Scientific Conclusions

[_MrStakhanovite]

I don't want to be a part of a world where marg is schooling stak on scientific method.

She schools me on everything, didn't you know?

[_Blixa]

I’m trying to think of a study (hook me up here EA) that showed the more confident a person was in their skills were less competent than those who were less confident.
So, there you have it.

The Anosongnosic's Dilemma: Something's Wrong But You'll Never Know What It Is:

Dunning wondered whether it was possible to measure one’s self-assessed level of competence against something a little more objective — say, actual competence. Within weeks, he and his graduate student, Justin Kruger, had organized a program of research. Their paper, “Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties of Recognizing One’s Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-assessments,” was published in 1999.

Dunning and Kruger argued in their paper, “When people are incompetent in the strategies they adopt to achieve success and satisfaction, they suffer a dual burden: Not only do they reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realize it."

It became known as the Dunning-Kruger Effect — our incompetence masks our ability to recognize our incompetence.

[_Fence Sitter]

Dunning and Kruger argued in their paper, “When people are incompetent in the strategies they adopt to achieve success and satisfaction, they suffer a dual burden: Not only do they reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realize it."

It became known as the Dunning-Kruger Effect — our incompetence masks our ability to recognize our incompetence.

Maybe it is just me but the fact that someone would do a study like this seems to be evidence of its conclusion.

[_Blixa]

Dunning and Kruger argued in their paper, “When people are incompetent in the strategies they adopt to achieve success and satisfaction, they suffer a dual burden: Not only do they reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realize it."

It became known as the Dunning-Kruger Effect — our incompetence masks our ability to recognize our incompetence.

Maybe it is just me but the fact that someone would do a study like this seems to be evidence of its conclusion.

I've seen Dunning-Kruger Effect play out in too many classes, like the student who quite seriously could not see any difference between her incoherent and ungrammatical writing and the examples I gave her of competent student essays. Later, she asked me what classes she should take to become an English professor because that is what she felt she had the best skills for.

[_Hoops]

I've seen Dunning-Kruger Effect play out in too many classes, like the student who quite seriously could not see any difference between her incoherent and ungrammatical writing and the examples I gave her of competent student essays. Later, she asked me what classes she should take to become an English professor because that is what she felt she had the best skills for.

You promised you wouldn't tell on me!

[_Blixa]

I've seen Dunning-Kruger Effect play out in too many classes, like the student who quite seriously could not see any difference between her incoherent and ungrammatical writing and the examples I gave her of competent student essays. Later, she asked me what classes she should take to become an English professor because that is what she felt she had the best skills for.

You promised you wouldn't tell on me!

Lol. This student also repeatedly loudly proclaimed how much she hated reading, too.

[_Fence Sitter]

I've seen Dunning-Kruger Effect play out in too many classes, like the student who quite seriously could not see any difference between her incoherent and ungrammatical writing and the examples I gave her of competent student essays. Later, she asked me what classes she should take to become an English professor because that is what she felt she had the best skills for.

I don't doubt that it is true or that I may even fall into that category, what I found amusing is someone had to conduct a study to determine that stupid people don't know they are stupid. Did they do the follow up study to determine if intelligent people knew they were intelligent?

:)

[_Hoops]

Lol. This student also repeatedly loudly proclaimed how much she hated reading, too.

They do walk through the door in all forms don't they? I applaud your patience and grace. They're lucky to have you.

[_Ceeboo]

I have "scientifically concluded" that this thread lends further support to my "scientific theory" that offers my "scientific hypothesis" that all my MDB atheist friends were most likely created by a Creator with a great sense of humor.

:)

Peace,
Ceeboo

[_honorentheos]

A couple of years back I was chatting with a fellow member here on MDB. The person asked me what my particular affiliation was, I suppose because I hadn't shown my hand beyond my status as "former Mormon".

When I expressed that I viewed myself as agnostic, the person questioned why I didn't claim full atheism? My response then is similar to what it is today: I don't know enough to be so decidely against the existence of a god. But in regards to defined ideas about who this God is as conveyed in traditional Christianity and Judaism I was fairly sure that such a God didn't exist. From the perspective of a Judeo-Christian based believer I am essentially atheistic. I generally feel that when a person from within this view looks at and defines me only in this way, though, they miss things about my own beliefs I hold to be essential but it forms an event horizon for many beyond which it's not really feasible to share why this is so. Of course it's only fair to accept that there is a horizon that they must see that I do not as well. In both cases, it would be incredibly egotistical to favor one's own view completely over the other's just on the grounds that one is at the center of their own limited horizon.

Why I share that here is because I was thinking of that person with whom I had that discussion a few years back. I've often found myself internalizing this concept of horizons when wondering about how people's views change over time. In discussions, it's not readily apparent when a person's changing perspective is akin to me standing on the shore of life and viewing that person as if on a ship moving away. To me, it may seem that they're just shrinking their horizon or narrowing their view as they are less and less able to describe the world in a way that corresponds to my limited view that extends only to my horizon. But perhaps this is simply due to the ship of their mind moving further away in another direction from my own?

But I find it rare to mistake the view of someone who's horizon has expanded because they have "climbed higher" so to speak. While it can be apparent they see much further and therefore see things I do not, there is a familiarity to what they describe that allows me to orient myself based on what I can still see from my perhaps limited perspective. It's always nice to hear descriptions of a far-off horizon presented by someone who has climbed up yet remained near by horizontally.

With that in mind, the paper "Unskilled and Unaware" should really be read with the same humility that lent voice to the apostles of Christ when told there would be one among them who would betray him.

Anyway, while the premise of unskilled and unaware is sound enough, I was also disappointed in the nature of the studies used to back it up. When read in it's entirety it's a reasonable example of the nuanced finding Stak mentioned earlier in the thread. See this for example -

"When can the incompetent be expected to overestimate themselves because of their lack of skill? Although our data do not speak to this issue directly, we believe the answer depends on the domain under consideration. Some domains, like those examined in this article, are those in which knowledge about the domain confers competence in the domain. Individuals with a great understanding of the rules of grammar or inferential logic, for example, are by definition skilled linguists and logicians. In such domains, lack of skill implies both the inability to perform competently as well as the inability to recognize competence, and thus a¥e also the domains in which the incompetent are likely to be unaware of their lack of skill.

In other domains, however, competence is not wholly dependent on knowledge or wisdom, but depends on other factors, such as physical skill. One need not look far to find individuals with an impressive understanding of the strategies and techniques of basketball, for instance, yet who could not "dunk" to save their lives.

(These people are called coaches.)"

In many respects I think message boards are little more than coaching conventions anyway. The trick is in figuring out when a person's coaching on a subject of which they have limited knowledge that is really of value to me. (Different than being of limited value to them or someone else, of course)

I find most discussions about how to live as a post-mormon of best value when I'm asking other post-Mormon's how they've dealt with something similar. And when I need to learn how to align my worldview better with my new-found non-Mormon culture, I find the advice of never-mo's of great value.

Given that spirituality/"true religion" as defined by the author of the epistle of James is something lived rather than heard, I find the best advise from my religious friends when it comes to living a life more in line with their spiritual values that I hope to strengthen in myself.

I find very little value in asking about the Bible as a matter of literal post-death significance anymore. I feel I gave it it's just due and it failed to achieve what it could have "had it been". As a matter of religious significance, please refer to my comment about James.