The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJames Thompson Archive
Dunning Kruger Effect Done with.
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Dunning Kruger effect done with.

The Dunning Kruger effect is a lovely finding, which seems to suggest that the cognitively incompetent are too incompetent to realise that they are incompetent. They over-estimate their abilities. Brighter people are more aware of their short-comings, and under-estimate their abilities.

Once the Dunning Kruger effect was announced, much of the mess of life made sense. The dull are full of passionate intensity, while the best lack all conviction.

However, for a few years now it has been clear that the finding was a bit too lovely. Most of the apparent effect was regression to the mean. Also, most of the samples were drawn from university students, who are supposedly bright, or at the very least an upwardly biased sample of ability, but the restriction of range called into question the generalisation of the finding. Even on better non-university samples there are still other statistical problems with getting people to judge themselves against an average. For example, older and more experienced drivers are better than younger less-experienced ones, and so it is natural for older drivers to think they are above average, and insurers agree with them. It is the old problem about the mean and the median when applied to non-normal distributions.

To give them their due, in their original article Dunning and Kruger had wittily admitted that they might have made a mistake in finding the effect, and were too dull to have noticed it.

Now a new study has dug deeper into a broader set of data, and comes to the conclusion that once you make a correction for regression to the mean there is something there, but that something doesn’t amount to much. The effect is too small to account for anything.

Reevaluating the Dunning-Kruger effect: A response to and replication of Gignac and Zajenkowski (2020)
Curtis S.Dunkel, Joseph Nedelec, Dimitri van der Linden
Intelligence Volume 96, January–February 2023, 101717

There is always a sense of loss when a useful explanatory finding has to be dropped because the data don’t support it. Of course, we should be above such sentimentality, but empiricism is a brutal calling. You have to take down an explanatory scaffolding you had come to rely upon, and sally forth in ignorance until some other theory finds evidence in its favour.

So, it seems that we must drop this notion, and move on.

 
• Category: Science • Tags: Dunning-kruger Effect 
Hide 52 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Notsofast says:

    the timing of the reevaluation seems suspicious, just when the tptb would most want it to disappear, it is memory holed. seems to me that instead of shit canning the concept they should use updated woke guinea pigs and run the numbers again.

    • Replies: @Realist
  2. ruralguy says:

    Having worked with thousands of engineers and scientists, over forty-some years, on developmental efforts, re-developmental efforts, research, and proposal teams, I’ve found that the most competent, by far, are those individuals who are aggressive and somewhat abnormal.

    In research efforts, I’ve seen these engineers/scientists do the work of large teams of “normal” engineers/scientists far faster and with much better results. In developmental efforts, I’ve measure the productivity of “normal” engineers, using different metrics, finding they are usually only 5% or so, efficient. They comply with social rules and cooperate, but their focus is usually on social or financial goals. The “abnormal” engineers, by comparison, are extremely efficient (too small of a subset to measure with metrics), because they often are obsessed with their work, often ruminating on it away from work.

    What’s especially astonishing, I’ve seen many instances in which Human Resource Departments and/or management fire those abnormal engineer/scientists, for behaviors that are not socially acceptable. When that superstar performer is replaced with a large team of “normal” engineers, that teams struggles, often unsuccessfully, to meet schedule, cost and technical requirements. But, proper social behaviors usually take precedence over results.

    Psychologists do base their theories on properly sampled populations and the science of their field, unlike my theory which is based on personal experience without knowing Psychological Science. But, what they lack is immersion in the problem, as I have, over 40 some years.

  3. It is not done away with; Dunning Kruger Effect itself is subject to D-K Effect: once we discover it, it is the ‘aha’ moment; we feel we can explain everything about learning. After learning that it is not such a magical tool after all, now we are in the valley of despair, . This article says there is something indeed, but not much. Slowly we will climb the slope of enlightenment…

    So the D-K Effect is true indeed!

  4. The Dunning-Kruger effect wasn’t discovered, but invented to provide whatever dominating party with a pseudo-scientific but ‘sciency’-sounding explanation (read here: ad hoc argument) for as to why ‘science-deniers’ deny the things that are undoubtedly true even if these things were never actually proven in the first place.

    According to the Dunning-Kruger effect then, science-deniers simply deny the established science because they are too stupid to realize that they are stupid. Because they’re stupid, whatever objections they may come up with can be safely discarded and ignored. Your refutal of the concept will surely not herald the end of what has become a politically useful tool to bash and censor people.

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  5. dearieme says:

    But what of the Kunning Druger Effect? Surely it’s undeniable?

  6. Realist says:
    @Notsofast

    Yes, indeed, quite suspicious.

  7. There is also the “midwit” meme. Those who believe history is full of nuances and both– or multiple– sides have to be examined and assessed are the truly ignorant ones.

    No, the super-smart know that the simplistic view held by the stupid is actually the right one!

    This attitude is deeply totalitarian. And thoroughly top-down.

    • Replies: @Sollipsist
  8. A123 says: • Website

    DK may work with individuals, but it does not apply to groups.

    In politics is there a larger set of DK cycles that moves the Overton Window, instead of reaching a plateau?

    Look at the absurd myth of man made climate impact.

    DK # 1 — Global Cooling
    DK # 2 — Global Warming
    DK # 3 — Climate Variability

    Each time that peak crazy is reached, there is a fall. However, it starts a new cycle that will result in an even crazier peak.

     

     

    Saint Greta had been risen up to frown us unto the next extreme of climate mythology.
    ___

    Leftoids and Sheeple are incapable of learning. Errors do not result in course correction.

    DK does not apply to brain dead hordes.

    PEACE 😇

  9. FKA Max says: • Website
    @ruralguy

    When that superstar performer is replaced with a large team of “normal” engineers, that teams struggles, often unsuccessfully, to meet schedule, cost and technical requirements. But, proper social behaviors usually take precedence over results.

    The opposite effect has been observed with star scientists, but they were not replaced by “normal” scientists or collaborators of the star scientist, but by “outsider” scientists: https://www.unz.com/article/no-david-cole-race-realism-research-continues-despite-the-new-dark-age/?showcomments#comment-5683789

    Image Source: https://www.nber.org/digest/mar16/does-science-advance-one-funeral-time or https://archive.ph/Y0l6j

    • Thanks: ruralguy
  10. FKA Max says: • Website

    That would be a pity, not being able to cite the DK effect anymore.

    However, I had a look at the paper https://www.gwern.net/docs/iq/2023-dunkel.pdf and it had quite some significant limitations, this one stood out to me:

    The conclusions of the current study should be tempered by at least
    two limitations. First, while the objective measure of intelligence employed in the Add Health is a well-validated measure it is focused on verbal cognitive abilities and exhibits a restricted range of scores.

    I’m not quite sure what this implies exactly, but it could be that the DK effect does not apply for (il)literacy anymore, but still for (in)numeracy?

    So, maybe there is still hope for us DK-effect-citing enthusiasts…

    • Replies: @FKA Max
    , @James Thompson
  11. The Dunning-Kruger effect graphic has not spelt the word “experience” correctly.

  12. Legba says:
    @ruralguy

    I am familiar with this – The ‘Everybody is Stupider Than Me’ method of coping with one’s shortcomings.

  13. @A123

    But you are ‘living’ proof of the existence of rabid, racist, Rightwing Dunning-Krugerism, which you illustrate here yet again. Using covers of Time magazine as ‘evidence’ nails it, but you are TOO stupid to realise so. And I thought that Jews were the, self-declared, greatest intellects on Earth.

  14. @ruralguy

    Very interesting observations, which I tend to agree with. When working with teams, I always pointed out that if there was one person capable of solving the problem, there was no need for a team.
    It has also happened in medical research. Some rebels solve problems, and then the normal medics don’t pay attention, because the solution comes from an unsociable rebel.

    • Agree: ruralguy
  15. The Phenomenon

    The original 1999 paper by Krüger and Dunning
    Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One’s Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments,
    defines a phenomenon, which is readily observed, immediately applicable, and easily verified (just try correcting someone who is unskilled and unaware that he is unskilled, or stupid and unaware that he is stupid). Rather than a study and proof, it is a formalisation of a phenomenon that was known intuitively but not properly identified. That is the reason for its fame, and even more for the fame of the concept, the memes.

    Of course, the anti-scientific Jews wrote a few papers than introduced doubt without attacking it squarely (typical Taldmudic strategy), so Ehrlinger; Johnson; Banner; Dunning; and Kruger wrote a second paper in 2008
    Why the unskilled are unaware: Further explorations of (absent) self-insight among the incompetent
    Which destroyed the attacks, reinforced the original paper, and added more insights as to causes.

    So for the intellectual, for those not looking for click-bait answers to serious questions, the original paper, is recommended.

    Re:

    Now a new study has dug deeper into a broader set of data, and comes to the conclusion that once you make a correction for regression to the mean there is something there, but that something doesn’t amount to much. The effect is too small to account for anything.

    Fiddlesticks. First, there is ongoing research in that field, and such papers do not deny or counter the original, they merely add to the body of knowledge.

    Second, one paper does not destroy another paper, especially not one that is so well-received. So you are pushing the usual tribal agenda, the result is telling: to elevate the stupid and stupidly confident, holding up one single paper divorced from its context.

    The Concept

    The Dunning Krüger Effect is a concept, it has become famous in the form of many memes.  It is a horribly simplified understanding of the problem, but it is beloved of the click-bait generation.  The graphic being an example, including the spelling error.

    Second, the graphic (almost all memes of the concept), is false: the only thing that is even slightly correct is the axes, the graph is made-up nonsense.  The X-axis is Knowledge, and can be a percentage, the same as the Y-axis.

    The famous concept has another, perhaps greater, error. It attempts to describe the progress out of the initial Unskilled & Unaware state, into awareness and experience (not knowledge). As if that adorable sequence can be shown of a graph that is strictly science. Which demeans the science, but gives the stupid the notion that there is a way out of stupid, by just doing the same thing over and over again. This is consistent with the Jew propaganda, that anyone can do anything, no education necessary, based on the hysterical anti=science of Evolutionism, that if gazillion molecules collided for a quintillion years thos dead molecules will somehow create life.

    It also has a faint reference to Mastery, the four levels of competence.  So again, it attempts to marry two things that have a connection intuitively, but not formally, they are best understood separately.

    The stupid usually have just one tool in their toolkit, and every problem looks like a nail (Abraham Maslow, the Law of the Instrument).

    So the concept, the Dunning Krüger Effect, as made famous by the numerous memes with pretty graphics; false graphs; and a variety of sequences out of the hole, has very little to do with the original and second papers.  It has everything to do with the prosecution of the Jewish Agenda, the destruction of the intellect and the elevation of the stupid.

    And the science, the original papers remain, and continue to be the basis of ongoing study and research, such as the subject paper, which actually adds to the body of knowledge, rather than negating it ir subtracting from it.

    You merely prove you are an anti-scientist, a pseudo-scientist, a Shabbos goyim.

    • Thanks: Polphil
    • Replies: @Anonymous
  16. @ruralguy

    Nothing against your comment itself, but …

    It has nothing at all to do with the original Krüger & Dunning papers Unskilled and Unaware 1999 & 2008, which is about the quite real phenomenon, and the reasons for it.   Details in #15.

    The Dunning Krüger Effect is concept, simplistic and bastardised, plus an added sequence about how to get out of it, in the stupid belief that the stupid can be something other than stupid. Not a skerrick of science behind it.  Heavily marketed by the tribe in the form of a variety of memes, the graphic in the article being one.

    Of course, being a simplistic, stupid caricature, rather than a precise scientific definition, different people read different things into it, as yours does, which is then two degrees away from the original.

    It basically proves that the concept as presented is stupid and quite useless, but its fame and common usage serves to demean the original papers.

    The original papers remains unaffected, and the research into the subject continues.

    Separately, the idiot that wrote the article, clueless about the difference between the original papers and the concept (memes) thinks that one such paper destroys the original papers, instead of appreciating that it is part of the ongoing research, adding to the body of knowledge.

  17. @Reg Cæsar

    Somewhere between too dumb to bother with petty details and too smart to bother with petty details 😀

  18. @A123

    Great post on magazine covers on “climate”.

    The elites only get to lie to me once.

    After the second time they are stupid.

    After the third time they are insane.

    After the fourth time they have proven themselves to be a danger to themselves and others.

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  19. I have been saying for years that it is simply a troll on people who would want to use a term with a name like “Dunning-Kruger Effect” to sound intelligent. It’s kind of genius in that sense.

  20. res says:

    Initial quick response. I had not realized idiot memers had so misconstrued the Dunning Kruger results to produce graphs like the joke at the top. Here is a relevant graph from the paper.

    More here.
    https://graphpaperdiaries.com/2017/08/20/the-real-dunning-kruger-graph/

    The first logic and reasoning graph does look a bit like the meme though.

    Some things which seem clear.
    – Restriction of range is key to evaluating this correctly.
    – Properly defining comparison groups is also key.
    – Domain being evaluated matters and performance across domains will vary.
    – Restriction of range is especially interesting in terms of how people frame their competence judgement in terms of environment. For example, are the Cornell undergrads being asked to compare with their Cornell peers or the broader population? And do people apply those corrections effectively? This ties in with my frequent gripe about people who are fairly bright but have seldom or never been around the super bright (too often the smartest person in the room) being overly confident of their ability.
    – I haven’t (re)visited the relevant papers yet (hence the “quick comment” statement), but if regression to the mean refers to people’s judgment shading towards average (rather than future performance doing so) then I don’t think that is cause to dismiss the observation. I’ve always assumed that accompanied by a bit of overoptimism across the board (more at the bottom) were the bulk of the Dunning Kruger effect.
    – Nonlinearity of performance matters (as noted in some comments). Percentiles can obscure important variation. Especially in the tails (cf. IQ).

    Interesting topic. Thanks, Dr. Thompson.

    • Replies: @James Thompson
  21. FKA Max says: • Website
    @FKA Max

    One line of inquiry that could validate the invalidity of the DK effect, in particular the part that high performers underestimate their skill level, is Cipolla’s research in the field of human stupidity and the conclusions he has drawn from it, namely that stupidity is evenly distributed:

    Always and inevitably, everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation. The probability that a certain person (will) be stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_M._Cipolla#%22The_Basic_Laws_of_Human_Stupidity%22_(1976)

    This, counterintuitively, includes a much higher number of stupid/dysfunctional individuals among high IQ persons, who overestimate not underestimate their abilities, capabilities and skill level. Mensa comes to mind: Bad News for the Highly IntelligentMore than a quarter (26.7 percent) formally diagnosed with a mood disorder […] far higher than the national averages of around 10 percenthttps://www.scientificamerican.com/article/bad-news-for-the-highly-intelligent/ or https://archive.ph/5v2rP

    I believe the DK effect is still a useful (rhetorical) tool/device and I personally still consider it mostly valid, but it should be supplemented with The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity https://www.unz.com/aanglin/after-weeks-of-nonsense-elon-finally-restores-donald-trumps-twitter-account/?showcomments#comment-5670365 in order to avoid/prevent the trap/mistake of putting high IQ and/or high status individuals (who can be extraordinarily stupid/dysfunctional and unfriendly) on a pedestal.

    Whenever I analyzed the blue-collar workers I found that the fraction σ of them were stupid. As σ’s value was higher than I expected (First Law), paying my tribute to fashion I thought at first that segregation, poverty, lack of education were to be blamed. But moving up the social ladder I found that the same ratio was prevalent among the white-collar employees and among the students. More impressive still were the results among the professors. Whether I considered a large university or a small college, a famous institution or an obscure one, I found that the same fraction σ of the professors are stupid. So bewildered was I by the results, that I made a special point to extend my research to a specially selected group, to a real elite, the Nobel laureates. The result confirmed Nature’s supreme powers: σ fraction of the Nobel laureates are stupid.

    https://archive.ph/x9H05#selection-345.0-345.859 or http://harmful.cat-v.org/people/basic-laws-of-human-stupidity/

    Additional recommended viewing:

    Survival of the friendliest: How dogs evolved to be man’s best friend | 60 Minutes

    The rare disorder that could hold the secret of what makes us who we are | 60 Minutes Australia

    They’re the happiest, friendliest, most loveable people you’re ever likely to meet. Just being around them is a joy, an absolute delight – but something’s wrong here. They suffer from a rare and baffling genetic disorder called Williams Syndrome, what the scientists call ‘a beautiful mystery’. The ‘Willies’, as they’re affectionately known, also have low IQs but the amazing thing is, they can teach the rest of us a thing or two. They could just hold the key to that age old argument of nature versus nurture – the secret of what makes us the way we are.

  22. Palmm says:
    @ruralguy

    Yes, AFAIK, IQ is one of the most scientifically rigorous psychiatry theories out there. IQ really is about speed and efficiency. On a pop science view, yes, those people are viewed as “weirdos” many times, and most people don’t know how to handle them.

    I remember once, Dr. Jordan Peterson, mentioned that because of the rigor of IQ and racial differences, many psychologists “hate it” because one of the few truly scientific products of psychiatry happens to be “racist.”

  23. @Justvisiting

    Only a TRULY malicious cretin would reject nearly 200 years of science and increasingly calamitous observations, preferring a couple of TIME magazine covers. Were your parents imbeciles, too?

  24. @That one comment

    The Dunning-Kruger Effect does not pertain to those who question the consensus with rational arguments. It describes those who are taken in by lies and imbecilities peddled by professional disinformationists because they are too stupid and ignorant, or lazy, and stupidly arrogant to boot, massively overestimating their own intelligence., to better inform themselves. When a cretin prefers a couple of TIME magazine covers to nearly 200 years of science and observations from reality, you have a Dunning-Krugerite-or worse.

  25. jb says:
    @A123

    You idiot! You are fooling yourself! The 1973 and 1977 Time Magazine “Big Freeze” cover stories you’re making such a big deal over are both available online (here and here), and neither has anything to do with long term climate change. The first is about energy shortages due to the 1973 Arab oil embargo, while the second is simply about the unusually cold winter America was having that year. Whether or not the Dunning Kruger effect actually exists, the fact that so many self-anointed experts like you are pontificating about climate change while pulling bonehead moves like this certainly helps explain why so many people think it does.

    It’s true that there actually was some concern back in the 60s and 70s over the possibility that we could be about to enter another ice age. (Not entirely unreasonable, as ice ages do come and go, and we are due for another one sometime in the next few thousand years. In fact we may have put it off by pumping so much CO2 into the atmosphere!). But I’m old enough to remember this, and believe me, it was a minor story, one of many that came and went in the popular press, and in no way comparable to the broad level of concern over climate change today. I do have a certain level of climate change skepticism myself, but for the most part it isn’t based on arguments put forward by the denier community; arguments which, like the “big freeze” thing, generally strike me as being even more ideologically motivated than those of climate change activists, and very often just kind of dumb.

    • Agree: mulga mumblebrain
    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  26. @ruralguy

    Asperberger’s was originally called Engineers Disease in the UK as the Cambridge team who researched it found a disproportionate number of engineers and mathematicians as parents of such children. Socially awkward with high output (in a narrow field) is consistent with autistic tendencies. Two of my living family carry formal autism spectrum diagnoses. I haven’t wanted one. I can’t see the benefit. Those engineers may deliver output but it might not be on target.

    • Replies: @dearieme
  27. Cook-ie says:

    I see the U.K has done away with the effect that this article highlights.

    They have announced a new coal mine…there goes the green revolution of wind and sun power.

    Now that the reality of the energy war with Russia has bitten the public…its back to good old fossil fuels.

    Its amazing what a bit of shivering and hunger can do for ones belief systems.

    • Replies: @dearieme
  28. @FKA Max

    Thanks for your comment. Good to hear from you. It is a short vocabulary test, so it will not give fine detail, but it comes from a very good sample, so on balance acceptable, particularly because Vocabulary is a good test of general intelligence.

  29. @res

    Thanks for your comment. Good to hear from you again. Comparison groups are certainly an issue. Since people preferentially associate with similar people, either through family networks or their occupational equals, there is often a limited understanding of how greatly intelligence varies. To complicate matters, comparisons depend on benchmarks, and unless those are carefully specified the answers will vary noisily.

    I think I should have used the graphs from actual research papers to make clear what the actual claimed phenomenon is, rather than the silly ones popularly available.

  30. dearieme says:
    @Philip Owen

    Tell me, did the Cambridge team do their research locally? Cambridge is stuffed with mathematicians, engineers, and physicists.

    If I were looking for a field of strangely incomplete males I’d look at computer programmers. Maybe there weren’t many around when the Cambridge investigation was pursued?

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    , @dux.ie
  31. dearieme says:
    @Cook-ie

    True but it’s coking coal that they’ll be mining not steam coal.

    (And that’s assuming that a ton ever does get mined.)

  32. @dearieme

    Simon Baron-Cohen, a researcher based in Cambridge, seems to have coined the phrase in pre internet days. This is the earliest paper, 1997, I can find that points in that direction. He started work in the 1980s. It’s paywalled but the abstract gives you the gist.

    https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1362361397011010

    • Replies: @dearieme
  33. dearieme says:
    @Philip Owen

    Thank you. As you imply the abstract carries the answer:

    “A different prediction might have been that parents would be over-represented in occupations involving mathematics and/or computing since these do not necessarily require a talent for folk psychology, but do require a talent for folk mathematics or folk physics. However, mathematics is a low-frequency occupation, whilst these days computing is part of almost every occupation. Hence our prediction regarding engineering.”

    I still don’t know why he didn’t look at physicists: scared of upsetting The Cavendish perhaps.

  34. dux.ie says:
    @dearieme

    Baron-Cohen recruited 1000 subjects through the UK National Austic Society. There was no breakdown of all the subjects occupations, only those that have austic children.

    They based their assertion only on the raw percentages. That will give a biased view as the more populous occupations will skewed the results. The RiskRatio=%NAS/%Male gives a better metric not influenced by the popularity of the occupation. In fact wrt the %Male of the occupations, Engineers come out fourth in RiskRatio ranking. They did include Computing and Science.

    Suprising the Protective Forces come up top as the %Male is very small. My expected Accounting come up second, as accounting requires intense attention to routine detail, great memory and great focus usually found in high functioning austistics HFA. The employment of HFA in software quality assurance is a later discovery. https://qualitestgroup.com/insights/blog/the-autism-spectrum-and-software-testing/

    • Replies: @dux.ie
    , @Anonymous
  35. dearieme says:

    The first thing that strikes me is how broad the categories are. “Scientist” includes many tribes of rather distinctive intellectual bents (I’d say), “Teachers” even more so.

    no breakdown of all the subjects occupations, only those that have autistic children.

    Or, strictly only those who have autistic children and joined the NAS. There could be a sizeable selection effect there.

    Hm. Could that have been an apprentice effort from Baron-Cohen?

  36. dux.ie says:
    @dux.ie

    It is not a fluke that the rank 1 riskratio is protective forces (police, military). It is common enough that UK has the National Police Autism Association https://www.joiningthepolice.co.uk/supporting-diversity/support-organisations/national-police-autism-association

    Google cannot find any Engineer Autism Association or Accountant Autism Association. Though there is film “Accountant” on high functioning austistic accountant with military skills. I could have got the idea from there.

  37. Anonymous[260] • Disclaimer says:
    @dux.ie

    Baron-Cohen recruited 1000 subjects through the UK National Austic Society.

    Baron-Cohen is also a jew, who, at one point, stated that he was very much interested in getting more and more people diagnosed with autism so his institution could cash in on government grants. Mind you, after working on autism for 40 years, he still hasn’t come up with any biological evidence nor proper definition of what it is.

  38. Antiwar7 says:
    @ruralguy

    Is that you, Elon Musk?

    • Replies: @Sean
  39. dearieme says:
    @Sean

    When did shagging step-daughters become a thing? Are there any mentions in the classical writers or the old testament? Did Confucius have anything to say? Are the Laws of Hammurabi silent on the matter?

  40. Alrenous says: • Website

    Modern scientific papers do not warrant anything like that level of trust. Thinking for yourself has no shortcut.

  41. @jb

    My only quibble is your definition of a desire to prevent near term human extinction caused by anthropogenic climate destabilisation as ‘ideological’. It seems eminently humane and practical to me, but perhaps you define such concerns as ‘ideological’.

    • Replies: @jb
  42. jb says:
    @mulga mumblebrain

    Nobody worth listening to believes that climate change is going to cause human extinction — that’s just dumb. But there are a lot of serious people who think the consequences could be quite bad, so the issue needs serious consideration. My point about ideology is that both sides seem to be motivated to some degree by non-scientific ideological concerns, and to the extent they are it undermines their credibility. However I do think the deniers are worse in this regard, and have less credibility.

    My own opinion is that climate change is probably real, but probably won’t be as bad as the hysterics are saying. However there is a non-trivial chance the hysterics could be right, which makes it a real conundrum. How much are you willing to spend to ward off a disaster that probably isn’t ever going to happen, but would be really bad if it did? People face this question all the time when deciding how much to pay for insurance on their homes or businesses, but we are talking here about insuring the whole world, and nobody has any experience with that.

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  43. Santocool says:

    ”The Dunning Kruger effect is a lovely finding, which seems to suggest that the cognitively incompetent are too incompetent to realise that they are incompetent. They over-estimate their abilities. Brighter people are more aware of their short-comings, and under-estimate their abilities.”

    theoretically and simplistically.

  44. Anymike says:

    The Dunning-Kruger Effect is just more seedy pop psychology – right up there with the Kenneth Clark doll studies, the Kinsey Report and Shere Hite.

    Like most such things, there is some amount of applicability, but it in the case of Dunning-Kruger it tells us more about what the professional elite and the upper middle class thinks about itself than it does about anyone else.

  45. Factorize says:

    Dr. Thompson, I am very interested on your take on the latest news in Alzheimer’s; several clinical trials have read out with moderately strong results. The UK has played a leading research role in advancing Alzheimer science and these efforts now appear to be bearing fruit. It is no great gamble to expect that the FDA will approve Lecanemab given the recent presentation of its phase 3 trial. I have been following the Alzheimer story carefully for some time and it appears that we are now at the beginning of the endgame to the cure. The social implications for solving the dementia crisis will be far reaching and would be well worth a blog post to discuss further.

    Best Wishes for the Christmas season and the New Year!

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  46. @Factorize

    Got shares in Biogen and Eisai, have you? Don’t mind a little brain bleeding or swelling, then?

    • Replies: @Factorize
  47. @jb

    ‘Non-trivial’ alright, but let’s take the gamble. In FACT, it is already too late, because, even if we stopped producing greenhouse gases overnight the irreversible positive feedbacks from nature have already commenced.
    These include, but are not limited to, greenhouse gases caused by decomposing organic material released from permafrost, greenhouse gases trapped in frozen submarine clathrates, CO2 released from warming oceans and from dying tropical forests, the albedo flip in the Arctic as highly reflective summer sea ice is replaced by dark, heat-absorbing sea, and the rapid weakening of the AMOC of the north Atlantic.
    These are occurring at rates FAR above previous, natural, climate disturbances, save for comet or meteor impacts, or supervolcano eruptions, but those effects are shorter lived. So you are ill-informed, but cannot recognise it, ie Dunning-Kruger has come to visit. And, unsurprised, I see that you see human existence as a crude calculation of dollars and cents.

  48. Factorize says:
    @mulga mumblebrain

    Thank you for your reply mulga mumblebrain.

    This blog is devoted to cognitive science. The emerging cure for Alzheimer’s is the cognitive science and medical breakthrough of the century. Discussing how society will adjust to our now rapidly approaching dementia free society would seem highly appropriate for this blog as preserving the cognitive health of our thought leaders for possibly additional multiple decades has profound implications for the functioning of society. The actual specific details of the particular products need not be the focus of the conversation.

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  49. Anonymous[259] • Disclaimer says:
    @Incisive One

    You merely prove you are an anti-scientist, a pseudo-scientist, a Shabbos goyim.

    “goyim” is plural. There is no such thing as “a” Shabbos goyim. You merely prove that you’re a stupid fucking idiot.
    ___________________
    The Dunning-Kruger effect is nothing more than a tool for douches to criticize other people. It’s what douches do after someone hips them to the fact that comparing someone else to Hitler is not a winning strategy. The douche toolbox is a limited one.

    There’s also Dunning-Kruger Auto-blindness Syndrome, which is almost universal. In this syndrome someone diagnosing others with Dunning-Krueger fails to see his own incompetence. Until I pass away it will remain almost universal.

    It’s douches all the way down.

    Try the Douche Home Self-test:

    If you think “How do I tell if I’m a douche?” or “I’m not a douche” then you are most certainly a douche.

  50. @Factorize

    Dementia is best prevented. ‘Cures’ are generally publicised to pump up the stock price, and the later ‘disappointments’ are, so far, inevitable. Prevention id not profitable, so it’s off the table.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All James Thompson Comments via RSS