Attributed to Voltaire (referring of course to the Gregorian calendar reform) though evidence that Voltaire actually said or wrote any such thing seems scanty. Reversed stupidity is not intelligence.
Reversed perceived stupidity. (Sorry, it’s just that I think the Catholics are cool and think maybe we shouldn’t call popes stupid unless we have arguments for it. But yeah, I guess I’m in the minority on that subject.)
I think the Catholics are cool and think maybe we shouldn’t call popes stupid unless we have arguments for it.
Here’s an argument from Tim Minchin that some of the guys at Berkeley showed me.
Also, popes (say that they) believe there is a god and that said god makes the pope infallible. What arrogant dumbasses (or brilliant machiavellian pricks).
I see three. The second two refer specifically to intellectual capability (to the extent that they are not subverted by rejecting the premise “popes are not outright evil bastards”).
In high school when someone was being obtuse my friends would draw a diagram to explain the point; not only did it work, they also somehow always managed to make the diagram look like a penis. Stylin’ bonus.
Belief in God: Correct; since this is a non-obvious question about decision theory they get my props for answering it correctly. Belief that God makes pope infallible: I dunno ’cuz I haven’t read this yet; definitely not sure if that makes them stupid. Tim Minchin’s song: dude politics seriously?
Politics only to the extent that the pope is a politician and his actions are political. That is—of course he is but I didn’t bring up the pope advocacy based on the coolness of catholics so I deny responsibility.
Going against the evidence when there’s a massive amount of evidence is at best deeply irrational and counterproductive. I don’t know if “stupid” is a better term because it has connotations of issues with intelligence, but in the context of “reversed stupidity is not intelligence” it applies just as well in the form “reversed irrationality is not rationality”.
Attributed to Voltaire (referring of course to the Gregorian calendar reform) though evidence that Voltaire actually said or wrote any such thing seems scanty. Reversed stupidity is not intelligence.
Reversed perceived stupidity. (Sorry, it’s just that I think the Catholics are cool and think maybe we shouldn’t call popes stupid unless we have arguments for it. But yeah, I guess I’m in the minority on that subject.)
Here’s an argument from Tim Minchin that some of the guys at Berkeley showed me.
Also, popes (say that they) believe there is a god and that said god makes the pope infallible. What arrogant dumbasses (or brilliant machiavellian pricks).
Technically, only popes since 1868 have claimed that. (It was also the inspiration for Lord Acton’s famous quote about absolute power.)
And even more technically, they’ve only claimed that they believe god makes the pope infallible when he’s doing certain things.
So… still no argument.
I see three. The second two refer specifically to intellectual capability (to the extent that they are not subverted by rejecting the premise “popes are not outright evil bastards”).
Do you need a diagram?
In high school when someone was being obtuse my friends would draw a diagram to explain the point; not only did it work, they also somehow always managed to make the diagram look like a penis. Stylin’ bonus.
Belief in God: Correct; since this is a non-obvious question about decision theory they get my props for answering it correctly. Belief that God makes pope infallible: I dunno ’cuz I haven’t read this yet; definitely not sure if that makes them stupid. Tim Minchin’s song: dude politics seriously?
Politics only to the extent that the pope is a politician and his actions are political. That is—of course he is but I didn’t bring up the pope advocacy based on the coolness of catholics so I deny responsibility.
I’m surrounded by Catholics and they aren’t cool, trust me.
I meant people like Aquinas and Chesterton and stuff. I suspect most popes would be more like them and less like the people you’re surrounded by.
Going against the evidence when there’s a massive amount of evidence is at best deeply irrational and counterproductive. I don’t know if “stupid” is a better term because it has connotations of issues with intelligence, but in the context of “reversed stupidity is not intelligence” it applies just as well in the form “reversed irrationality is not rationality”.
Either way works, but it’s irrelevant unless said “massive amounts of evidence” exist, which I am skeptical of.