101–110 of 267 posts
The article title is clickbait nonsense: “The findings in relation to knowledge acquisition were mixed. While an online study involving 604 adults (and using the more comprehensive measure of intellectual humility) found the aforementioned link between greater intellectual humility and superior general knowledge, another involving college students (and the briefer intellectual humility questionnaire) found that those…
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…
One of my friends called me a genius the other day, but I'm just really nerdy about something that makes money. He's really into comics and is a walking encyclopedia of characters, timelines, stories and arcs, but wouldn't consider that "smart stuff", even though it is to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I always considered myself one of the most humble people i know. This is the paragon of humble-brags.
... Not really? There's nothing humble about his statement, it's just a brag. Also, it's intended to be ironic.
That's a brag about being humble.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Actually, you likely do. Well sure everyone does, to some degree. But I thought dyarosla's clarification was quite sound, particularly this part: I admit to understanding positions that are premised on different values. In my experience, a lot of people are completely ignorant of this important idea, that values (or axioms) are a crucially important part of disagreements, that someone may be approaching the same ge…
I am not judging on "sound", just pointing out that self consistency is the core exception. That statement on "values", coupled with the other ones, all support strong self consistency. How people evaluate things can, does, will vary from a highly rational POV.
I’ll concede that some people don’t value logical consistency - but that doesn’t make them more rational in their arguments.
If there is subjectivity in a ‘logical inference’, I’ll err on the side of being open to it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's difficult to think of examples "from this site" because I rarely remember the posters' names. I would point to cryptocurrencies as a rich source of extremely wrong takes: how bitcoin would replace paypal and credit cards, how government conspiracies would try to fight it, etc. None of those predictions came to pass, to put it mildly. What I can't offer is specific instances of people pivoting from "it's a curren…
person you replied to here: well yes, I was being sarcastic but I'm glad it sparked this high value comment you wrote. It is easy to see how the 'consensus narrative' changes, as the accounts are censored and their comments are in fact promoted by the collective community. But it is impossible to see who was part of that collective community.