Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

opensociet.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 267 posts

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#71

Post by have_faith »

naringas wrote: post #68
danielbigham wrote: post #67

One of the ways I think about humility is that it is the ability of a person to successfully integrate information that requires some non-trivial refactoring of one's internal model of the world. Refactoring can be a costly operation, so it makes sense that the mind shouldn't take on that task too often, especially if one's mind is more likely to suffer net harm from an unsuccessful or partial refactoring. However, i…

why would a partial refactor be bad for the mind? (I don't consider the mind to be digital, and the brain even less so) how can you know when you have completed a refactor?

Probably not bad, but taxing. Unlearning and re-learning is difficult so it's avoided at the expense of retaining bad habits or knowledge. Like the adage about people getting more stubborn as they age, teaching an old dog new tricks etc.

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#72

Post by Isamu »

anoncake wrote: post #48
Isamu wrote: post #28

A questionnaire from the article: 1) I am willing to admit if I don't know something. 2) I like to compliment others on their intellectual strengths. 3) I try to reflect on my weaknesses in order to develop my intelligence. 4) I actively seek feedback on my ideas, even if it is critical. 5) I acknowledge when someone knows more than me about a certain subject. 6) If someone doesn't understand my idea, it's probably b…

> Also (3) I don't get, because while I am extremely motivated by intellectual curiosity, I have maybe zero motivation to "develop my intelligence" like it was some kind of fitness thing. What's the difference between curiosity and a drive to develop your (crystallized) intelligence?

I mean I'm not driven to be "smarter", whatever that is. I am immersed in finding out more about everything that interests me.

Like I don't read to be well read. I don't listen to news to be informed. I read and listen out of my interests.

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#73

Post by dyarosla »

GuiA wrote: post #36
dyarosla wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My problem lies in being open minded to hearing out someone who, after enough conversing, has an opinion that you’ve delved into deeply before and have seen the glaring shortcomings of, and when that individual is not open to those factual shortcomings. That is- dealing with stubborn, close minded people, is incredibly difficult to stay open for me- in the best case I just move on.

Sounds to me like you enter conversations with a pre-made idea of what you want the conclusion to be. Questions to ask yourself if you feel that way regularly: Have you considered that various shortcomings might hold different weights to people depending on their background, experience in other adjacent domains, etc? That what is factual for you might not be so to others? How do you know that your analysis of the sho…

Note how I said ‘after enough conversing‘.

I do give the benefit of the doubt for as long as I can. I admit to understanding positions that are premised on different values. I have a hard time when once I understand the values, inaccurate steps are taken to reach a false conclusion.

What I’m talking about is more akin to talking with someone making a mistake in a proof, being pointed out the mistake, but still digging their feet in to not admit the mistake.

I’m fine if assumptions aren’t shared, but not when conclusions don’t follow logically from assumptions.

Being open minded isn’t akin to listening to everything and anything- there are limits.

So no, it is not that ‘I enter conversations with a pre-made idea of what [I] want the conclusion to be.’

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#74

Post by yters »

pseudolus wrote: post #12

It's a finding more pithily stated by the poet W.B. Yeats: "The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity" - The Second Coming (poem).

Is Yeats saying lack of conviction is a good thing? Or commenting on the fact that the wrong people have conviction?

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#75

Post by stcredzero »

Then sometimes, you meet someone with the attitude, "I must be very intellectually humble, because I already know just about everything!" This sounds like a cheap joke, but I'm serious about this observation. It's easy to fall into this for someone who has been inculcated with the academy's values with regard to knowledge. This not only includes academics, but disciplines with some degree of intellectual rigor, like programming and software development.

Here's a good rule: Don't get so pumped up, that someone else wants to poke you to deflate you.

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#76

Post by yters »

My understanding of the great geniuses is they tend to not be very humble...is this concept empirically supported, or does it just sound nice?

In my experience, the really knowledgeable people tend to be quite opinionated, while also being willing to question their own ideas and receive critical feedback. So, it seems they have both great humility and arrogance, not one or the other.

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#77

Post by Balero »

naringas wrote: post #68
danielbigham wrote: post #67

One of the ways I think about humility is that it is the ability of a person to successfully integrate information that requires some non-trivial refactoring of one's internal model of the world. Refactoring can be a costly operation, so it makes sense that the mind shouldn't take on that task too often, especially if one's mind is more likely to suffer net harm from an unsuccessful or partial refactoring. However, i…

why would a partial refactor be bad for the mind? (I don't consider the mind to be digital, and the brain even less so) how can you know when you have completed a refactor?

I suppose you have an incomplete model where you haven't thought of and understood all of the corner cases.

I don't think you ever 'finish' a refactor! But you get to be able to deal with your everyday without bumping into conflicting information that causes you to have to refactor every day.

I think a partial refactor would be bad because you're working on an inconsistent model, and if it's wildly inconsistent then it can cause you issues, and might not be a complete model.

For example, imagine you just learned that sugar is bad for you! But thats the sum of your new dietary knowledge. So you start going for fatty foods with lots of preservatives. This isn't going to be any better for you. And you'll have to 'refactor' when someone points out your new diet is still bad for you.

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#79

Post by stcredzero »

naringas wrote: post #68
danielbigham wrote: post #67

One of the ways I think about humility is that it is the ability of a person to successfully integrate information that requires some non-trivial refactoring of one's internal model of the world. Refactoring can be a costly operation, so it makes sense that the mind shouldn't take on that task too often, especially if one's mind is more likely to suffer net harm from an unsuccessful or partial refactoring. However, i…

why would a partial refactor be bad for the mind? (I don't consider the mind to be digital, and the brain even less so) how can you know when you have completed a refactor?

You know that scene from Animal House where the 60's college kids are sitting around smoking a joint, and someone proposes the idea that every electron is a universe, and their minds are all blown? That's a parody, but it also really is what a human mental model refactor looks and feels like. (Both from the outside and the inside. Yes, I'm speaking from personal experience.)

how can you know when you have completed a refactor?

Before you've completed it, other people might think you're annoying because you want to talk about one particular thing a whole lot, and they're waiting for you to get over it. Most likely, you'll roll back some of the changes and make some bug fixes, and you'll stop feeling "whoa" and euphoric, and people will start treating you normally again.

The above answers:

why would a partial refactor be bad for the mind?

Probably good for your mind, but an interruption for your social progress.

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#80

Post by TheShrug »

throwawaymath wrote: post #41
agumonkey wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that being great in every of these aspects can lead to suffering. Because most people don't and you'll be talked down regularly to the point of breaking. And it's utterly difficult to keep respect for people when you try to be balanced, team oriented and generous when others only know how to assert their POV and limited experience.

I agree with you. My honest answers to each of questions (save 8 and 9) are what the researchers would probably consider the "correct" response. Personally I don't like it when people point out my shortcomings or errors, but I'd argue those questions are under-specified. I may not like it, but I'll welcome it and earnestly assume they have some insight I do not. In any case I think it makes me an unenjoyable person t…

I feel similarly and agree about the responses. I typically avoid political arguments or heavily opinionated conversations. Maybe it's because I'm still young (I'll be 30 in a couple years) but I don't think this makes me an unenjoyable person to be around.

I like having _good_ conversations, and can still have them about controversial or opinionated subjects. If I don't know enough about a topic to offer my opinion I like to ask questions that will offer some insight as to why the person feels so strongly. Usually (not always) when someone feels very strongly about something, there is some kernel of truth somewhere that will at least be interesting. It's fun to at least figure out _why_ people think they way they do.

I used to have a bad habit of being a devil's advocate. I'm sure it was annoying when I was even younger, but I've found that faking (exploring) an opinion can help give the conversation some depth. Nowadays I do that less, but can get away with it if I preface it nicely enough.

Post reply on HN