WhyAsk comments on Open thread, Oct. 26 - Nov. 01, 2015 - Less Wrong

4 Post author: MrMind 26 October 2015 08:34AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (106)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: WhyAsk 27 October 2015 06:30:21PM 0 points [-]

I had a word and then lost it.

It meant willfully ignorant, or ignorant & proud of it. This was applied to a former U.S. president.

Can anyone supply this word?

TIA

Comment author: Jayson_Virissimo 27 October 2015 06:52:30PM *  2 points [-]

Here is an English Stack Exchange question looking for such a word. I'm not sure there is a single word that means exactly this.

Comment author: WhyAsk 27 October 2015 11:33:07PM 0 points [-]

Thanks for the link, I'm sure it will be helpful for this word and others.

Comment author: gjm 28 October 2015 01:05:59AM 2 points [-]

Perhaps "incurious", which you might have seen applied to G W Bush in Keith Stanovich's book "What intelligence tests miss". (Quoting David Frum, I think.)

Comment author: WhyAsk 28 October 2015 06:03:05PM *  0 points [-]

Yes, I've heard that.

This word defines more of a in-your-face-ignorant attitude. It may also go into contempt for those who work to achieve knowledge.

I didn't record it because I thought I would never need it again. My bad.

For someone who believes false things I'd say "Reality attacks your beliefs in a hundred little ways every day" but I have no rebuttal for this lifestyle for someone of privilege.

When I get a chance I'll search the Exchange link and try a few more searches containing the word 'Bush'.

Thanks for your help, folks. . .

Comment author: PECOS-9 29 October 2015 04:15:11AM 1 point [-]

Anti-intellectual?

Comment author: VoiceOfRa 03 November 2015 03:40:08AM 1 point [-]

The problem with that word is that in conflates many different meanings.

Comment author: WhyAsk 29 October 2015 04:45:26PM 0 points [-]

And he's proud of it. :(

In a way, he's putting down eggheads without directly saying so.

From what little I know about Game Theory I'd say being ignorant is never a dominant strategy.

Comment author: Lumifer 29 October 2015 05:08:14PM 1 point [-]

being ignorant is never a dominant strategy.

Remaining ignorant might be a dominant strategy in a Game of Chicken X-/

Comment author: Tem42 21 November 2015 11:36:08PM 0 points [-]

If you're still looking, is it contumacious? 'Willfully obstinate' rather than 'willfully ignorant', but the phrase "contumacious president" has appeared many times in political writings.