The United States recently saw another outbreak of the measles with most victims being unvaccinated. Critics of the anti-vaccination movement present incidents like these as proof the movement is not just misinformed but dangerous. Not surprisingly, anti-vaccination folks are often derided as stupid. After all, the anti-vaccination arguments usually rest on untrue and often debunked claims. For example, the claim that vaccines cause autism is clearly untrue. Vaccination, in general, has been conclusively shown to safely prevent diseases, although there are some risks.
It is tempting for those who disagree with the anti-vaccination people to dismiss them as to stupid to understand science. This, however, is a mistake. One reason is purely pragmatic: those who are pro-vaccination want the anti-vaccination people to change their minds and calling them stupid, mocking and insulting them will only cause them to entrench. Another reason is that the anti-vaccination people are not, in general, stupid. There are good grounds for people to be skeptical towards claims about health and science. To show this, I will briefly present some points of concern.
One rational concern is the fact that scientific research has been plagued with a disturbing amount of corruption, fraud and errors. For example, the percentage of scientific articles retracted for fraud is ten times what it was in 1975. Once lauded studies and theories, such as those behind the pushing of antioxidants and omega-3, have proven riddled with inaccuracies. As such, it is not stupid to worry that scientific research might not be accurate. Somewhat ironically, the study that started the belief that vaccines cause autism is a paradigm example of bad science. However, it is not stupid to consider that the studies that show vaccines are safe might have flaws as well.
Another matter of concern is the influence of corporate lobbyists. For example, the dietary guidelines and recommendations set forth by the United States Government should be set based on the best science. However, guidelines are influenced by industry lobbyists, such as the dairy industry. Given the influence of corporate lobbyists, it is not foolish to think the recommendations and guidelines given by the state might not be correct.
A third point of concern is that dietary and health guidelines and recommendations undergo what often seem to be relentless and unwarranted change. For example, the government warned us of the dangers of cholesterol for decades, but this recommendation is being changed. It would, of course, be one thing if the changes were the result of steady improvements in knowledge. However, the recommendations often seem to lack a proper foundation. John P.A. Ioannidis, a professor of medicine and statistics at Stanford, has noted “Almost every single nutrient imaginable has peer reviewed publications associating it with almost any outcome. In this literature of epidemic proportions, how many results are correct?” Given such criticism from experts in the field, it hardly seems stupid of people to have doubts and concerns.
There is also the fact that people do suffer adverse drug reactions that can lead to serious medical issues and even death. While the reported numbers vary (one FDA page puts the number of deaths at 100,000 per year) this is a matter of rational concern. In an interesting coincidence, I was thinking about this essay while watching the Daily Show and one of my “ad experiences” was for Januvia, a diabetes drug. As required by law, the ad mentioned all the side effects of the drug and these include serious things, including death. Given that the FDA has approved drugs with dangerous side effects, it is hardly stupid to be concerned about possible side effects from any medicine or vaccine.
Given the above, it is not stupid to be concerned about vaccines. At this point, the reader might suspect that I am about to defend an anti-vaccine position. I will not. In fact, I am a pro-vaccination person. This might seem surprising given the points I just made. However, I can rationally reconcile these points with my position on vaccines.
The above points do show that there are rational grounds for taking a general critical and skeptical approach to health, medicine and science. However, this general skepticism needs to be rational and consistent. That is, it should not be a rejection of science but rather the adoption of a critical approach in which one considers the best available evidence, assesses experts by the proper standards (those of a good argument from authority), and so on. Also, it is important to note that general skepticism does not automatically justify accepting or rejecting specific claims. For example, the fact that there have been flawed studies does not prove any specific study about a vaccine is flawed. As another example, the fact that lobbyists influence the dietary recommendations does not prove that vaccines are harmful drugs being pushed on Americans by greedy corporations. As a final example, the fact that some medicines have serious and dangerous side effects does not prove that the measles vaccine is dangerous or causes autism. Just as one should be rationally skeptical about pro-vaccination claims one should also be rationally skeptical about ant-vaccination claims.
To use an obvious analogy, it is rational to have a general skepticism about the honesty and goodness of people. After all, people do lie and there are bad people. However, this general skepticism does not automatically prove that a specific person is dishonest or evil. That is a matter that must be addressed on the individual level.
To use another analogy, it is rational to have a general concern about engineering. After all, there have been many engineering disasters. However, this general concern does not warrant believing that a specific engineering project is defective or that engineering itself is defective. The specific project would need to be examined, and engineering is, in general, the most rational approach to building stuff.
So, the people who are anti-vaccine are not, in general, stupid. However, they seem to be making the mistake of not rationally considering specific vaccines and the evidence for their safety and efficacy. It is rational to be concerned about medicine in general, just as it is rational to be concerned about the honesty of people in general. However, just as one should not infer that a friend is a liar because there are people who lie, one should not infer that a vaccine must be bad because there is bad science and bad medicine.
Convincing anti-vaccination people to accept vaccination is challenging. One reason is that the issue has become politicized into a battle of values and identity. This is partially due to the fact that the anti-vaccine people have been mocked and attacked, thus leading them to entrench and double down. Another reason is that, as argued above, they do have well-founded concerns about the trustworthiness of the state, the accuracy of scientific studies, and the goodness of corporations. A third reason is that people tend to give more weight to the negative and tend to weigh potential loss more than potential gain. As such, people would tend to give more weight to negative reasons against vaccines and fear the alleged dangers of vaccines more than they would value their benefits.
Given the importance of vaccinations, it is critical that the anti-vaccination movement be addressed in a way that respects their legitimate worries and concerns. Calling people stupid, mocking them and attacking them are not effective ways of convincing people that vaccines are generally safe and effective. A more rational and hopefully more effective approach is to address their legitimate concerns and consider their fears. After all, the goal should be the health of people and not scoring political points or feeling smug superiority.
Well, having read some of the comments, it seems to me that this becomes a case of the pot telling the kettle black. The Professor is not denying that those people may be stupid, but his point is that by calling them stupid, they will not be persuaded to have an open mind on the subject. And the way I read the comments, it seems that the other side is also not prepared to have an open mind on this subject. So if you think those people, seen from your frame of reference, ARE stupid (just as they are calling you stupid, as seen from their frame of reference) how do you propose to persuade them to your viewpoint? Which I think was what the professor was trying to do, or at least create an environment in which they would be amendable to persuasion. Slinging mud (by both side) is been done enough already methinks. Also, I personally think we are past the point of persuasion, but that does not mean we should not at least think about how, why and when to do that.
Dear Professor,
Your arguments are excellent and instructive as always, but why should we deny the existence of stupid people, when most of us will grant that intelligent people do exist and have existed? They are simply the two extremes of the same thing, and in the middle, lies the person who isn’t particularly intelligent, but neither is readily stupid. This type of person might not be ‘quick’, but is more open minded and ready to change mind should new information come to them. Or, more accurately, should they find it. They don’t look for information in Facebook ‘groups’. Someone who isn’t dumb, would not try to understand how something works by going to a bad area in their city and try to learn things from strangers and shady characters.
Also, what more can be said of people to whom every fact about something, every shred of evidence about it, have been presented to them in many ways, and still they deny it?
They must be stupid. Whether is the one who doesn’t believe man went on the Moon, or how a vaccine will cause them to grow a third eye on their buttocks, they all have but that one thing in common: they are just stupid.
Young people are the only ones to whom I give the benefit of doubt. Only for them, perhaps, there’s hope.
I conceived a continuum, maybe two years ago. I know it was before the presidential election. The beginning and end of the construction was, as follows:
ARROGANCE………………………………………………………….NARCISSISM
At several points on that line, I included ignorance, pride, selfishness (or, self-absorption), and several more adjectives. So, it might be argued arrogance and ignorance are the same. They are not. Anyhow, play with it, if you are interested. There are far better attributes, but those were not my interest then. In the interim, much has changed, Clearly. This is not a hardened position…only an intuition pump.
I think there is a distinction between ignorance and stupidity. For example, the US Secretary of Health and Human Services is ignorant because of a long-standing stance against vaccination. He has a view, his mind is made up, and he can’t be confused by evidence or facts. That, in my opinion, is ignorance.
Constituents who support him and much of everything else, foisted upon them by the administration, are stupid. Like the proverbial herd of sheep or a mob of lemmings, they will not think for themselves, preferring to follow the crowd. Their interests, motives and preferences are limited, following that limited ability/willingness to think. Society here has regressed. That regression is unhelpful.
Some are plain dumb, others are of average intelligence but misinformed, others are smart, but not smart enough to know when they are wrong !
Trying to deprogram anti vaxxers is also a lesson in dealing with arrogant people. One consistent issue I have had with anti vaxxers is there belief that they are smarter than the scientists that developed the vaccines or other medications. This is especially relevant and easy to observe in people like RFK jr. another approach would be a psychological approach to dealing with arrogant behaviour. What makes arrogance manifests. How can it be neutralised. How can a person be convinced to accept what they don’t know. I find this with climate denial too.
A approach I have used to some success is to explain to the denier that science is open to peer review. I convince them that if they know better they could easily prove to the world how right they are and how wrong the scientific community is by simply peer reviewing scientific journals they disagree with. They should submit their own review pointing out all the mistakes the scientists have made. They can submit for publication, self publish and send it to their favourite media organisations. I convince them they have the tools to end what they believe to be a conspiracy. If they know better they owe it to the world to correct the record.
Yes.
Long answer – yes, they are not smart. They are stupid.
Longer answer – yes, morons. Here is a 5-second preventative medicine made by brilliant people spending BILLIONS of dollars and saving hundreds of millions of people so we can save you … so you do not die … only a moron would turn that down. ONLY A MORON.
I wish it weren’t true, but yes, I think some people truly are dumb: for me the choice to get vaccinated was pretty easy, based on the following facts, which I learned pretty quickly by doing two things: A. making sure I read only from the most credible sources about Covid, and 2. by ignoring everything else. Here’s the facts I learned quickly:
1. Even if Covid didn’t kill, which it can, it can do worse, such as ‘long Covid’ can do. I am not so afraid of death, but of living while being half dead.
2. Covid took the world in its grip in a mere two weeks. Seemed pretty serious to me, in fact crazy. I took it seriously, and was one of the first in London to wear a mask. Stupid people were laughing at me, asking me: ‘where did you buy THAT?’. I let them do so, but later I wondered if they were still laughing. Isolation to me wasn’t a problem at all: for me it felt like being a duck sitting in water.
3. It seemed short of a miracle to come up with a vaccine in a mere few months: most vaccines take about 10 years, and for some disease, they are never found: the common cold, for example, is very similar to Covid as it is a coronavirus. I don’t remember the details, but this doesn’t matter, I knew them when I needed to know them. A vaccine for the common cold has never been found, but it was found for Covid.
4. This fact warmed my heart. I could not wait to get the vaccine, I felt privileged: poor countries could not afford it, I could. I was aware of the fact that there was a very low chance to get a blood clot and die. I didn’t care about this because, it was a very low chance, whereas to get Covid and possibly ‘long Covid’ wasn’t at all a remote possibility. I continued to wear a mask and even a visor even after I started to see all the fools going around after a few months as if had just been a bad dream.
Am I smart and intelligent? I don’t think I am. Are anti-vax people stupid? Yes, absolutely. Here’s why:
1. I have never, ever seen a smart person being anti-vax. They are dumb. Their arguments are incredibly dumb. I could not believe how dumb. I don’t remember the details, but in my whole life I have never heard so dumb arguments. A tv celebrity I remember as a child, whom I thought was a smart person, revealed herself to be absolutely dumb, again I don’t remember the details, because my mind is taken by more important thoughts than dumb people like these and I forget about dumb people quickly. She wrote some preposterous trash, and all the fools on her facebook were like: ”Yeah! You are so right!”. To them is ‘freedom’ that matters, not safety, not being well, not avoiding misfortunes and being in ill health.
2. These people ‘protested’. I say, protest about what what, you idiots? By all means don’t get vaccinated. I don’t care. I don’t give a toss if you live or die. Do whatever you like, no one is putting a leash on you, although you think think the opposite, because you believe the most important thing in the universe, is you. Believe all you want, who cares. But you even have to come out like a vermin infestation, to spread the disease even more.
I ask you, a smart and intelligent person, even a philosopher, to consider that, yes, absolutely, some people are dumb. You know as well as I do, and better, that every major philosopher suggested this very thing in their writings and treatises, starting from the ancient Greeks, who amaze me every time how smart they seemed, so long ago.
Socrates (or Plato, or ‘both’) said, as you know: people aren’t evil, just ignorant (in the sense of not knowing). But come on. This is not the case here. The information is out there, at the touch of a button. Yet every damn fool – purposefully – disregards that, and lands on Facebook, ‘learning’ stupid, mindless pap. I always say: fake news are for idiots.
The point isn’t that science is brilliant, but simply, that science is better than mindless pap. Sure, there’s fraudsters. But let us remember: these are fraudsters, NOT scientists. A true scientist would never serve themselves at the expense of others. Fraudsters are everywhere. You have pedophiles running orphanages. Killers and rapists working for the police. Killer doctors.
But that doesn’t make orphanages bad, or the police bad, or medicine bad. It only means that, since scum has always been present in the human kind, it is found everywhere, like weed in a garden.
The Stoics would say, could this world be without such people? No. They have always been there, the fools, the evil ones, the dumb ones. Let’s call them what they are.
Mine isn’t so much ‘hatred’, just anger at how these dumb people throw tantrums, exactly like the adult person soon or later loses the patience with a spoiled child. I am not saying these people should be harmed or anything. I just want nothing to do with them: they are too stupid to deal with. But this goes far beyond Covid, for example flying. Every once in a while, invariably, I hear that a plane has fallen and X people died, and I go: ‘Duh?’. Yet every fool flies around the world more confidently that the geese.
I really don’t know what else to say. Sorry. Again don’t publish this if you don’t want to, I promise I would never feel insulted by someone like you. I wrote a lot, probably too much, so no problem. I wish you a great week ahead.