"Master, when we spoke of a starting point of stupidity [170], you related Ontogenetic arguments. Is there not also a Phylogenetic approach?"
"Certainly there must be. Ontogenesis is but a necessary active Memory of phylogenesis. Mind, Ideation, has no other possibility open to it. It is then clear that the child, as well as the Neanderthaler have but little occasion to be 'Really' stupid, rather is it the 'making of mistakes'. Even the superstitious, then, is not stupidity, not doing the opposite of what one knows should be done, but merely mistakes, i.e. doing the correct thing, the logical, yet based on a wrong idea. The Neanderthaler, just like the kid, when he acts according to some god(s)' or sperrit's fancy, really 'knows' the sperrit to exist. He has not (yet) the mental ability to question, hence to seek proof and reject the ideas inherited from forefathers. But this, mark you, was before the need of the belly changed into a need for control over the individual (Spencer). The same acts, the same Ways of living though, in the 20th century, are not mistakes any more, but rank stupidity. They are based upon the very early: 'Decor prevails over usefulness'." [170]