And I was like, "whoa"

"I am going to defer the matter of situating stupidity since, anyway, everyone else at some level of understanding has situated and filed a report on it, which is to say, for the most part, let it go. Whether abandoned or put to work, its fate was the same: the case was closed on stupidity, as if either way it had been adequately dealt with. At this point in its career, hesitation and deferral seem to be the most dispassionate ways to approach stupidity. The more we defer it, the more the knowledge we think we have about knowledge weakens (as long as I don't know what stupidity is, what I know about knowing remains uncertain, even forbidding). All we know at this juncture is that stupidity does not allow itself to be opposed to knowledge in any simple way, nor is it the other of thought. It does not stand in the way of wisdom, for the disguise of the wise is to avow unknowing. At this time I can say only that the question of stupidity is not satisfied with the discovery of the negative limit of knowledge; it consists, rather, in the absence of a relation to knowing."