|
| Author |
Message |
fire_eyes_2k
The Burn Card
Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 3179
Location: Old York
|
 Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 5:08 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| dumwaldo wrote: |
| There is also the fundamental problem that while psychiatry is a proven science, psychology is NOT. Many people misunderstand that. |
[hijack]
Just cos I know this will get you going DW....Where does Dianetics fit on that scale? According to the Church of Scientology, psychiatrists were responsible for the holocaust ya know.
[/hijack] |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Blackray
Straight
Joined: 20 Mar 2008
Posts: 106
Location: Bergen, Norway
|
| Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 5:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| markljackson wrote: |
wow! where to start. Sadly the Professor does seem incompetent, on many levels. Maybe he is just desperate for headlines, need them for tenure.
1. being ignorant does not make you incompetent. Many people who are NOT ignorant are incompetent. Lots of "well educated" folks who can barely dress themselves.
2. Most people who doubt their ability, do so for a couple of reasons. A) constant negative feedback from superiors/mentors/events/self B) One tragic experience that overshadows all good ones. Sadly we teach people to NOT aspire to greatness.
3. Having confidence in yourself is in no way indicative of: ignorance, incompetence, or inability. Any wonder #2 is true? Teaching people that being confident means your are incompetent is idiotic, and dangerous.
4. This is the worst reasoning I have seen in a long time. No surprise it's from an Ivy league school. Non sequiter after non sequiter.
I am so tired of the negative attitudes of the "well educated". The most offensive comment is that all of us are so stupid we can't learn to make better decisions. Unreal.
Now you see why kids today are so messed up. |
I think you need to actually READ the article...
1. You are correct, and the article does not make a conclusion like you try to claim. It uses hard to understand words like "most" and "usually" to that effect.
2. Where's your research backing up that these reasons are why most people doubt their ability? I'm sure it's true for some, but for most? Doubt it. I can't help but think back at the most horrible singers from American Idol and their misconception of their own abilities. Contrary to your statement, they've probably been taught to "aspire to greatness" (despite their complete lack of talent).
3. Again, read the article. This is in no way, form or shape what the article is about. It's about how most incompetent people are ignorant/blissfully unaware of their own incompetence.
4. No wonder since you didn't read the article, or completely failed to understand what it was all about.
And to end it all, you claim that the article says that "all of us are so stupid we can't learn to make better decisions". Well, again... if you had cared to read it, you would have seen this:
"In a final experiment, Dunning and Kruger set out to discover if training would help modify the exaggerated self-perceptions of incapable subjects. In fact, a short training session in logical reasoning did improve the ability of low-scoring subjects to assess their performance realistically, they found.". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Riddim
Moderator
Joined: 04 Dec 2005
Posts: 6454
Location: Quitting smoking
|
| Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 6:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mark, you're making this way more complicated than it is. Pretty much everyone sucks at something they have little to no experience with and it's a lot easier to get better if you don't already think you're good when you in fact have no clue. Hence the people who realize when they suck at something have a much better chance of eventually getting good at it. If you can't accurately judge that you're bad at something and why, how are you going to get better? It's not rocket science, it's simple logic and apparently this study backs it up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bdbranch
Banned
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 503
Location: At home wdyt. Btw. I'm not opinionated all the time, umm can you be opinionated when you're asleep
|
| Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 9:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Riddim wrote: |
| mark, you're making this way more complicated than it is. Pretty much everyone sucks at something they have little to no experience with and it's a lot easier to get better if you don't already think you're good when you in fact have no clue. Hence the people who realize when they suck at something have a much better chance of eventually getting good at it. If you can't accurately judge that you're bad at something and why, how are you going to get better? It's not rocket science, it's simple logic and apparently this study backs it up. |
I agree with the above statement, I just believe that the 'research' paper chosen to convey the message wasn't the best. Unfortunately, the professor that wrote it had a less than objective viewpoint and this shows in the flawed paper. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HuJwang
Forum Blight
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Posts: 5346
Location: Halifax, NS
|
| Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
bd, did you actually read the paper or are you basing your opinion off of the newspaper article?
fwiw here is the actual paper although you have to pay to get it:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.05.002
| dumwaldo wrote: |
Why are you are incapable of discussing something without making personal attacks?
I suppose a better question might be why do moderators on this forum allow you to do it when you are doing it so frequently?
|
I know, I know, nobody likes to be called a Bush supporter. But the way he was talking about the "big bad elitist intellectuals" really reminded me of them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bdbranch
Banned
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 503
Location: At home wdyt. Btw. I'm not opinionated all the time, umm can you be opinionated when you're asleep
|
| Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 8:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| HuJwang wrote: |
bd, did you actually read the paper or are you basing your opinion off of the newspaper article?
fwiw here is the actual paper although you have to pay to get it: |
My viewpoint is based on the information supplied. Now, if you read what I wrote on page 1 of this post, you would have seen my major concern about the research paper. For your benefit, I've included it below. Ps, if you believe that the 'newspaper' article was misleading in any way, why don't you actually tell us why instead of flapping your gums about and flaming everyone.
| bdbranch wrote: |
If I can write garbage like this, can I be a professor of psychology too? Please .... Pretty Please ...... Pretty Pretty Please.
Won't bother with most of the garbage, just the so-called test results. It says that the lowest 10% overestimated their ability. Well duh. They can hardly say, I'm in the lowest -20% now can they. The only thing that's possible is a over estimation in 'percentile' terms.
Secondly, the areas that were tested was deliberately designed to produce the result that he wanted. For instance, I believe that I've spelt everything here correctly. If I've made even a single mistake (for whatever reason) then that's automatically a overestimation.
To then use this result as a claim of arrogant or ignorant incompetence is absolutely flawed. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HuJwang
Forum Blight
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Posts: 5346
Location: Halifax, NS
|
| Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bdbranch wrote: |
| HuJwang wrote: |
bd, did you actually read the paper or are you basing your opinion off of the newspaper article?
fwiw here is the actual paper although you have to pay to get it: |
My viewpoint is based on the information supplied. Now, if you read what I wrote on page 1 of this post, you would have seen my major concern about the research paper. For your benefit, I've included it below. Ps, if you believe that the 'newspaper' article was misleading in any way, why don't you actually tell us why instead of flapping your gums about and flaming everyone.
| bdbranch wrote: |
If I can write garbage like this, can I be a professor of psychology too? Please .... Pretty Please ...... Pretty Pretty Please.
Won't bother with most of the garbage, just the so-called test results. It says that the lowest 10% overestimated their ability. Well duh. They can hardly say, I'm in the lowest -20% now can they. The only thing that's possible is a over estimation in 'percentile' terms.
Secondly, the areas that were tested was deliberately designed to produce the result that he wanted. For instance, I believe that I've spelt everything here correctly. If I've made even a single mistake (for whatever reason) then that's automatically a overestimation.
To then use this result as a claim of arrogant or ignorant incompetence is absolutely flawed. |
|
I don't understand your argument at all. Why is that flawed? They are trying to find out whether incompetent people are aware they are incompetent. They give them tests and then ask them to evaluate how well they think they did. The people who scored lowest were more likely to overestimate their score than people who scored higher.
Where is the flaw? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Flying_Kiwi
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 5056
Location: qwning n00bs fwiw ldo imo
|
| Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 10:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting article and I agree with the findings for the most part.
Reminds me of something Einstein said in a speech once (borrowing from Shakespeare), roughly something like:
The empty vessel makes the loudest sound, while the full one falls quietly crushing the toes it lands on.
And I see what the article discusses in place regularly when you're in a group and it leads to a philosophical or political debate - it's normally the most clueless people who will speak up first, be the loudest or try and be the most convincing (normally through sheer volume rather than logic/fact). While the ones who have a better understanding of the topic will normally sit back and listen to others rant before offering their point of view (if they do at all). This is often especially true in philosophical and religious debates, where the intelligent realise a conclusion can't be reached and therefore aren't interested, while the ignorant keep trying to make everyone else accept their conclusion as correct (because they haven't actually applied enough thought to realise there's no definitive answer). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bdbranch
Banned
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 503
Location: At home wdyt. Btw. I'm not opinionated all the time, umm can you be opinionated when you're asleep
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 12:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| HuJwang wrote: |
I don't understand your argument at all. Why is that flawed? They give them tests and then ask them to evaluate how well they think they did. The people who scored lowest were more likely to overestimate their score than people who scored higher.
Where is the flaw? |
Quite obviously you don't understand simple maths. Somebody who is deemed to be in the lowest 10% of any given task can't make a underestimation in 'percentile' terms. They can hardly say that they are minus 20% now can they? Secondly the tests used for evaluation were not of a objective nature. Now to use bias and non-objective studies as a basis of the claim of arrogant or ignorant incompetence does little to support the claim (even if the claim itself is correct).
Btw: HuJwang, why don't you say something in support of the study instead of just mouthing off. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HuJwang
Forum Blight
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Posts: 5346
Location: Halifax, NS
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 2:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bdbranch wrote: |
| HuJwang wrote: |
I don't understand your argument at all. Why is that flawed? They give them tests and then ask them to evaluate how well they think they did. The people who scored lowest were more likely to overestimate their score than people who scored higher.
Where is the flaw? |
Quite obviously you don't understand simple maths. Somebody who is deemed to be in the lowest 10% of any given task can't make a underestimation in 'percentile' terms. They can hardly say that they are minus 20% now can they?
|
So? That doesn't mean the conclusion is incorrect. Incompetent people tend to overestimate their results, competent people tend to underestimate their results.
| Quote: |
Secondly the tests used for evaluation were not of a objective nature. Now to use bias and non-objective studies as a basis of the claim of arrogant or ignorant incompetence does little to support the claim (even if the claim itself is correct).
|
In what way are the tests subjective? I think it's quite telling that the worst 10% guessed their results to be, on average, at the 61st percentile. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HuJwang
Forum Blight
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Posts: 5346
Location: Halifax, NS
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 2:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bdbranch wrote: |
| bdbranch wrote: |
| HuJwang wrote: |
| Ok this is getting nowhere. You're basically ignoring what I said and repeating the same stuff over and ove. I'm done here. |
Now I regularly disagree with the opinions of others, but still respect them as people. However there is one thing that I absolutely don't respect and that's people who demands complete and utter agreement with their particular viewpoint. And I don't respect those who shows themselves to be of this nature.
If HuJwang wants mindless beings around him, then he should pick up some of those Japanese robots that are for sale. And no, I don't respect him or anything that he has to say, regardless of whether I agree with him or not. |
Go throw another temper tantum HuJwang because somebody has disagreed with you. |
I don't recall throwing a temper tantrum, nor do I recall getting mad at someone for disagreeing with me. I do recall a person in that thread who couldn't seem to understand that repeating the same thing over and over without explaining it doesn't constitute a good argument.
But keep posting, though. Irony is fun. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drtre1987
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 1762
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 2:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think this is a great article to post here Riddim, as it has much relevance here. This really relates to the forum as I see so many people here post and have no idea what they are talking about, yet refuse to change their mind on an issue because they are sure they are right. They simply do not understand that they are incompetent. I used to be stubborn like this in my early forum days and posted many stupid things. But its not until you learn from the better players that you finally understand. A lot of people here should really just open their minds and realize that they are not the best player in the world.
Oh, and sorry for hijacking from the good discussion going on here. Here is my comment on the recent discussion on this thread: bdbranch, stop stalking HuJwang and complaining about everything he does. HuJwang, start posting 3-5 page essays explaining your reasoning for every post you make. Your simple moderately sized paragraphs of well constructed, consise explanations simply aren't cutting it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HuJwang
Forum Blight
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Posts: 5346
Location: Halifax, NS
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 3:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| drtre1987 wrote: |
| HuJwang, start posting 3-5 page essays explaining your reasoning for every post you make. Your simple moderately sized paragraphs of well constructed, consise explanations simply aren't cutting it. |
Yeah, well your mom isn't cutting it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pghbandit
Royal Flush
Joined: 18 Jun 2006
Posts: 517
Location: Ummm Pittsburgh?
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 4:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Flying_Kiwi wrote: |
Interesting article and I agree with the findings for the most part.
Reminds me of something Einstein said in a speech once (borrowing from Shakespeare), roughly something like:
The empty vessel makes the loudest sound, while the full one falls quietly crushing the toes it lands on.
And I see what the article discusses in place regularly when you're in a group and it leads to a philosophical or political debate - it's normally the most clueless people who will speak up first, be the loudest or try and be the most convincing (normally through sheer volume rather than logic/fact). While the ones who have a better understanding of the topic will normally sit back and listen to others rant before offering their point of view (if they do at all). This is often especially true in philosophical and religious debates, where the intelligent realise a conclusion can't be reached and therefore aren't interested, while the ignorant keep trying to make everyone else accept their conclusion as correct (because they haven't actually applied enough thought to realise there's no definitive answer). |
I agree with the flying Kiwi.
Riddim, interesting article, and I think it speaks volumes to people's self-perception. I actually posted it on a bulletin board at work, just out of curiousity as to who would take offense to it.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bdbranch
Banned
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 503
Location: At home wdyt. Btw. I'm not opinionated all the time, umm can you be opinionated when you're asleep
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 7:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| HuJwang wrote: |
| bdbranch wrote: |
| HuJwang wrote: |
I don't understand your argument at all. Why is that flawed? They give them tests and then ask them to evaluate how well they think they did. The people who scored lowest were more likely to overestimate their score than people who scored higher.
Where is the flaw? |
Quite obviously you don't understand simple maths. Somebody who is deemed to be in the lowest 10% of any given task can't make a underestimation in 'percentile' terms. They can hardly say that they are minus 20% now can they?
|
So? That doesn't mean the conclusion is incorrect. Incompetent people tend to overestimate their results, competent people tend to underestimate their results. |
That's correct, I've never said that the conclusion is incorrect, just that the 'research' paper had a bias that made it less than suitable evidence. One writer did state a better example, those lousy idol wannabes. A video of that would make a excellent example. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
FAQ
Search
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
