31–40 of 167 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At the risk of being divisive, this will generally only work if you're white, if you're a minority or a woman, there's way more pushback on all those things, even when you're right. Seen it many times.
if you're a minority or a woman, there's way more pushback on all those things My counter to that is Theranos.
Because talking with confidence will go 90% of the way to convincing people that you know what you're talking about. So often I've worked with assholes who talk with such confidence that most people won't bother filtering the garbage coming from their mouths. They just believe it. It's almost eerie how effectively talking with confidence works. It's so effective that when you complain about these charlatans, YOU look…
At the risk of being divisive, this will generally only work if you're white, if you're a minority or a woman, there's way more pushback on all those things, even when you're right. Seen it many times.
Secondly, are you only talking about the US because you're American? Because there are plenty of other countries in this world, and it's true in all of them.
So if the issue is the inability to discern between confidence and competence, it should be relative easy to create a experiment through a double blind study where 50% of the participants are trained in behaving confident around their peers. Then we the study observe, first through experimental environment and then through a longer life-time study, and see if the result differ.
A question that arise is also how society treats men with below average confidence. Do they have higher or lower chance to be perceived as leaders compared to women with the same level of confidence? If they have less (a common theme in gender studies), we would again find a distribution where a minority portion of men are at top and have a higher chance than women to be leaders, with the majority of men below with a worse chance. This should also be fairly easy to test in an experimental setting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At the risk of being divisive, this will generally only work if you're white, if you're a minority or a woman, there's way more pushback on all those things, even when you're right. Seen it many times.
if you're a minority or a woman, there's way more pushback on all those things My counter to that is Theranos.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At the risk of being divisive, this will generally only work if you're white, if you're a minority or a woman, there's way more pushback on all those things, even when you're right. Seen it many times.
>if you're a minority or a woman for hundreds of thousands of years having your tribe represented by a confident male (selected from the majority of the tribe) was beneficial (at least we can conclude that now based on the survivor bias principle) We still have those cave man instincts with us to a high degree. The point of civilization development is to reign in cave man instincts inside and among us. Seems that it…
I noticed that some engineers can come across as extremely smart because they talk fast and can think fast - Also, they are really good at defending their ideas when put on the spot but if you dig deeper afterwards you might often find that while their solution is good, it's not the best one.
It always takes time to come up with optimum engineering solutions - It's not something that just pops into your head in a millisecond whist having a casual technical discussion - No matter how smart you are. The history of software development (with all of its failed projects) is proof that even great engineers have difficult coming up with optimum ideas.
As I often see in this kind of theory based articles, it is missing some basic experiments through which we can test and investigate the theory. So if the issue is the inability to discern between confidence and competence, it should be relative easy to create a experiment through a double blind study where 50% of the participants are trained in behaving confident around their peers. Then we the study observe, first…
Because talking with confidence will go 90% of the way to convincing people that you know what you're talking about. So often I've worked with assholes who talk with such confidence that most people won't bother filtering the garbage coming from their mouths. They just believe it. It's almost eerie how effectively talking with confidence works. It's so effective that when you complain about these charlatans, YOU look…
At the risk of being divisive, this will generally only work if you're white, if you're a minority or a woman, there's way more pushback on all those things, even when you're right. Seen it many times.
I'd say people use confidence as evidence for competence. Yet, that only make them adjust their priors, and biased people have some extreme priors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>if you're a minority or a woman for hundreds of thousands of years having your tribe represented by a confident male (selected from the majority of the tribe) was beneficial (at least we can conclude that now based on the survivor bias principle) We still have those cave man instincts with us to a high degree. The point of civilization development is to reign in cave man instincts inside and among us. Seems that it…
The principle of sexual inequality (and male superiority) appears to be a relatively recent phenomenon--arising only around the time of agriculture. Even subsequent to the development of agricultures, plenty of civilizations have practiced matrilineal succession, with no apparent cost to their dealings with neighboring societies (indeed, some even flourished at the expense of others--consider the Iroquois, for exampl…
Some of the characteristics you need to become a leader are: be an excellent lyer, have a good pair of elbows, a desire for power and/or money, fit in the world of wealthy people that are in power, etc..
What do you expect from people with these characteristics? Competence?