Taught to be obtuse

Is it possible to teach people to be obtuse? Of course it is in numerous ways, but mainly we do it by inducing allegiances. To defend an allegiance it is often necessary to be so obtuse that its defects become invisible and cannot be rendered visible by even the clearest logic or the most obvious facts.

It is also possible to teach intelligent people to be obtuse to such an extent that the social and economic value of their intelligence is severely compromised. In some cases the value of their intelligence can be negative – we’d be better off if they kept quiet and did something useful such as composing crosswords. For example there are many celebrities we could advantageously do without. I’m not sure how many could compose crosswords though.

It is also possible for people to want the certainty that an obtuse outlook confers. We see lots of evidence of that in bureaucracies, TV and mainstream media. Bureaucracies invent new flavours of obtuseness all the time. Nutty flavours are popular at the moment.

The issue is not a dichotomy between obtuse and acute because obtuse people can be acute in different situations. They may acutely defend their own obtuseness too – although that isn’t common. Some common situations demand an obtuse outlook to begin with. Climate change is as ever a good example.

It is quite possible that Prince Charles is not what one would ordinarily call obtuse, but in his concern for climate change he is. A Prince Charles clone born a century earlier might not be so obtuse. He may find some other form of obtuseness of course. Claiming that railways will destroy the entire world by 1930 for example. That kind of obtuseness.

We also teach children how to be obtuse. Not to be obtuse as such, but to recognise when it may be appropriate to seem obtuse. Later they may learn to be obtuse in more adult ways – perhaps permanently or perhaps temporarily. Temporary but only erased by age and experience is common. Permanent is also common.