• dudeami0@lemmy.dudeami.win
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Being proudly ignorant of everything is bad. I will respect people who know they don’t know things though, you can’t know everything about everything. It’s why people generally specialize in a field in an industry.

    • Sunrosa@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sometimes my friends laugh at me for how little I know about pop culture. I laugh back though. I wouldn’t say I’m proud of it but it’s just funny.

  • SeverianWolf@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    People who litter. Throw their rubbish out the window of the car. Or who throw rubbish in public, like into drains or sidewalks.

    It’s in the mentality, and I say the lack of education is the reason for it.

    It’s sad to see the people of my country do this, and to see it with your own eyes.

    • mcc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Some people can be very well educated but choose not to follow reason. For example polititions appealing to a voting base. Point is these things certainly say “what a twat” but doesn’t necessarily reflect poor education.

    • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Coping mechanism for the poor, they can’t admit they’re at the bottom and so it feels good to put other people down for nonsense reasons

  • DePingus@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Thinking that someone without a formal education is somehow beneath you.

    • ram@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      On the flipside, the belief that someone with a formal education is somehow beneath you or brainwashed for it.

  • atlasraven31@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not being able to entertain ideas. “What would the world be like with 100% renewable energy?” “Would basic healthcare for every person help our country?”

    I tried to explain the 4 day work week to someone that gets paid by the hour. You make the same money but work 4 days a week instead of 5. Insisted he got paid less. Had to explain like a Bingo card with a Free Space, 1 day he is paid even if he stays home.

    • utopianfiat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know if that’s necessarily wrong of them. There isn’t any precedent for hourly workers to be paid when they’re not working. The “four day workweek” as described simply means that any time over 32 hours a week is overtime. Hourly workers in general don’t really have a “workweek” anyway because they will often have multiple jobs or will work whatever shift they can pick up that works with their schedule.

      They understood how the 4-day workweek works based on how the 5-day workweek works. I think maybe you need to listen more to them and try to understand your own proposition better.

      When companies voluntarily implement 4-day workweeks, they are literally either cutting 8 hours or doing 10-hour shifts. They do not pay for hours not worked.

    • MrVilliam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I like the idea of the 4 day workweek and would absolutely advocate for it, but I’m not sure how I personally would be affected by it. I do rotating 12 hour shift work to operate a power plant. I flip between 36 and 48 scheduled hours, 5 to 5 flipping between days and nights with a few days off between to flip my sleep schedule.

      Would my OT start after 32 hours instead of 40? Would my company hire more people to schedule me between 24 and 36 hour weeks as a result? Because I’m not sure they’d be down with paying 4 hours OT on the cheapest weeks of my labor, and 16 hours OT every other week. So they probably have me work less, but does this result in a one time 25% raise and then fall off over time as no further raises come?

      Idk, I would be fine either way because of how I budget, but I think these are valid questions that most hourly workers should be concerned about. I don’t think it’s such a simple concept, and companies will almost certainly find loopholes to exploit to fuck us like they did for the ACA.

    • CleoTheWizard@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think it’s good to note that while some of this is a failure to develop critical thinking, failure to entertain hypotheticals is OFTEN a trait for people with differing cognition. So don’t assume they’re poorly educated just from this, take it as a sign that the person thinks differently.

      I’ve met and am friends with people who struggle with hypotheticals and education isn’t the problem, just how their brain works.

      • voxov7@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Also, some hypotheticals don’t consider the inherent problem of a situation or ignores context, and therefor aren’t worth entertaining. Not all, just some. When that happens it’s best to explain why the hypothetical doesn’t work, which I suppose is entertaining it.

    • someguy3@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because he’s an hourly worker he’s in the hourly mindset. You’d have to say your hourly rate would go up but only if you worked 32 hr/wk.

  • pH3ra@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Whataboutism”, or if you are unfamiliar with the term:

    “The act or practice of responding to an accusation of wrongdoing by claiming that an offense committed by another is similar or worse”

    People that use this mechanism are “poorly educated” and unable to hold a conversation and they should just be mocked by whatabouting even harder, so they can maybe understand that they’re dumb and that’s not how you should debate.

    Example of the last argument I had recently with my dumb c*nt father:

    • Me: You shouldn’t idolize that politician, he evaded literally billions in taxes and that befalls on citizens like you
    • Dumb c*nt father: Yeah? And what about that other politician?
    • Me: What about the disappearing middle class?!
    • D.C.F.: What…?
    • Me: WHAT ABOUT THE BEES!?!
  • BrooklynMan@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    religion and the belief in the supernatural/paranormal. also the belief in conspiracy theories.

    • salarua@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      conspiracy theories i agree with, but religion? organized religion, definitely. joining a religion with a hierarchy signals that you want someone else to give you all the answers, which is very much a mark of poor education. but religious beliefs are not an automatic marker of poor education, as long as they’re sincerely held, don’t supersede science, and are frequently revisited and revised based on personal experience and knowledge. even basic, broad frameworks like animism or some parts of Buddhism can help you make sense of the world when science can’t help you

  • utopia_dig@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Not trusting in science.

    Edit: Since there are many comments, I would like to clarify my statement. I meant that you should rather trust scientists, that the earth is round / that there is a human-made climate change, etc. and not listen to some random internet guy, that claims these things are false although he has made no scientific tests or he has no scientific background. I know that there are paradigm shifts in science and sometimes old ideas are proven to be wrong. But those shifts happen through other scientific experiments/thoughts. As long as > 99 % of all scientists think that something is true, you should rather trust them then any conspiracy theorist…

    • ccunix@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Trust what? Many scientists will quite justifiably have completely opposing views (do vaccines cause autism for example).

      • adderaline@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        i mean i get the impulse, but if we were to blindly trust any sort of knowledge system, science is the one to trust, right? like, any downsides of trusting scientific consensus are necessarily larger when trusting information sources that aren’t scientific, and if you follow through with trusting science blindly, you might ignorantly begin to believe that empirical testing and intellectual honesty is necessary for determining the truth of your beliefs!

  • squirrel_bear@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Being poor or lower middle class and voting for right wing/conservatives. You essentially give away your hard earned money and give it to ultra rich and worsen the quality of your life… usually because the right wing scares people to be afraid of other people and new phenomena.

    • MrMonkey@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      “People who don’t support my party are stupid”

      Is a pretty big “poorly educated” sign.