51–60 of 74 posts
Here's an example making the rounds, originally from 2022: there is systemic bias in Americans' understanding of US national statistics about all kinds of subgroups: https://yougov.com/en-us/articles/41556-americans-misestimat... (Although, apparently the poll didn't ask how uncertain they were. The question was, "If you had to guess, what percentage of American adults...")
Here's an example making the rounds, originally from 2022: there is systemic bias in Americans' understanding of US national statistics about all kinds of subgroups: https://yougov.com/en-us/articles/41556-americans-misestimat... (Although, apparently the poll didn't ask how uncertain they were. The question was, "If you had to guess, what percentage of American adults...")
We are so full of ourselves we called ourselves Homo sapiens, wise man, but wise we don't seem to be. I recently faced this feeling of overconfidence in knowledge trying to think about how seasons work or why rainbows have a curved or arcing shape. You might think seasons are caused by the tilt of the earth, but why? Exercise left for the reader.
> We are so full of ourselves we called ourselves Homo sapiens, wise man, but wise we don't seem to be. Terry Pratchett said that a better name for humans would be Pan narrans , "Story-telling Chimpanzee".
Same reason we think we’re smarter than we actually are?
Generally, it is people with a lower ability to understand the world that overestimate their own intelligence because they are unable to imagine anyone being smarter than them, and those on the smarter end who underestimate their own intelligence because they believe everyone else must be able to see what they are able to see. There was a paper, quite famous now, on the topic titled "Unskilled and Unaware of It: How…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Generally, it is people with a lower ability to understand the world that overestimate their own intelligence because they are unable to imagine anyone being smarter than them, and those on the smarter end who underestimate their own intelligence because they believe everyone else must be able to see what they are able to see. There was a paper, quite famous now, on the topic titled "Unskilled and Unaware of It: How…
The paper's combined author names become the shorthand for that long title...
Everyone should be required to sign up for a year of being followed around by an inquisitive child who will pockmark the landscape of their knowledge with exploratory boreholes. I have multiple environment and science degrees and feel generally knowledgeable and my oldest will put on his best Feynman face and be entirely unsatisfied when I offer and explain “Rayleigh scattering.” I love it. I love it so much. I love…
Has anyone here found ways to actively cultivate this kind relentless curiosity within themselves? People sometimes describe me that way when I start asking unbridled questions. Personally, I find that I can activate this mode when trying to connect answers to some sense of life meaning and the myriad ways that unfolds. Many on the receiving end find the experience frustrating, though. I think we get used to repeatab…
Yes; As a great fan of detective fiction specifically Poe(Dupin/Legrand) and Doyle(Holmes), I call it the "Sherlock Holmes - Dr. Watson method of interactive problem-solving" ;-)
Watson only sees the obvious, does not understand their meaning/causes/effects and starts asking questions. Holmes uses that to establish indisputable facts/evidence, reason analytically from effects to causes (i.e. the usual detective trope) or synthetically from the present to the future (i.e. prediction). Both authors in their stories often elaborate on methods of reasoning, which provide insights that can be adapted to problem-solving in general.
This is the scientific method in action viz. Observe, Measure, Hypothesize (and Model), Test, Draw Conclusions and finally, Iterate over all of the above to refine the hypothesis and minimize error.
Finally, the classic The Chemical History of a Candle by Michael Faraday is an excellent source to teach oneself/others/students/children on how to think scientifically in depth about anything - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chemical_History_of_a_Cand...
Modern version of the book(free) and accompanying video lectures on Youtube - https://engineerguy.com/faraday/ and https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL0INsTTU1k2UCpOfRuMDR...
Everyone should be required to sign up for a year of being followed around by an inquisitive child who will pockmark the landscape of their knowledge with exploratory boreholes. I have multiple environment and science degrees and feel generally knowledgeable and my oldest will put on his best Feynman face and be entirely unsatisfied when I offer and explain “Rayleigh scattering.” I love it. I love it so much. I love…
100 percent can relate on the relentless curiosity of a child. I was dumbfounded yesterday by this question -> if cars go at high speed, and breaks stop it suddenly, how come the friction doesn't generate enough heat to start a spark?
I don't know ... I actually think I'm quite aware of a lot of how complicated many things can be. Perhaps it is because I was really curious as a kid about how things work, peeked into things, really tried to understand how it works, and figured it was far from easy. I also tried to draw bikes, and figured you really have to think it through quite hard the first times, lol.
The Science of Cycology: Failures to understand how everyday objects work (pdf) - https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/BF03195929
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Generally, it is people with a lower ability to understand the world that overestimate their own intelligence because they are unable to imagine anyone being smarter than them, and those on the smarter end who underestimate their own intelligence because they believe everyone else must be able to see what they are able to see. There was a paper, quite famous now, on the topic titled "Unskilled and Unaware of It: How…
I feel like hearing this is dangerous in itself - even if you overestimate yourself, surely you yourself don't overestimate yourself as much as others? Personally, I ran against a closed glass door yesterday. All I hope for is that I was entertaining to onlookers at least.
There are limits to this, plainly Einstein didn't think some guy as dumb as a bag of rocks was as smart as he was.