OT: NYT article on, among other things, the limits of our ability to acknowledge what we don’t know

[eavesdropper]

[quote=davelj]Taleb’s primary thesis is that as humans we systematically underestimate the frequency and importance of random events; that is, we underestimate the role of luck (randomness) in our lives.[/quote]

Reminds me of one of my favorite StarTrek exchanges (from the original series):
Spock: “Random chance seems to have operated in our favor”.
McCoy: “In plain, non-Vulcan English: We’ve been lucky.”
Spock: “I believe I said that, Doctor”.

[quote=davelj] This article, among other things, addresses the fact that humans systematically overestimate their understanding of all sorts of things. One of the themes that’s discussed is one I’ve mentioned here at the Pigg many times: What you know is not nearly as important as knowing/acknowledging what you don’t know. As humans we’re all bad at this to varying degrees. [/quote]

Spot-on, davelj. I’ve advised students many times over to ask questions, and pointed out that the only way to get to know something that you don’t already know is to ask questions. Without questions, there is no learning; without learning, there is no knowledge. Sounds ridiculously simplistic, like one of those “inspirational” posters that they sell at office supply stores. But it’s mind-boggling how many people, in all age groups, will not ask questions. Is it that they’re too embarrassed to ask, or that they simply lack intellectual curiosity?

However, several years back, I became aware of the phenomenon of “not knowing what you don’t know”, and shortly thereafter, realized that there are many people who will not acknowledge that there may be things that they do not know, including things that are essential to doing their jobs. The most glaring recent example that comes to mind – and I am NOT hijacking the thread – is Sarah Palin. Despite the fact that her experience included 6 years as mayor of a town of less than 6000 people in a relatively isolated state, and 18 months as that state’s governor, she insists that she never hesitated about accepting McCain’s offer. Since that time, she appears to have made no effort to fill the gaps that exist in her base of knowledge – indeed, she doesn’t seem to acknowledge to herself that any such gaps exist. Given the seriousness with which she gave (and repeatedly defended) answers such as “They’re our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska” to reporters expressing doubts about her foreign policy knowledge and experience, it would certainly appear that Ms. Palin is afflicted with anosognosia as described in the article.

Again, in mentioning Ms. Palin, I’m not attempting to sway the direction of this thread to one that is political. I think the subject matter of the NYT article is strong enough to stand on its own, and hope that other Piggs will weigh in with their thoughts and opinions on it. I’ve come across many people employed in positions who not only aren’t in possession of the skills and knowledge to perform the duties required by the job, but are entirely unaware that such gaps exist. It’s almost as though they believe “having” the job constitutes “doing” the job. It’s scary.

[jpinpb]

Yeah. What a brain twister.

If Wheeler was too stupid to be a bank robber, perhaps he was also too stupid to know that he was too stupid to be a bank robber — that is, his stupidity protected him from an awareness of his own stupidity.

I like this:

It became known as the Dunning-Kruger Effect — our incompetence masks our ability to recognize our incompetence.

But this really explains it:

With an “unknown unknown,” I don’t even know what questions to ask, let alone how to answer those questions.

Towards the end:
For years, I have had my own version of the story of the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In my version, God appears before Adam and Eve, and tells them that they have disobeyed Him. He admonishes them, and they will have to leave immediately. Everything will be completely grotesque, grim, ghastly and gruesome outside of Eden. God spares them no detail.

Adam and Eve, both crestfallen and fearful, prepare to leave, but God, feeling perhaps a little guilty for the severity of his decision, looks at them and says, “Yes, things will be bad out there, but I’m giving you self-deception so you’ll never notice.”

Gives meaning to ignorance is bliss, right?

[jpinpb]

Yeah. What a brain twister.

If Wheeler was too stupid to be a bank robber, perhaps he was also too stupid to know that he was too stupid to be a bank robber — that is, his stupidity protected him from an awareness of his own stupidity.

I like this:

It became known as the Dunning-Kruger Effect — our incompetence masks our ability to recognize our incompetence.

But this really explains it:

With an “unknown unknown,” I don’t even know what questions to ask, let alone how to answer those questions.

Towards the end:
For years, I have had my own version of the story of the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In my version, God appears before Adam and Eve, and tells them that they have disobeyed Him. He admonishes them, and they will have to leave immediately. Everything will be completely grotesque, grim, ghastly and gruesome outside of Eden. God spares them no detail.

Adam and Eve, both crestfallen and fearful, prepare to leave, but God, feeling perhaps a little guilty for the severity of his decision, looks at them and says, “Yes, things will be bad out there, but I’m giving you self-deception so you’ll never notice.”

Gives meaning to ignorance is bliss, right?

[jpinpb]

Yeah. What a brain twister.

If Wheeler was too stupid to be a bank robber, perhaps he was also too stupid to know that he was too stupid to be a bank robber — that is, his stupidity protected him from an awareness of his own stupidity.

I like this:

It became known as the Dunning-Kruger Effect — our incompetence masks our ability to recognize our incompetence.

But this really explains it:

With an “unknown unknown,” I don’t even know what questions to ask, let alone how to answer those questions.

Towards the end:
For years, I have had my own version of the story of the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In my version, God appears before Adam and Eve, and tells them that they have disobeyed Him. He admonishes them, and they will have to leave immediately. Everything will be completely grotesque, grim, ghastly and gruesome outside of Eden. God spares them no detail.

Adam and Eve, both crestfallen and fearful, prepare to leave, but God, feeling perhaps a little guilty for the severity of his decision, looks at them and says, “Yes, things will be bad out there, but I’m giving you self-deception so you’ll never notice.”

Gives meaning to ignorance is bliss, right?

[jpinpb]

Yeah. What a brain twister.

If Wheeler was too stupid to be a bank robber, perhaps he was also too stupid to know that he was too stupid to be a bank robber — that is, his stupidity protected him from an awareness of his own stupidity.

I like this:

It became known as the Dunning-Kruger Effect — our incompetence masks our ability to recognize our incompetence.

But this really explains it:

With an “unknown unknown,” I don’t even know what questions to ask, let alone how to answer those questions.

Towards the end:
For years, I have had my own version of the story of the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In my version, God appears before Adam and Eve, and tells them that they have disobeyed Him. He admonishes them, and they will have to leave immediately. Everything will be completely grotesque, grim, ghastly and gruesome outside of Eden. God spares them no detail.

Adam and Eve, both crestfallen and fearful, prepare to leave, but God, feeling perhaps a little guilty for the severity of his decision, looks at them and says, “Yes, things will be bad out there, but I’m giving you self-deception so you’ll never notice.”

Gives meaning to ignorance is bliss, right?

[jpinpb]

Yeah. What a brain twister.

If Wheeler was too stupid to be a bank robber, perhaps he was also too stupid to know that he was too stupid to be a bank robber — that is, his stupidity protected him from an awareness of his own stupidity.

I like this:

It became known as the Dunning-Kruger Effect — our incompetence masks our ability to recognize our incompetence.

But this really explains it:

With an “unknown unknown,” I don’t even know what questions to ask, let alone how to answer those questions.

Towards the end:
For years, I have had my own version of the story of the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In my version, God appears before Adam and Eve, and tells them that they have disobeyed Him. He admonishes them, and they will have to leave immediately. Everything will be completely grotesque, grim, ghastly and gruesome outside of Eden. God spares them no detail.

Adam and Eve, both crestfallen and fearful, prepare to leave, but God, feeling perhaps a little guilty for the severity of his decision, looks at them and says, “Yes, things will be bad out there, but I’m giving you self-deception so you’ll never notice.”

Gives meaning to ignorance is bliss, right?

[jpinpb]

eavesdropper – nice Star Trek exchange!

I wish you wouldn’t have picked Palin as an example. I agree w/the example, but I can see this turning to politics. I hope not. I got the point, which was anosognosia.

[jpinpb]

eavesdropper – nice Star Trek exchange!

I wish you wouldn’t have picked Palin as an example. I agree w/the example, but I can see this turning to politics. I hope not. I got the point, which was anosognosia.

[jpinpb]

eavesdropper – nice Star Trek exchange!

I wish you wouldn’t have picked Palin as an example. I agree w/the example, but I can see this turning to politics. I hope not. I got the point, which was anosognosia.

[jpinpb]

eavesdropper – nice Star Trek exchange!

I wish you wouldn’t have picked Palin as an example. I agree w/the example, but I can see this turning to politics. I hope not. I got the point, which was anosognosia.

[jpinpb]

eavesdropper – nice Star Trek exchange!

I wish you wouldn’t have picked Palin as an example. I agree w/the example, but I can see this turning to politics. I hope not. I got the point, which was anosognosia.

[Arraya]

[quote=jpinpb]
For years, I have had my own version of the story of the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In my version, God appears before Adam and Eve, and tells them that they have disobeyed Him. He admonishes them, and they will have to leave immediately. Everything will be completely grotesque, grim, ghastly and gruesome outside of Eden. God spares them no detail.

Adam and Eve, both crestfallen and fearful, prepare to leave, but God, feeling perhaps a little guilty for the severity of his decision, looks at them and says, “Yes, things will be bad out there, but I’m giving you self-deception so you’ll never notice.”

Gives meaning to ignorance is bliss, right?[/quote]

If you subscribe to the idea that religious or spiritual beliefs contain self-deceptive aspects, then the first archeological evidence of self-deception occurs in Western Europe approximately 30,000 to 40,000 years ago. A profound change in behavior took place at this time. In fact, this segment of human development has been referred to as ‘the creative explosion’ or ‘cultural takeoff.’ In addition to evidence of ritualized religious behavior, art, music, jewelry for personal adornment, trappings of status, and even the concept of inherited status, suddenly appears in the archeological record.

“We have physically evolved very little in the past one hundred thousand years—and certainly not in the past 30,000. So I would have to say that self-deception had little or nothing to do with our physical evolution. Self-deception, no doubt, played a substantial role in our cultural evolution.

“Humans are the only animals known to self-deceive. There is no evidence to suggest that any other species besides our own possesses this capability. At a conference of the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences in 1991, Washington University anthropologist Robert Sussman said, ‘Self-deception is what separates us qualitatively from all other animals and even early hominids.’

“Hierachies certainly exist within animal groups. But, a hierachial system does not need deception or self-deception to exist. Science generally recognizes two types of thinking. Concrete thinking—thought that occurs within the realm of the senses—is the form of thinking found in most animals. Concrete thinking is a linear progression like beads on a string or rungs on a ladder.

“Abstract reasoning is the second form of thinking and is found in only a few species: humans, chimps, gorillas, dolphins, etc. Since an intentional lie is an abstraction, only animals with brains complex enough for abstract reasoning can intentionally deceive. A chimpanzee is a notorious liar. But it takes the even more complex brain of a human to self-deceive. Self-deception is a relative newcomer on the behavioral scene. It didn’t help make us human. Self-deception didn’t exist until human brains reached their current level of complexity. In short, self-deception had no part in making us—we made self-deception.”

[Arraya]

[quote=jpinpb]
For years, I have had my own version of the story of the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In my version, God appears before Adam and Eve, and tells them that they have disobeyed Him. He admonishes them, and they will have to leave immediately. Everything will be completely grotesque, grim, ghastly and gruesome outside of Eden. God spares them no detail.

Adam and Eve, both crestfallen and fearful, prepare to leave, but God, feeling perhaps a little guilty for the severity of his decision, looks at them and says, “Yes, things will be bad out there, but I’m giving you self-deception so you’ll never notice.”

Gives meaning to ignorance is bliss, right?[/quote]

If you subscribe to the idea that religious or spiritual beliefs contain self-deceptive aspects, then the first archeological evidence of self-deception occurs in Western Europe approximately 30,000 to 40,000 years ago. A profound change in behavior took place at this time. In fact, this segment of human development has been referred to as ‘the creative explosion’ or ‘cultural takeoff.’ In addition to evidence of ritualized religious behavior, art, music, jewelry for personal adornment, trappings of status, and even the concept of inherited status, suddenly appears in the archeological record.

“We have physically evolved very little in the past one hundred thousand years—and certainly not in the past 30,000. So I would have to say that self-deception had little or nothing to do with our physical evolution. Self-deception, no doubt, played a substantial role in our cultural evolution.

“Humans are the only animals known to self-deceive. There is no evidence to suggest that any other species besides our own possesses this capability. At a conference of the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences in 1991, Washington University anthropologist Robert Sussman said, ‘Self-deception is what separates us qualitatively from all other animals and even early hominids.’

“Hierachies certainly exist within animal groups. But, a hierachial system does not need deception or self-deception to exist. Science generally recognizes two types of thinking. Concrete thinking—thought that occurs within the realm of the senses—is the form of thinking found in most animals. Concrete thinking is a linear progression like beads on a string or rungs on a ladder.

“Abstract reasoning is the second form of thinking and is found in only a few species: humans, chimps, gorillas, dolphins, etc. Since an intentional lie is an abstraction, only animals with brains complex enough for abstract reasoning can intentionally deceive. A chimpanzee is a notorious liar. But it takes the even more complex brain of a human to self-deceive. Self-deception is a relative newcomer on the behavioral scene. It didn’t help make us human. Self-deception didn’t exist until human brains reached their current level of complexity. In short, self-deception had no part in making us—we made self-deception.”

[Arraya]

[quote=jpinpb]
For years, I have had my own version of the story of the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In my version, God appears before Adam and Eve, and tells them that they have disobeyed Him. He admonishes them, and they will have to leave immediately. Everything will be completely grotesque, grim, ghastly and gruesome outside of Eden. God spares them no detail.

Adam and Eve, both crestfallen and fearful, prepare to leave, but God, feeling perhaps a little guilty for the severity of his decision, looks at them and says, “Yes, things will be bad out there, but I’m giving you self-deception so you’ll never notice.”

Gives meaning to ignorance is bliss, right?[/quote]

If you subscribe to the idea that religious or spiritual beliefs contain self-deceptive aspects, then the first archeological evidence of self-deception occurs in Western Europe approximately 30,000 to 40,000 years ago. A profound change in behavior took place at this time. In fact, this segment of human development has been referred to as ‘the creative explosion’ or ‘cultural takeoff.’ In addition to evidence of ritualized religious behavior, art, music, jewelry for personal adornment, trappings of status, and even the concept of inherited status, suddenly appears in the archeological record.

“We have physically evolved very little in the past one hundred thousand years—and certainly not in the past 30,000. So I would have to say that self-deception had little or nothing to do with our physical evolution. Self-deception, no doubt, played a substantial role in our cultural evolution.

“Humans are the only animals known to self-deceive. There is no evidence to suggest that any other species besides our own possesses this capability. At a conference of the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences in 1991, Washington University anthropologist Robert Sussman said, ‘Self-deception is what separates us qualitatively from all other animals and even early hominids.’

“Hierachies certainly exist within animal groups. But, a hierachial system does not need deception or self-deception to exist. Science generally recognizes two types of thinking. Concrete thinking—thought that occurs within the realm of the senses—is the form of thinking found in most animals. Concrete thinking is a linear progression like beads on a string or rungs on a ladder.

“Abstract reasoning is the second form of thinking and is found in only a few species: humans, chimps, gorillas, dolphins, etc. Since an intentional lie is an abstraction, only animals with brains complex enough for abstract reasoning can intentionally deceive. A chimpanzee is a notorious liar. But it takes the even more complex brain of a human to self-deceive. Self-deception is a relative newcomer on the behavioral scene. It didn’t help make us human. Self-deception didn’t exist until human brains reached their current level of complexity. In short, self-deception had no part in making us—we made self-deception.”

[Arraya]

[quote=jpinpb]
For years, I have had my own version of the story of the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In my version, God appears before Adam and Eve, and tells them that they have disobeyed Him. He admonishes them, and they will have to leave immediately. Everything will be completely grotesque, grim, ghastly and gruesome outside of Eden. God spares them no detail.

Adam and Eve, both crestfallen and fearful, prepare to leave, but God, feeling perhaps a little guilty for the severity of his decision, looks at them and says, “Yes, things will be bad out there, but I’m giving you self-deception so you’ll never notice.”

Gives meaning to ignorance is bliss, right?[/quote]

If you subscribe to the idea that religious or spiritual beliefs contain self-deceptive aspects, then the first archeological evidence of self-deception occurs in Western Europe approximately 30,000 to 40,000 years ago. A profound change in behavior took place at this time. In fact, this segment of human development has been referred to as ‘the creative explosion’ or ‘cultural takeoff.’ In addition to evidence of ritualized religious behavior, art, music, jewelry for personal adornment, trappings of status, and even the concept of inherited status, suddenly appears in the archeological record.

“We have physically evolved very little in the past one hundred thousand years—and certainly not in the past 30,000. So I would have to say that self-deception had little or nothing to do with our physical evolution. Self-deception, no doubt, played a substantial role in our cultural evolution.

“Humans are the only animals known to self-deceive. There is no evidence to suggest that any other species besides our own possesses this capability. At a conference of the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences in 1991, Washington University anthropologist Robert Sussman said, ‘Self-deception is what separates us qualitatively from all other animals and even early hominids.’

“Hierachies certainly exist within animal groups. But, a hierachial system does not need deception or self-deception to exist. Science generally recognizes two types of thinking. Concrete thinking—thought that occurs within the realm of the senses—is the form of thinking found in most animals. Concrete thinking is a linear progression like beads on a string or rungs on a ladder.

“Abstract reasoning is the second form of thinking and is found in only a few species: humans, chimps, gorillas, dolphins, etc. Since an intentional lie is an abstraction, only animals with brains complex enough for abstract reasoning can intentionally deceive. A chimpanzee is a notorious liar. But it takes the even more complex brain of a human to self-deceive. Self-deception is a relative newcomer on the behavioral scene. It didn’t help make us human. Self-deception didn’t exist until human brains reached their current level of complexity. In short, self-deception had no part in making us—we made self-deception.”

[Author]

Posts