| > there are plenty of people with high paying jobs or powerful positions who are in this category who will not let it slide without some form of retribution. I don't think they're going to be particularly good at putting together that they're included in that group unless they're mentioned directly. The thing is, intelligence is almost entirely separate from thinking ability. There are some extremely intelligent people who nonetheless have very low capacity for thought, because intelligence is defined as the ability to store and recall information. That's what's taught up to high school. These intelligent people don't deserve to be considered any less of human beings, and it's very difficult to speak of not being able to think without implying some level of inferiority on their part or superiority on mine (ours?). I don't mean to imply that such people aren't conscious. They could pass any Turing test. But there is somewhat of a difference between thinkers and non-thinkers. For example: - Those without thought are given responsibility that they shouldn't necessarily be trusted with, for example settings that might break something if changed. Customer support representatives can probably tell you how common it is for someone to bypass any number of warnings or layers of obscurity to access things that they have no idea how to operate, then make it someone else's problem once it bites them later and they have no idea what might have happened. - Due to the above, mainstream products are often designed with primarily non-thinkers in mind, leading to those with thought potentially feeling restricted or that they lack control thanks to the changes designed to limit how much mistake someone who doesn't think can make. I wish there were some way to fix these problems, but it'd probably be too discriminatory for most of the non-thinkers to recognize the utility, and it seems impossible to classify people like this, since thinking ability isn't binary. |