I've always put it like this. Smart people underestimate their intelligence because they know how much there is to know. While stupid people overestimate their intelligence because they can't understand how much there is to know.
Or:
You don't know what you don't know.
This hurt my heart for how accurate it is. Unbelievable how much knowledge and experience each person is lacking in thousands of topics.
Educate yourselves.
SMEs are usually extremely confident, and are usually intelligent, intelligent people will speak up when they are confident in the subject.
Yall don't know actual smart people.
Subject matter expert.
For example your doctor, or a civil engineer when talking about their fields will be quite confident.
Reddit hive mind is poison.
I’m pretty sure you’re being downvoted for, whether intentionally or not, insulting the person you’re responding to despite not actually disagreeing with them. They said that intelligent people underestimate themselves, and unintelligent overestimate themselves, not that intelligent lack confidence and unintelligent have it. Those may seem the same on the surface, but they are very different things.
Intelligent people do not underestimate themselves.
Intelligent people are typically self reflective, and this results in the ability to accurately gage if they can perform for most tasks.
The only failing I've seen in Intelligent people is the false assumption that other people are similar to themselves.
So yall don't actually know smart people
Assuming we’re defining intelligence by how much you know in a particular subject, as we have been in prior comments, intelligent people [provably](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect) underestimate themselves on average. Not even close to the same rate that unintelligent people overestimate themselves, but enough to be statistically significant.
Absolutely false. Smart people are more likely to be SMEs, such as possessing a doctorate, an engineer, etc.
https://images.app.goo.gl/6pJv87qjkFJNbMpY6
Stupid people overestimate themselves.
Average and slightly above average underestimate themselves.
And smart people have a very good accurate estimation of themselves.
Only if you define the point at which you become intelligent as the point in which you accurately assess your intelligence, which makes this conversation moot. Clearly, the people in this thread are defining intelligence differently, perhaps by the more common colloquial meaning of “above average,” in which case my statement that intelligent people will underestimate themselves at a lower rate than unintelligent will overestimate themselves is accurate. The derivative of your dunning-kreuger graph says as much. As intelligence goes to infinity, your tendency to underestimate yourself goes toward 0*. As intelligence goes to zero, overestimating yourself goes toward infinity*. The slope of that change decreases as intelligence increases. Given that nobody can reach maximum nor minimum intelligence, intelligent people will underestimate themselves at a rate that may or may not be significant depending on their level of understanding. All I said is the point at which many researchers consider people intelligent still allows for a statistically significant amount of underestimation.
*or some constant of similar nature
I'm defining intelligence the same way.
Doctors, engineers, physicists, are all SMEs and are dominated by above average individuals, who will have, due to their own intelligence, a very good idea of where they are.
You are playing semantics with a graph that isn't used to talk about intelligence, but perceived ability to do X task.
Intelligent people do not under estimate themselves.
Average people do.
Yeah and the loudest people in business meetings are often seen as the best contributors. That’s how you end up with businesses run by stupid windbags while quiet geniuses propel the company forward despite their leaders’ awful decision making.
And when the colleagues who aren't the loudest demonstrate any acumen, it suddenly threatens the empty talkers.
I wish people weren't like this.
The only pushback I'd give is that we all need to learn public speaking and articulation. But again that isn't just talking for the sake of talking.
This is how I can often tell that someone is knowledgeable in what they are talking about, there's usually a lot of qualifying language.
Very little in life has absolute, black and white, 100% answers to it.
I am a music professional and find it amusing now when I hear / see people try teach others wrong information about music - especially on Reddit. What I can confidently say is, there is MUCH more wrong information out there than right. When you see someone chuckling in the corner when you speak you mostly likely should shut up.
Just be careful.
Just because someone is a brilliant engineer doesn’t mean they know anything about brain surgery. And vice versa.
Sometimes we trust the wrong people. Opinions are opinions no matter how smart we are. Even objective success in a given field can be deceiving.
Very true, it's the "halo effect" right? Just because someone is brilliant in one field doesn't mean they know everything else. Jordan Peterson is a good example. He's a great psychiatrist but then he often talks about the lives of lobsters, and different diets and stuff, and some people listen like he's an expert on everything.
A streamer I watch has confidence ratings for back-seating. If you want to give advice you have to give it a X/10 rating. Something like 5/10 is fine if someone isn't sure, but he roasts people who do 10/10 ratings that are incorrect.
Everyone forgets the last part of the dunning-Kruger curve where people who are very capable think they are capable and are confident in their ability.
Fudge, this is my job recently. It's like no one in charge of hiring can tell a competent person from someone willing to bullshit nonstop. Had multiple people come in claiming to experts at one thing or another, only to come in on their first day and just blatantly not know what any machine does.
Interview:"Oh yeah, i could totally come in and start programming on that machine tomorrow."
First day: "Oh, I worked on an older model, I can't do a goddamn thing with your machine."
And then the chucklefucks in charge of hiring the chucklefucks know it will reflect poorly on *them* if they fire people they just hired for incompetence, so they keep them on board **and** try to cover for them.
Some of the dumbest comments I have seen on reddit come from someone who says "lol" and then gives their take, as if no other take exists...and it seems for them it's true.
Ironically, this is not what the Dunning Kruger study showed, despite everyone on the internet presenting it as such.
Basically, the study showed that people estimate their abilities/skills to be closer to the average than they actually are.
iirc the original study looked at test scores.
Therefore poor scorers thought “that test was hard and I did poorly, but it was probably hard for everyone so most people probably did poorly, even if they did better than me.”
The people who scored well thought “that was easy for me so it was probably easy for everyone. So while I did well, everyone else probably did well too.”
The people who are bad at things are generally aware that they are bad at those things.
Thank you man, I’m so tired of the insane number of people confidently “explaining” the dunning kruger effect while being completely and utterly incorrect.
But tbh it’s still funny that they are demonstrating the exact behavior they are explaining
It is also worth noting that the test measures skills and competency, not general intelligence and not “how well you are informed in general issues.”
A cardiologist would be more competent and confident in treating heart failures than an engineer or a lawyer. It makes no insinuation of their overall intelligence.
Well, i can say, that smartness is a subjective thing. And that is all about how you can see people, in my opinion, an example you have cited, has nothing to do with smartness. Measuring someone's intelligence is impossible.
A little learning is a dangerous thing. Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian Spring; There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again.
Smart people will only speak up when they can explain what they're going to say
There's a big difference between knowing something and thinking or believing it
Knowing something implies a foundation, some evidence or reason.
Thinking/believing something is usually shallow at best; there's not much to hold it up
That is a very astute observation. It also has to do with insecurity. An insecure person is afraid to admit they don't know something because they will be embarrassed. A secure person doesn't have that fear.
Which is why clueless folks make the big decisions. What’s the difference between an illiterate and a well educated person if the educated person doesn’t speak up?
I've always put it like this. Smart people underestimate their intelligence because they know how much there is to know. While stupid people overestimate their intelligence because they can't understand how much there is to know. Or: You don't know what you don't know.
Known unknowns and unknown unknowns.
Thank you Secretary Rumsfeld
The circles of knowing/ unknown grow as you learn more.
To paraphrase Mark Twain: It ain’t the things you are uncertain of that gets you in trouble. It’s the things you know for sure that just aren’t so.
This hurt my heart for how accurate it is. Unbelievable how much knowledge and experience each person is lacking in thousands of topics. Educate yourselves.
You nailed it.
SMEs are usually extremely confident, and are usually intelligent, intelligent people will speak up when they are confident in the subject. Yall don't know actual smart people.
Yeah, SMEs will actually get mad and be more than talkative if misinformation happens on their watch.
What's an SME?
I guess Subject Matter Expert, which is not necessarily a smart person, but somebody who knows a lot about a specific topic.
Subject matter expert. For example your doctor, or a civil engineer when talking about their fields will be quite confident. Reddit hive mind is poison.
I’m pretty sure you’re being downvoted for, whether intentionally or not, insulting the person you’re responding to despite not actually disagreeing with them. They said that intelligent people underestimate themselves, and unintelligent overestimate themselves, not that intelligent lack confidence and unintelligent have it. Those may seem the same on the surface, but they are very different things.
Intelligent people do not underestimate themselves. Intelligent people are typically self reflective, and this results in the ability to accurately gage if they can perform for most tasks. The only failing I've seen in Intelligent people is the false assumption that other people are similar to themselves. So yall don't actually know smart people
Assuming we’re defining intelligence by how much you know in a particular subject, as we have been in prior comments, intelligent people [provably](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect) underestimate themselves on average. Not even close to the same rate that unintelligent people overestimate themselves, but enough to be statistically significant.
Absolutely false. Smart people are more likely to be SMEs, such as possessing a doctorate, an engineer, etc. https://images.app.goo.gl/6pJv87qjkFJNbMpY6 Stupid people overestimate themselves. Average and slightly above average underestimate themselves. And smart people have a very good accurate estimation of themselves.
Only if you define the point at which you become intelligent as the point in which you accurately assess your intelligence, which makes this conversation moot. Clearly, the people in this thread are defining intelligence differently, perhaps by the more common colloquial meaning of “above average,” in which case my statement that intelligent people will underestimate themselves at a lower rate than unintelligent will overestimate themselves is accurate. The derivative of your dunning-kreuger graph says as much. As intelligence goes to infinity, your tendency to underestimate yourself goes toward 0*. As intelligence goes to zero, overestimating yourself goes toward infinity*. The slope of that change decreases as intelligence increases. Given that nobody can reach maximum nor minimum intelligence, intelligent people will underestimate themselves at a rate that may or may not be significant depending on their level of understanding. All I said is the point at which many researchers consider people intelligent still allows for a statistically significant amount of underestimation. *or some constant of similar nature
I'm defining intelligence the same way. Doctors, engineers, physicists, are all SMEs and are dominated by above average individuals, who will have, due to their own intelligence, a very good idea of where they are. You are playing semantics with a graph that isn't used to talk about intelligence, but perceived ability to do X task. Intelligent people do not under estimate themselves. Average people do.
Yeah and the loudest people in business meetings are often seen as the best contributors. That’s how you end up with businesses run by stupid windbags while quiet geniuses propel the company forward despite their leaders’ awful decision making.
And when the colleagues who aren't the loudest demonstrate any acumen, it suddenly threatens the empty talkers. I wish people weren't like this. The only pushback I'd give is that we all need to learn public speaking and articulation. But again that isn't just talking for the sake of talking.
Eh, smart people can speculate, but they make it clear they aren’t certain.
And idiots think that is a sign of weakness and ignore them.
This is how I can often tell that someone is knowledgeable in what they are talking about, there's usually a lot of qualifying language. Very little in life has absolute, black and white, 100% answers to it.
This is not a shower thought, it’s an extremely popular but false retelling of the dunning-kruger effect
Which means it's not the dunning-kruger effect.
No; which means it exactly is it.
I am a music professional and find it amusing now when I hear / see people try teach others wrong information about music - especially on Reddit. What I can confidently say is, there is MUCH more wrong information out there than right. When you see someone chuckling in the corner when you speak you mostly likely should shut up.
Just be careful. Just because someone is a brilliant engineer doesn’t mean they know anything about brain surgery. And vice versa. Sometimes we trust the wrong people. Opinions are opinions no matter how smart we are. Even objective success in a given field can be deceiving.
but thats just your opinion, right?
Yup.
Ben Carson and his beliefs on the pyramids is a great example
Very true, it's the "halo effect" right? Just because someone is brilliant in one field doesn't mean they know everything else. Jordan Peterson is a good example. He's a great psychiatrist but then he often talks about the lives of lobsters, and different diets and stuff, and some people listen like he's an expert on everything.
A streamer I watch has confidence ratings for back-seating. If you want to give advice you have to give it a X/10 rating. Something like 5/10 is fine if someone isn't sure, but he roasts people who do 10/10 ratings that are incorrect.
it's called Imposter Syndrome for the smart people and Dunning Kruger Effect for the clueless folks.
impostor syndrome is a different thing.
And the people reading these threads are usually in the opposite group of what they think.
“The fool thinks himself wise; the wise man knows himself to be a fool.”
It’s the Dunning-Krueger effect.
Everyone forgets the last part of the dunning-Kruger curve where people who are very capable think they are capable and are confident in their ability.
Certainly true. There a lot of subtleties in the DK Effect that are beyond the intent of this post
Knowing what you are talking about and being smart are not the same thing.
You seem pretty confident about this. Personally, I’m not so sure.
I doubt it!
prime example is people who post this
Fudge, this is my job recently. It's like no one in charge of hiring can tell a competent person from someone willing to bullshit nonstop. Had multiple people come in claiming to experts at one thing or another, only to come in on their first day and just blatantly not know what any machine does. Interview:"Oh yeah, i could totally come in and start programming on that machine tomorrow." First day: "Oh, I worked on an older model, I can't do a goddamn thing with your machine." And then the chucklefucks in charge of hiring the chucklefucks know it will reflect poorly on *them* if they fire people they just hired for incompetence, so they keep them on board **and** try to cover for them.
Some of the dumbest comments I have seen on reddit come from someone who says "lol" and then gives their take, as if no other take exists...and it seems for them it's true.
The lol replies make me so mad. Or the emojis. They think it makes them right
Yep. It's kind of hilarious because they are often the worst.
[You don't say...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect)
Ironically, this is not what the Dunning Kruger study showed, despite everyone on the internet presenting it as such. Basically, the study showed that people estimate their abilities/skills to be closer to the average than they actually are. iirc the original study looked at test scores. Therefore poor scorers thought “that test was hard and I did poorly, but it was probably hard for everyone so most people probably did poorly, even if they did better than me.” The people who scored well thought “that was easy for me so it was probably easy for everyone. So while I did well, everyone else probably did well too.” The people who are bad at things are generally aware that they are bad at those things.
Thank you man, I’m so tired of the insane number of people confidently “explaining” the dunning kruger effect while being completely and utterly incorrect. But tbh it’s still funny that they are demonstrating the exact behavior they are explaining
Oh the irony
It is also worth noting that the test measures skills and competency, not general intelligence and not “how well you are informed in general issues.” A cardiologist would be more competent and confident in treating heart failures than an engineer or a lawyer. It makes no insinuation of their overall intelligence.
However, a lawyer trying to argue that an engineer should be performing heart surgery would insinuate overall intelligence.
Smart people,.clueless.folks? Not smart folks, clueless people.
Smart people who are clueless in a subject also often fall into this trap.
You seem pretty confident about this.
“Some people speak from experience. Others, from experience, don’t speak.”
Well, i can say, that smartness is a subjective thing. And that is all about how you can see people, in my opinion, an example you have cited, has nothing to do with smartness. Measuring someone's intelligence is impossible.
It takes a very clever man to realize he’s an idiot.
“The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.” Charles Bukowski
This is an absolute fact. Also Experts stay in the job they are in, the idiots are promoted.
magaheads have entered the chat
I'm sure you're just as bad as them.
And the pot calls what he perceives yo be a kettle black.
Buddy, it's incredibly lame to do the "no, you" response. I'm also not a MAGA supporter.
I know you are, but what am I?
Exactly bro. Keep on keeping on with trump supporters living rent free in your head.
The voices in my head charge them rent. Double for you.
This is pathetic. 💀
No - you're pathetic.
Watch out for the guy with Tourette’s that knows everything
A little learning is a dangerous thing. Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian Spring; There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again.
Smart people will only speak up when they can explain what they're going to say There's a big difference between knowing something and thinking or believing it Knowing something implies a foundation, some evidence or reason. Thinking/believing something is usually shallow at best; there's not much to hold it up
Way to speak up there buddy. I joke I joke.
*"They say the empty can rattles the most."*
So you say I’m smart, thanks!
Jokes on you, i am always unsure of myself, and i am stupid.
So extroverts = less intelligent
na i speak all the time on shit im not sure about i just add the context of i am unsure and should be verified.
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt. - source: not Abe Lincoln or Mark Twain
There's a level above this though, which are smart people that speak with the confidence of dumb people, because they know it gets them places.
That is a very astute observation. It also has to do with insecurity. An insecure person is afraid to admit they don't know something because they will be embarrassed. A secure person doesn't have that fear.
Smart people also talk when they have something to say, instead of talking for the sake of talking.
the Donald Trump Rule.
Add a monetary incentive from a monopoly with motive and you have climate science.
Which is why clueless folks make the big decisions. What’s the difference between an illiterate and a well educated person if the educated person doesn’t speak up?