How stupid are people?

By stupid I mean grossly lacking in intellectual capacity and basic education. By intellectual capacity I mean, the ability to read, understand and reason.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that 'everybody' is stupid. I'm asking 'How stupid are people?'. I'm not here to criticise people who were born lacking in intellectual capacity.

It has been some time that I've written anything on Jumbie's Watch. In the last few years, I have become increasingly intolerant of stupid people. You who reads this wants an example. I could give numerous examples. Today I'll give just one.

I submitted a well worded letter for publication with a few points declaring my area of expertise. The editor of 'a website' (that has nothing to do with Jumbie's Watch) didn't wish to publish because I hadn't explained my reasoning with evidence 'for my arguments'. I made no arguments. I made assertions, which I had every reason to think would be basic common sense.

For example - among several points - I said that increasing cannabis use would lead to an increase in crime rates. So according to the editor, I should have explained with evidence and reference how I arrived at that conclusion above. For that point and a dozen others I should 'explain' how I arrived at my assertions. That means that for  a dozen similar assertions, I'd need to add about 300 words per point.

Well no - I really can't believe that people are so totally uneducated (in general) that they can't see that increasing cannabis use leads to altered states of mind lacking in control, and hence greater propensity to commit crimes - to the extent that I need to provide references. No - if one is publishing for a newspaper or website, word counts are limited. A 1500 word letter rarely gets published. But that's what the editor seemed to want - which is a nonsense. How? That sort of thing is an academic publication.

So perhaps this editor thought, they'd get me to do a free academic publication. It ain't happening. I don't publish stuff for money or for readership followings.

It appeared that the editor's knowledge of their readership was to cater for people of average mental age <16 - and this was by no means a site for juveniles or the learning disabled.

I decided - no way am I gonna do as requested to get published. I simply don't need this.

To be clear, I'm the first person to seek evidence and reasoning for assertions where there is a contentious issue, or something that might appear complex. But this time - I'm not gonna fall in line with explaining an assertion as simple as 'bananas trees do not bear mangoes'. Tough - if I think something is that basic, I'm not explaining it.

But what does all that stuff mean? It means that there are a whole lot of stupid people out there who do need something as simple as 'bananas trees do not bear mangoes' to be explained. That's the line in the sand for me. No editor is gonna make me fall in line with explaining stuff like that. I'm not here to educate adults who are of kindergarten age groups.

That's it. The line in the sand has been drawn.