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

251–260 of 267 posts

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#251

Post by 2600 »

te_platt wrote: post #134

A few years ago the guy I was sharing an office with at work was cleaning off his desk and found a stack of resumes. He said they were all from the batch that I was hired from and asked if I wanted to know why I was picked. Very cautiously I said yes. He told me I was the only one who when really pushed during the technical interview said "I don't know". Their initial strategy had been to start easy on some topic and…

"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge" - Stephen Hawking

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#252

Post by haecceity »

btilly wrote: post #216
haecceity wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a classroom setting so the discussions are between peers with similar knowledge.

It is even more true in the real world when the discussions are between people with different knowledge. Do people recognize someone from another background as a peer or not?

If all parties are interested in the discussion they can ask questions to fill in gaps in the knowledge. Doesn't always happen of course.

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#253

Post by dang »

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #220
AmericanChopper wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The general meaning of the word is belief in any idea that you can’t prove. Belief in scientific knowledge requires no more or no less faith than belief in any religious system.

Yes, I am aware that you can use equivocation fallacies to explain that we can't know anything and all claims are equally likely to be true. I was talking about what a wise person would do, though.

Please don't cross into rudeness in HN threads. Also, please do religious flamewar somewhere else, not here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#254

Post by dang »

AmericanChopper wrote: post #221
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I am aware that you can use equivocation fallacies to explain that we can't know anything and all claims are equally likely to be true. I was talking about what a wise person would do, though.

There is no equivocation fallacy here at all. You have also failed to understand anything I’ve said. I’ve made no claims whatsoever about the likelihood of anything being true, not even any claims about the likelihood of anything being false. I’ve only asserted that it is impossible to prove any absolute truth. It seems you have taken this as some sort of insult to the merit of some truth that you must believe. Which…

Please don't cross into rudeness in HN threads. Also, please do religious flamewar somewhere else, not here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#255

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC »

dang wrote: post #253
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I am aware that you can use equivocation fallacies to explain that we can't know anything and all claims are equally likely to be true. I was talking about what a wise person would do, though.

Please don't cross into rudeness in HN threads. Also, please do religious flamewar somewhere else, not here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Would you mind explaining what about my comment was either rude or a flame, given the context in which rationality was named as a sign of being unwise?

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#256

Post by adverbly »

hathawsh wrote: post #126
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…

I would add some important evaluations. These are some less obvious, deeper aspects of intellectual humility: 10) I accept that someone with less experience may have better ideas than I have, even in my own field of expertise. 11) Even if I am not certain of myself, I am willing to suggest and defend my ideas because they deserve equal treatment. 12) I am willing to forgo new ideas when they hurt momentum too much. 1…

Care to explain the difference between 12 and 13?

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#257

Post by adverbly »

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 maybe I'm a wierdo but I don't think so much in terms of people being "smart", I think it is something you do.

Weirdo in a good way. Thanks for this one - sometimes I forget that thoughts/actions are smart, not people.

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#258

Post by dang »

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #255
dang wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't cross into rudeness in HN threads. Also, please do religious flamewar somewhere else, not here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Would you mind explaining what about my comment was either rude or a flame, given the context in which rationality was named as a sign of being unwise?

Any comment of the form, "Yes, I am aware that you can do stupid thing X, but I was talking about intelligent thing Y" is rude and a flame.

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#259

Post by kup0 »

hombre_fatal wrote: post #225
te_platt wrote: post #134

A few years ago the guy I was sharing an office with at work was cleaning off his desk and found a stack of resumes. He said they were all from the batch that I was hired from and asked if I wanted to know why I was picked. Very cautiously I said yes. He told me I was the only one who when really pushed during the technical interview said "I don't know". Their initial strategy had been to start easy on some topic and…

We HNers really love these kinds of submissions since we think we're so smart. The top comment is literally someone bragging about how they once got a job with their superior applause-worthy character of saying "idk".

That is an extremely uncharitable read of the comment.

I don't think it comes off as bragging at all, but just an observation of what worked, and how it's interesting that people will go into levels of nonsense to avoid saying they don't know something.

Re: People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge

#260

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC »

dang wrote: post #258
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you mind explaining what about my comment was either rude or a flame, given the context in which rationality was named as a sign of being unwise?

Any comment of the form, "Yes, I am aware that you can do stupid thing X, but I was talking about intelligent thing Y" is rude and a flame.

... when "stupid thing X" is making an argument that doesn't address the problem, and "you can do stupid thing X" is actually an explanation of what the problem with that argument is, and it's also not calling anyone names, but just calling out fallacious reasoning as what it is: Fallacious reasoning? Fallacious reasoning might well be correlated with stupidity, but that doesn't make pointing out fallacious reasoning an insult in itself.

Equally, if the topic of the discussion is what makes a certain decision wise or not, as it happened to be the case here, I don't see how pointing out that a suggested methodology does not qualify due to fallacious reasoning in that methodology is either rude or a flame. That is, unless you consider the start of that discussion (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20129547) a rude flame, which you possibly could, even though I don't think it was intended as such.

Post reply on HN