I think it's more about the persons' character and heart. There are dumb and smart people who are unkind and ignorant and completely self absorbed, and smart and dumb people who are open, sincere, and kind. I don't associate with the former. And, those who might be book smart yet can't get out of their own head and worldview, and look down upon others...I view them as incredibly dumb in other ways.
It's incredibly lonely to pretend to care about things that you don't so that people who in all likelihood will never care for you anyhow can feel a bit less uncomfortable.
Or... You can ask enough questions to find something interesting? I'm able to talk to most people casually because I ask loads of questions and don't make assumptions about their experiences or level of intelligence. Being in the industry that I'm in, I'm surrounded by a lot of high IQ people. It means nothing in terms of loneliness and being able to connect. I find loads of them boring because they have such narrowly defined experiences/perspectives and goals and have a weak sense of self - in spite of their academic intelligence.It's incredibly lonely to pretend to care about things that you don't so that people who in all likelihood will never care for you anyhow can feel a bit less uncomfortable.
Those with a low intellectual IQ often have a high emotional IQ, while many of those with a high intellectual IQ often have a low emotional IQ.
I hang out with mentally disabled people all the time.
What I can't stand are dumb people with lots of opinions on things they know nothing about.
Or... You can ask enough questions to find something interesting? I'm able to talk to most people casually because I ask loads of questions and don't make assumptions about their experiences or level of intelligence. Being in the industry that I'm in, I'm surrounded by a lot of high IQ people. It means nothing in terms of loneliness and being able to connect. I find loads of them boring because they have such narrowly defined experiences/perspectives and goals and have a weak sense of self - in spite of their academic intelligence.
I used to think that the barrier to communication was either character or lack of common interests or differences in intelligence. It's none of the above, it's a lack of curiosity in what other people have experienced, why they have the perspectives that they do, and a focus on your own experiences and perspectives.
Everyone thinks that people who don't agree with their way of seeing the world is dumb. That comes from not wanting to listen because it takes cognitive and emotional work. But if you're not willing to put in the work, you'll either end up surrounding yourself with people exactly like yourself or you'll have no one at all. Both are lonely existences.
Watch me bothering:
I just want to point out that Mole mentions a factual claim pertinent to the thread's general topic, while completely ignoring a direct treatment of the question.
Diversions like this are based in a skeptical outlook, that are obsessed with factual judgement which portend to supersede an exchange among those held to enjoy equivalent standings. Here we are all being offered a definition by Mole, with a built in formula that neatly divides various points of view as being morally wrong— if they don't similarly accept the same factual distinction: in analysis on this subject. What is morally right is imposed by a factual assertion or claim, which presumes to do the work of answering the question for everyone (including Mole), while condemning those who don't similarly concede to this pernicious claim to a moral authority.
_____
My answer to this particular matter: it first depends on the "dumb" persons claim or powers that are extending upon you, or whose influence subsists counter to my plans and the reasoning thereof. But this 'dumbness' gauging, is not a useful way to initially perceive people, its more of a secondary concern with deciding how to respond in the way that conserves a fully deliberate attitude: which is an attitude that is more difficult to be in the pursuit of when contracting (in a liberal sense of the word 'contract': i.e. consciously consenting to contract the energies held through 'the self') with "dumb" people.
The practice of trying to figure out human tendencies and traits through facial features isn't new. It's been going on for centuries under the term "physiognomy", and its history is long and dubious. The overwhelming general consensus is that it's nonsense, with anecdotal evidence for its successes being more the result of confirmation bias and self-fulfilling prophecy than anything else.
No issues with dumb as long as you are kind. I will cut off contact with an intellifgent asshole and migrate towards a dumb sweet person.