>>23473941>A malicious person could spread the idea that something is stupid instead of maliciousthat is a big fear of mine
>but you know the pure act of it on its own has nothing malicious going onlike, the people who are tricked into seeing an act of malice as stupidity aren't malicious?
>although there is no chicken nor egg and thus no loop, as you don't become malicious yourself, right?that's the thing
when you're taught that malice is stupidity for long enough, long enough that you become used to it, you might slide towards malice yourself more easily
people are molded by their environment
but yeah, in an abstract/platonic sense there is no loop, the tricked people don't become malicious
i think
>But you could still say that you have to be stupid to think that wayit depends
you'd have to be stupid to fall for a poorly-crafted trick, but you don't have to be stupid to fall for a masterful trick
there is a grey area
you'd have to be weak to be injured by an egg being thrown at you, but you wouldn't have to be weak necessarily to be injured by being shot, if that makes sense
