Ask Dr Stupid: Who invented the word stupid?
Return-Path: <apache@flatus.studio42.com>
Received: from flatus.studio42.com (10.1.42.10) by studio42.com with ESMTP (Eudora
Internet Mail Server 3.2.5) for <Dr. Stupid>; Wed, 13 Apr 2005 15:19:49 -0700
Received: from flatus.studio42.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by
flatus.studio42.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id j3DMKV96001673 for
<dr.stupid@studio42.com>; Wed, 13 Apr 2005 15:20:32 -0700
Received: (from apache@localhost) by flatus.studio42.com (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id
j3DMKVDM001671; Wed, 13 Apr 2005 15:20:31 -0700
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 15:20:31 -0700
Message-Id: <200504132220.j3DMKVDM001671@flatus.studio42.com>
X-HTTP-Referer: [http://www.studio42.com/stupid/stupidform.html]
X-HTTP-Client: [81.132.69.142]
X-Generated-By: NMS FormMail.pl v1.87
To: Dr. Stupid
From: stephenshale@yahoo.co.uk (Popeye Shalo)
Subject: Origin of "Stupid"
Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by
Popeye Shalo (stephenshale@yahoo.co.uk) on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 at 15:20:31
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
email: stephenshale@yahoo.co.uk
realname: Popeye Shalo
subject: Origin of "Stupid"
Form-ID: Dr. Stupid Form
Message: Me and a friend have recently come up against a brick wall in the form of
"Stupidity." We keep coming across stupid things or happenings that make us cross.
We want to know who invented the word "stupid." After hours of recreational time
taken up by the search for this person we are none the wiser.
We are now forced to turn to possibly the only puppet in this world who might know
the answer to our riddle.
"Who invented the word stupid?"
Thank you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
REMOTE_HOST: host81-132-69-142.range81-132.btcentralplus.com
REMOTE_ADDR: 81.132.69.142
HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; (R1 1.5))
Dear Popeye:
Popeye? Is that your real name? As in like "strong to the finish because I eats me spinach" Popeye? You must get your butt kicked a lot in school.
You came to a stupid site looking for an intellectual answer to perhaps what could be considered an intellecutal question. I'm afraid you may have come to the wrong spot. Still, you asked, and I will try to answer this question.
To clear confusion, let's get one thing clear. Dr. Stupid not a puppet. Dr. Stupid is a doll. To the best of my knowledge and abilities, I can never recall having strings tied to my extremeties that were in turn attached to various cross-bars for manipulative purposes. There was a time when my panty-hose cranium became knocked out of whack and my care-taker painstakingly massaged the two halves back into their proper position. This information is non-sequiter to the real discussion at hand.
Who invented the word stupid? Chances are, it was someone stupid. It was most likely noticed by someone not stupid. In fact, it was probably someone stupid in the act of doing something stupid at the time, but nobody knew what it was because the word had not been invented or discovered yet. Because today we have both the word stupid and a working definition of this word, it is now significantly easier to identify the stupid as well as stupidity. Isn't progress wonderful?
According to the American Heritage Dictionary, the etymology(I know, that is a big word) is that it comes from Latin, specifically the word "stupidus", which in turn comes from "stupere", which means "to be stunned". Now we have a real starting point. We can now conclusively deduct that stupidity and stupid have clearly been around since the age of the Roman Empire. Not only that, but it was significant and important enough for them to assign a word to this sort of thing. The description of "to be stunned" seems rather vague to me in observation, as many things can stun people. Thinking to a time around 2000 years ago before the invention of stun guns and electricity, I have trouble pondering things that might stun people. Then I realize that this discussion is not really about the temporary immobilization of an individual through artificial nervous stimulation overload. By stun, the working concept of this definition really implies that stun really means to amaze someone. Still, even that is not sufficient. People can be "stunned" in this manner be a large variety of things. They can be amazed by the size of someone's house, which in and of itself, may or may not be something that could be considered, especially by today's standards, stupid. A beautiful painting or artwork can stun or amaze people by the sheer magnitude of the piece of work or details or other interpretive qualities, which again, by today's standards, not be stupid.
Back in Roman times, some amazing things were done. Modern concepts of road developments and construction were created. While the actual construction of roads and the materials used have changed, the base concept was laid down and still in practice in most parts of the world. Surely seeing such well maintained roads in those times would surely stun and amaze those who have never seen roads before. Aqueducts constructed nearly two thousand or more years ago that transport vast distances still carry water today. The concept of running water back then would surely amaze people, while today it is just something we don't even bother to notice anymore except in undeveloped countries. In times of war, people can get killed and maimed in ways that may have been totally unexpected. This is true even today. Considering the limited technology in warfare 2000 years ago, perhaps someone losing their sword and spear then managed to decapitate their opponent with a shield may have stunned not onto the victim, but perhaps a few observers as well. Clearly, this also does not count as something stupid.
It seems that stupid mainly refers to something with little to no intellectual value, or something pointless and/or useless. Of course, that description alone sounds a lot like most governing bodies all over the world. Since that definition does not seem to sufficiently clarify, it would appear that stupid further narrows to actions or deeds that are unwise, as well as those who do such actions or deeds that are unwise. I purposely leave out dangerous since there are plenty of dangerous things that are useful and beneficial, as well as being wise things to do, considering the greater good that comes from it.
So it is clear that at least in languages that are derived from Latin, and the base of the word stupid comes from Latin, and that the Romans are credited as being the creators of Latin, about the best we can assume is that some Roman is responsible for the word "stupid" taht we know and use today. Then again, the Romans invented bulimia as well, and that's pretty stupid. I mean, let's go gorge ourselves, then puke, then do it all over again. Dr. Stupid does not consider this to be a definition of a good time. The Romans did this so much they even make formal places to puke, hence the creation of the vomitorium.
All things considered, the word stupid is in many forms and many languages and has most likely been around since the dawn of time and clearly before the existance of vertebrates. Lacking the ability to communicate only establishes that "stupid" had no audible or communicable expression, yet things that can be stupid can still be identified by those that are not stupid or engaging in something that can be considered stupid. With over 100 languages, there leaves the possibility of over 100 ways to say "stupid". Also consider that there are dozens or more ways of saying the word "stupid" without actually saying the word "stupid" thanks to the countless slang terms that are in the contempory vernacular, and then multply that by the number of languages actively spoken today as well, and one could truly be stupified at the number of ways to spot, identify and communicate just how stupid something is.
Now Dr. Stupid has to wonder if the question has been addressed, much less even answered. Do you realize how difficult it is to type with mitten hands?
Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by
Popeye Shalo (stephenshale@yahoo.co.uk) on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 at 15:43:55
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
email: stephenshale@yahoo.co.uk
realname: Popeye Shalo
subject: p.s: ...
Form-ID: Dr. Stupid Form
Message: Sorry, would I be allowed to have a signed photograph from
Dr. Stupid himself?
Just scan it and attach it to my e-mail, that would be great.
Thanks, keep up the good work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Popeye:
Dr. Stupid is honored by your humble request, but must state that at this time, Dr. Stupid has no photographs to autograph and send to you. Dr. Stupid does suggest that if you can be patient, your request will be granted.
Return-Path:
Received: from flatus.studio42.com (10.1.42.10) by studio42.com with ESMTP (Eudora
Internet Mail Server 3.2.5) for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2005 15:50:00 -0700
Received: from flatus.studio42.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by
flatus.studio42.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id j3DMoh96001947 for ;
Wed, 13 Apr 2005 15:50:43 -0700
Received: (from apache@localhost) by flatus.studio42.com (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id
j3DMohNR001945; Wed, 13 Apr 2005 15:50:43 -0700
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 15:50:43 -0700
Message-Id: <200504132250.j3DMohNR001945@flatus.studio42.com>
X-HTTP-Referer: [http://www.studio42.com/stupid/stupidform.html]
X-HTTP-Client: [62.253.96.40]
X-Generated-By: NMS FormMail.pl v1.87
To: Dr. Stupid
From: deegan_sean@hotmail.com (Sean)
Subject: Stupidity
Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by
Sean (deegan_sean@hotmail.com) on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 at 15:50:43
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
email: deegan_sean@hotmail.com
realname: Sean
subject: Stupidity
Form-ID: Dr. Stupid Form
Message: Dr Stupid,
I believe my friend has recently asked you the question 'who invented the word stupid'.
It is imperetive to our quest that we find that man as we believe that he is the source
of all 'stupidity' itself! Please help ask complete our task oh puppet one, and I would
also like a signed photo.
Honoured scholer, Sean
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
REMOTE_HOST: winn-cache-1.server.ntli.net
REMOTE_ADDR: 62.253.96.40
HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1)
Dear Sean:
Dr. Stupid does understands that perhaps the question that you and Popeye are asking is perhaps most likely one of the all time most important questions in the history of civilization. Dr. Stupid is honored to have been selected to persue this endeaver, despite all the much more qualified philosophers and theorists in the world who may be able to procure an answer to such a question. It is a serious quest the Dr. Stupid takes seriously.
If this question is approached from a theoretical position, we have to question the very core and root of religion. This is especially true in Judeo-Christian religions, and those of that common core structure. Of course, dismissing the in-their-face positive proof of the existance of creatures not mentioned in the Bible as well as irrefutable proof of evolution, still, a lot of people will not let them see past the drivel coming out of the religious leaders' mouths and are happy to keep their brains firmly in park. While Dr. Stupid open bashes Christians, especially the "born again" ones, Dr. Stupid does not see religion in and of itself being a bad thing, whatever religion it may be.
Taking a deeper route, one must consider if there is a god. That question could take years to answer, especially considering typing with mitten hands. However, looking to a all-powerful and all-knowing supreme being or beings, it would seem that it is necessary to look at the source: the god or gods. Now, Dr. Stupid is not suggesting that the supreme beings are either good or bad, wise or stupid, but if the supreme being is making everything or at least started things off, then it would clearly point out that the supreme beings are quite clearly capable of either making mistakes or having a sense of humor or being flawed, or a combination of two or more of those attributes as well as possibly more attributes that have been omitted.
Going down the route of evolution puts things back to the point where life itself evolved, which is a few billion years before life forms capable of creating religion were in existance. Since we're dealing with genes and possible mutations through cellular divions that went a little wonky, things happened. In single cell life forms, this most likely is not a big deal since those that mutate poorly tend to not last too long due to imperfections that are detrimental to its survival. Natural selection at work, in microscopic form. Plants fare no better, sometimes growing in ways that are not beneficial to the plant absorbing enough solar radiation to help the plant create the nutrients it needs to survive. Despite lacking higher functions and brains, cells not working together to benefit the overall host is not a wise thing. Considering life forms that reproduce using sperm and egg methods, including plants and animals, there is a huge random element involved. What the end result of this is, besides fertilization and reproduction, we get a mixing of genes that helps encourage that the better genes continue and the lesser quality genes hopefully get removed through death.
It seems the real question is not really a "who", but rather a what, and the only way to answer this is for science to discover the oldest form of life that was created from those primordial pools of ooze. Since all life on this planet as we understand evolved from those random joinings of amino acids, it is safe to say that by the absolute thinnest of threads, that we, as a planet, are all joined together as one, and that we are all one and the same. Race, color, ethnicity or even species or orders, we are all tied together despite billions of years of growing apart. So, now the anwer becomes very clear. To understand who is the source of all stupidity, one must look within.
And there you have it. Life is stupid. Dr. Stupid suggests investing heavily in a company that makes helmets.
In closing if you can be patient, Dr. Stupid will attempt to get an autographed photo for you as well. Never let it be said that Dr. Stupid does not love his fans.
Back
Disclaimer: Dr. Stupid is not a licensed medical practioner. Studio42 is not responsible for any advise given on this web site.
|