Dunning–Kruger effect

Casual discussion amongst spiritual friends.
User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 1773
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Dunning–Kruger effect

Post by rightviewftw » Mon Mar 26, 2018 2:18 pm

binocular wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 12:29 pm

I always look for truth, learn from companions who also look for truth, wrongs posts (from me or others) do not matter.
Both of you are using the term "debate", and not "discussion".
How come?
To me there seems to be an overlap in the methodology if one attempts to have a proper discussion it is sort of a friendly debate is it not. I think friendly debate is a thing or is it called a discussion at that point :shrug:

ieee23
Posts: 394
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 12:40 am

Re: Dunning–Kruger effect

Post by ieee23 » Sun Apr 01, 2018 8:06 pm

The problem with the concept of the Dunning-Kruger effect is that everyone fancies themselves as the exception and/or they take their self esteem issues as a sign that they are really a special person after all.
Whatever a bhikkhu frequently thinks and ponders upon, that will become the inclination of his mind. - MN 19

User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 1773
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Dunning–Kruger effect

Post by rightviewftw » Mon Apr 02, 2018 9:13 am

A typical example is people who take to argue against monks eating meat. Saying;
- It is so obvious! I can't belive you do not get it!

While in reality their view is easily understood by anyone who not a complete imbecile and they are the one who don't comprehend the more complex position. Yet argue as if equally qualified.

User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6437
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: California

Re: Dunning–Kruger effect

Post by Mkoll » Mon Apr 02, 2018 9:31 am

rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Mar 25, 2018 8:16 pm
Dunning–Kruger effect

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the field of psychology, the Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias wherein people of low ability suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly assessing their cognitive ability as greater than it is. The cognitive bias of illusory superiority derives from the metacognitive inability of low-ability persons to recognize their own ineptitude; without the self-awareness of metacognition, low-ability people cannot objectively evaluate their actual competence or incompetence.

Conversely, highly competent individuals may erroneously assume that tasks easy for them to perform are also easy for other people to perform, or that other people will have a similar understanding of subjects that they themselves are well-versed in.

As described by social psychologists David Dunning and Justin Kruger, the cognitive bias of illusory superiority results from an internal illusion in people of low ability and from an external misperception in people of high ability; that is, "the miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others."
I think this one is good to keep in mind.
It seems like a function of conceit, arrogance, stubbornness, obstinacy...a lot of unwholesome qualities that circle around the concepts of I, me, mine, my self.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa

binocular
Posts: 5476
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Dunning–Kruger effect

Post by binocular » Mon Apr 02, 2018 10:58 am

ieee23 wrote:
Sun Apr 01, 2018 8:06 pm
The problem with the concept of the Dunning-Kruger effect is that everyone fancies themselves as the exception and/or they take their self esteem issues as a sign that they are really a special person after all.
Why would that be the problem with the concept of the Dunning-Kruger effect?

If anything, the DKE has shown that what you say is the case, at least in some cultures.

ieee23
Posts: 394
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 12:40 am

Re: Dunning–Kruger effect

Post by ieee23 » Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:29 pm

rightviewftw wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 9:13 am
A typical example is people who take to argue against monks eating meat. Saying;
- It is so obvious! I can't belive you do not get it!

While in reality their view is easily understood by anyone who not a complete imbecile and they are the one who don't comprehend the more complex position. Yet argue as if equally qualified.

Next time you take a sharp turn away from the topic being discussed could you give us a warning so we can get our seatbelts on? :)
Whatever a bhikkhu frequently thinks and ponders upon, that will become the inclination of his mind. - MN 19

User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 1773
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Dunning–Kruger effect

Post by rightviewftw » Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:09 pm

ieee23 wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:29 pm
rightviewftw wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 9:13 am
A typical example is people who take to argue against monks eating meat. Saying;
- It is so obvious! I can't belive you do not get it!

While in reality their view is easily understood by anyone who not a complete imbecile and they are the one who don't comprehend the more complex position. Yet argue as if equally qualified.

Next time you take a sharp turn away from the topic being discussed could you give us a warning so we can get our seatbelts on? :)
Should have seen this one coming, let's just say this is hypotethical and there is the assumption that there is no wrong in eating meat.

I was going to list other examples as well but hestitated thinking that people might get provoked.

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 11705
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Dunning–Kruger effect

Post by DNS » Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:26 pm

rightviewftw wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:09 pm
ieee23 wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:29 pm
rightviewftw wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 9:13 am
A typical example is people who take to argue against monks eating meat. Saying;
- It is so obvious! I can't belive you do not get it!

While in reality their view is easily understood by anyone who not a complete imbecile and they are the one who don't comprehend the more complex position. Yet argue as if equally qualified.

Next time you take a sharp turn away from the topic being discussed could you give us a warning so we can get our seatbelts on? :)
Should have seen this one coming, let's just say this is hypotethical and there is the assumption that there is no wrong in eating meat.

I was going to list other examples as well but hestitated thinking that people might get provoked.
Which just goes to show that DKE can be used as a weapon on any discussion forum, as Sam Vara noted. A vegan-activist could say it is the meat eaters' position that has illusory superiority of intelligence, that they can't see the most basic understanding of cause and effect, supply and demand, etc; meanwhile the omnivores say that it is the vegans who can't see that the food is not impure and that there is no causality, etc, etc., both accusing the opposing side of having an illusory notion of superior intelligence.

All the more reason, I don't believe DKE should be used on discussion forums as it can be a weapon and mistakenly used, at that.

User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 1773
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Dunning–Kruger effect

Post by rightviewftw » Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:39 pm

I do not want this to derail, can delete that post if it is too offensive.

If pursuit of the truth is the goal then there is no need to compete and weaponize anything. If the goal is to get along then yes one will need to censor.

Wow this is hard to talk abou, better keep it as general as possible i guess.

binocular
Posts: 5476
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Dunning–Kruger effect

Post by binocular » Mon Apr 02, 2018 8:40 pm

DNS wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:26 pm
Which just goes to show that DKE can be used as a weapon on any discussion forum, as Sam Vara noted. A vegan-activist could say it is the meat eaters' position that has illusory superiority of intelligence, that they can't see the most basic understanding of cause and effect, supply and demand, etc; meanwhile the omnivores say that it is the vegans who can't see that the food is not impure and that there is no causality, etc, etc., both accusing the opposing side of having an illusory notion of superior intelligence.

All the more reason, I don't believe DKE should be used on discussion forums as it can be a weapon and mistakenly used, at that.
People who actually have an illusory sense of superiority can't see that it is illusory. Such people cannot refrain from acting on it (in line with the DKE). It's not like people who actually have such illusory superiority can refrain from exhibiting it; their conviction in their superiority prevents them from exhibiting it (even though they may temporarily refrain from exhibiting in, in the name of mercy, pity, tolerance, compassion).

I think it's a good idea to invoke an internet discussion principle similar to Goodwin's Law: "A discussion becomes untenable as soon as one or more parties involved exhibit the Dunning-Krüger Effect."

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 55 guests