MIKE, on June 28 1998 you wrote,

Jake, as usual, you give us food for thought, and in big portions. The entire article (also Part II ) can be found at: SUPIDITY

Mike,I strongly suggested to Mr. Livraghi to write the second part. He asked for some editing help. I added nothing to his writing.

I've realized that thinking about the topic can be done in a few "levels" (which is true for almost anything else).

A MOST IMPORTANT observation! If I "give food for thought" it is because you and other friends give me the materials --raw and half done too. In fact, perhaps I'll muse on the last 'discovery': the SUPERCOPROT, which I believe should be termed SECOND LEVEL coprot. The discoverer fancies that it has to do with...(Hold yourself!) INTUITION!! It appears that those protein molecules hold the key to a sort of 'gestalt' that allows for the appearance of entirely NEW IDEAS.

. The discoverer alleges that the Superprotein he 'unearthed' has many folds and henceforth an unusual quantity of electrical charges. The impressive number of hydrogen bonds make for its instant reactivity. In fact, they act in a sense like miniature "PROTO-HOLOGRAMS", since they are tridimensional and contain a large amount of electrical information.
You, of course, realize that it is really a matter of an EMERGENT. Many more RESULTANTS will no doubt be described. Please, do not tell anybody, promise, but I'm starting to fancy that SUPERFEPROTS will be also found, and I bet they will be shown to contain the electromagnetic explanation for so-called 'MYSTICAL EXPERIENCES.'

My first, instinctive thought, was in line with the article. In a process similar to mathematical induction, I saw the merit of the "Laws". I could see in front of my eyes a few examples. Then, I realized that the article deals with a linear mode of thinking, while philosophy doesn't.
Philosophy deals with a lot more than "who is stupid". For instance, according to the article, all living persons have been "stupid" many times in their lives. Consider: children, because of their lack of experience and other reasons, fit the five laws perfectly. Are they "stupid" ?

Mother says to little son,
"Yoram, you are behaving stupidly!"
Yoram: "Haven't you heard Mike saying that we children behave sometimes as if we were stupid?"
Mother: "Hope you learn to behave!"
Yoram: "Gim'me some time, Mom... When I grow, you and I will be laughing about this dialogue."

Adults make mistakes due to either bad judgement or inevitability. These may cause bad results for both them and others. Are they "stupid"?

Inevitability? You mean 'contingency.' This is a whole subject for a separate I-dialog... AS LONG AS THE PERSON REALIZES, ANALYZES, AND LEARNS FROM HIS MISTAKES, he is not stupid. He is a regular chap, like myself. **

On the linear way of thinking, the author is dealing with stupid vs. non-stupid. In a way it reminds me of "Good" and "Bad" in Man's World. The Universe doesn't have Good and Bad, Stupid and Non-Stupid. So, why does Man?

Because Men have developed the 'Logos' of VALUE JUDGMENTS (AXIOlogy). One of those men has defined the FIVE CRITERIA TO JUDGE A HUMAN ACT. (See my essay "Axiology."

Now, suppose we were all absolutely "Good" and "Non-stupid". Where would this lead us? Is there room for anything else? The next level is either sheer enlightenment or death. (Another Q is to define these two, but this is further on, right?)

An interesting exercise in futility. Societies are composed of individuals in a Gauss Curve (The 'bell curve') representing variable degrees of stupidity. It has been and it will always be that way.

Good and Bad are nothing but the dualism without which our physical world could not have existed, and we could not have existed and related to it. So is 'stupid' and 'non-stupid.' These are illusions of the external world, the one we can deal with our conscious mind.

The theme of OPPOSITES has occupied the human mind for ages. Ambiguous communication includes the wrong definition of opposites. 'Darkness' is not the opposite of 'Light,' but of 'Clearness.' The opposite of 'Stupid' is 'Wise.' 'Badness' vs. 'Goodness' have been dealt with here .
I've started posting on ANALOGIES, the intention being to clarify that method of analyzing and explaining the world. A wrong application of an analogical situation creates confusion. We do that almost daily, although --being aware of that fallacy-- I am most careful when I feel tempted to analogize for lack of a better explicative way. The Manichean Dualism has been the source of much false 'understanding' and of false hopes. Because the Good-Bad pretended 'dualism' is WRONG!

But in the internal world, there is no Good and Bad, it is all-supreme Knowledge which is wise and knowing. And if we really want, we can deal with this Knowledge, but NOT when we limit ourselves to specific tools. The Universe could not have been that "stupid" to "allow" for the emergence of Man, and to bring along with him all these new "goodies" such as Stupidity and Badness.

Mike, it's all a question of Evolution, the result of dumb physical laws. Stupidity is considered in my essay on AXIOLOGY.