>>12064899>If it's not incompetence, it could be rethoric or laziness.It's none of these, this is just what people say to feel better than others.
The reason because of conflict.
>>12065044>Because they're stupid and nuance requires intelligence.No, it's because "nuance" isn't free, it costs time and resources.
For example, not judging people as individuals is generally seen as "lacking nuance".
Does this mean that it's "dumb" to deny a stranger access to your house, even if he seems fine as an individual?
What if there were 100 strangers per day trying to get in to your house?
What about 1000000 strangers?
What happens if you are forced to allow everyone in unless you can specifically pinpoint an individual flaw?
How many people would have an incentive to try to get in if this were the case?
Eventually there comes a point where "nuanced" judgement becomes impossible, because the amount of information required to make that judgement scales out of control, and this scaling is a direct consequence of committing to making the "nuanced" judgement.
Many of the seemingly "less nuanced" attitudes people develop as they get older are actually attempts to optimize this problem via compromise that is "more nuanced" in the bigger picture, but you are only seeing slices of it in isolation.
