This article does not undermine its own point. In fact, very, very few articles
ever undermine their own point. In order to undermine your own point it means you've failed to construct a logical chain of thought. But that is what people do all the time in their daily lives. Maybe children would undermine their own points, or someone posting their first ill-thought comment on Facebook. But I think most people will learn how to construct an argument by their second time publishing one.
In this case, the article is not about 'the joys of being too dumb to breathe'. It's about how 1. looking stupid is not the same as being stupid, and 2. looking stupid can be beneficial in the long run. The author does not need to actually be stupid once in order to support this idea.
And I have to worry if you think he's "bragging" about merely looking stupid, as if that weren't bad enough. Maybe if you identify as stupid I could understand the offense.
To the author, Dan Luu: I like your article and I think you're on the right track!
In this case, the article is not about 'the joys of being too dumb to breathe'. It's about how 1. looking stupid is not the same as being stupid, and 2. looking stupid can be beneficial in the long run. The author does not need to actually be stupid once in order to support this idea.
And I have to worry if you think he's "bragging" about merely looking stupid, as if that weren't bad enough. Maybe if you identify as stupid I could understand the offense.
To the author, Dan Luu: I like your article and I think you're on the right track!