The Midwit Tier List: Stupid things that "Smart" people believe.

Overview

The video is a satirical “tier list” arguing that well-educated but average-in-reasoning (“midwit”) people are especially dangerous because they can hold influence in government, education, academia, and media. The creator claims that midwits often have the credentials to sound convincing while using flawed reasoning tactics or adopting widely repeated but incorrect “establishment” beliefs.

The tier list ranks beliefs not by how wrong they are, but by how intellectually credible they seem to the people the creator claims they fool—from higher-functioning midwits down to mostly “dimwit” beliefs.

Core thesis and framework

• Midwits ≠ average people: The creator defines midwits as having near-average IQ but strong education/credentials, which leads them to overestimate their intelligence.
• The “danger” claim: Midwits are portrayed as more influential than obvious conspiracy-addled “dimwits,” because their reasoning affects institutions.
• Ranking method: Items are tiered based on who falls for them:
  • B/C/D reflect higher to lower functioning midwits (and occasionally Mensa-level people),
  • F is reserved for ideas only dimwits believe (or midwits pretend to believe for virtue signaling).

Main beliefs and recurring critique targets

The creator repeatedly attacks reasoning errors and ideological dogmas, including the following.

“Basics” that midwits misuse

• Correlation doesn’t imply causation (B tier) Midwits are said to invoke this as a “magic phrase” without doing the causal reasoning work.

• Educationism (B tier) Judging worth/intelligence based on degrees.

• Credentialism / appeal to authority (B/D tiers) Credentials and experts are treated like proof rather than requiring evaluation of underlying reasoning.

• Source-demanding (“gimme a source”) (C tier) Treating requests for evidence as a universal trump card—even when the debate is about rational/praxiological arguments rather than empirical claims.

Status quo-aligned or ideology-preserving misconceptions

• Tabula rasa (C tier) The “blank slate” view is framed as neoliberal-friendly and treated as still persuasive despite genetic research critiques.

• Equity fallacy (C tier) Unequal outcomes are claimed to result mainly from unfair treatment; the creator argues this depends on tabula rasa and ignores other explanations.

• Conventional morality (C tier) Morality derived from majority rule/feelings/legal systems is attacked as inconsistent and shifting with culture.

Politics and media critique

• “Democracy goggles” (A tier) The claim that democracy’s flaws get ignored because people assume “democracy is always good,” even when misinformation undermines voting.

• Trust in mainstream media (C tier) The media is not assumed to always be outright lying, but is viewed as systematically dishonest enough that rational people should discount it.

• “That’s a conspiracy theory” labeling (D tier) Opposition to mainstream narratives is portrayed as lazily dismissed rather than evaluated.

Anti- and identity-ideology claims

• Anti-theism (A tier) Presented as a common phase among highly intelligent youths; the creator argues it often gets replaced with another dogma (e.g., “wokeness” as a secular religion). Later ages are said to be less likely to believe it.

• Healthy at Every Size (F tier) Framed as outright “brain rot” / virtue signaling, with the claim that no sane person believes it.

• Gender equality extremism (F tier) Even “light” versions are argued to be mistaken. A more moderate version is placed as C tier.

• Racism (B tier) Argued against racism, with claims that collectivist justifications rely on redefinitions. The creator claims differences are not extreme enough to justify hostility and that far-left definitions are where racism gets hidden.

Reasoning about human differences / HBD

• HBD question (mid-tier rating) The creator claims media consensus differs from researchers reviewing genetic heritability. They argue there is no 100% consensus, but something like “between 10% to 90%,” and that belief in “0%” drops after deeper research.

Institutional / philosophical arguments

• Bureaucracy question (B tier) Bureaucracy is said to reduce abuse visibility, making abuse harder to detect rather than preventing it.

• Rights come from the state (A tier) The creator argues rights require enforcement power short-term, but that the “source” of rights is what sustains stable long-run social order—leading to support for property-rights-first logic.

• Moralistic fallacy (D tier) Believing “what seems good” changes reality is framed as invalid.

• Radical postmodernism (C tier) Attacked for denying objective truth and enabling contradictory reasoning.

• Empiricist epistemology (B tier) Said to have holes; requires philosophical literacy to fully refute.

• Presupposing materialism to prove materialism (B/A) Criticized as circular argumentation (not asserting materialism’s truth/falsehood).

Economic/praxiology (ideological anti-socialism)

• Rejection of praxiology (C tier) Framed as failing to understand human action as meaningful, goal-directed behavior based on reasoning.

• Socialism can work if we do it my way (A tier) Presented as the repeated attempt to “fix” socialism without learning the knowledge problem; argued to be impossible in principle.

• Eternal neoliberalism (A/C tier) Claimed to be mostly propaganda-based optimism about long-term system stability; as real-world debt/social problems worsen, belief should drop.

“Word games” as midwit tactics

The video also emphasizes rhetorical strategies, including:

• Word celly maxing (C tier): adding jargon to salvage a bad argument.
• Word soup (B tier): pretentious overpadding and overcomplication that creates a false sense of rigor (sometimes “debunking” simplified versions instead of addressing the real one).
• Semantics vs philosophy (C tier): changing definitions to evade logical consequences rather than resolving philosophical contradictions.
• Debate broism (C tier): debates are portrayed as rhetorical contests where preparation and baiting matter more than truth; winning doesn’t imply correctness.
• Dichotomy brain (D tier): black-and-white thinking; especially failing to recognize “gray areas,” including “victim blaming” misunderstandings.

Overall conclusion

The creator’s concluding claim is that the “tier list” catalogs how midwits commonly:

1. misuse respectable-sounding concepts (credentials, authority, sources, debates),
2. lean on ideology-consistent but flawed models (tabula rasa/equity, moral relativism, democracy worship),
3. rationalize contradictions via language games and selective epistemology, and
4. become influential enough to shape society through institutions and media.

Presenters or contributors

• Main presenter/creator: The video’s speaker. (The transcript only clearly identifies “Meniswave” via sponsor URL text.)