5 ms·

> unfortunately, confidence isn't a perfect signal. I think that's a major understatement. There's the Dunning–Kruger effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dun

> unfortunately, confidence isn't a perfect signal. I think that's a major understatement. There's the Dunning–Kruger effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect and the world is complex and it's very difficult to get a clear and definitive picture of it. The better your understanding, the more hedged and less definitive it will tend to be, and that does not tend to come across as confidence in your understanding.

gowld 9y ago
You should read the link you shared, since it contradicts your claims. Your post is an illustration of the false Dunning-Kruger effect that is astoundingly commonly seen in forum posts citing the Dunning-Kruger effect. "The group of competent students underestimated their class ranks, while the group of incompetent students overestimated their ranks; yet the incompetent group did not estimate their class ranks as higher than the ranks estimated by the competent group."
- jamesrcole 9y ago
  That doesn't contract my claim at all. It would only contradict it if I had claimed that the incompetent people estimated their rant as above some competent group. All that is required for my claim is that they overestimate their abilities.
  - Nomentatus 9y ago
    Right - you claimed mere imperfection, in a limited case. But we also know that experts making predictions outside their field are on average more confident but less accurate than non-experts. So the "folk mythology" version of D-K actually does apply at times, just not to "people of low ability."
  - aaron695 9y ago
    It absolutely constricts you. You being funny? >> unfortunately, confidence isn't a perfect signal. >I think that's a major understatement. >There's the Dunning–Kruger effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect "major understatement" People rank themselves very well. They don't rank "spacing" all that well but they rank absolutely accurately. For a "major understatement" I would expect it would be so bad they rank incorrectly which is NOT the case (as per stated by your wiki link, Dunning–Kruger could be wrong) People rank themselves in the order they should be accurately. (With variance blah blah blah)
xg15 9y ago
I think the problem boils down to how to take meaningful action without confidence. E.g., if I admit that, not only am I not confident, but I see the world as so complex that I can't be possibly confident about it, how can I decide what to do? If my view of the world is correct than my actions would at best have unpredictable results and at worst would be reckless. So the best course of action would be not to do anything. However, would strip me of all agency and any ability to do anything about things in the world I see as problematic.
- cableshaft 9y ago
  > if I admit that, not only am I not confident, but I see the world as so complex that I can't be possibly confident about it, how can I decide what to do? You get input from others with knowledge, consider things as much as you can, and recommend a course of action / make a decision based on what you know, understanding that it might not end up being the right one. I've seen it happen often in small businesses and startups I've worked with, and I've seen people make what in hindsight were the wrong decision. But that's just the way things are for everyone, really. You can't see the future but have to make a decision anyway at some point.
- lsc 9y ago
  >E.g., if I admit that, not only am I not confident, but I see the world as so complex that I can't be possibly confident about it, how can I decide what to do? You need to learn to face uncertainty. You know some of your data is incorrect, and that you sometimes make mistakes processing that data. But if you are calibrated correctly, you should be more sure of some things (that the sun will rise tomorrow) than others (that I'll get that job I just interviewed for) - I mean, I think both of those things are true, but one I'm very certain of the first, the other? I'd say it has a 60% chance of happening. It's totally reasonable to make a bet that will cause me to lose something important if the sun doesn't come up tomorrow. It's much less reasonable to make a bet that will cause me to lose something important if I don't get that job. >If my view of the world is correct than my actions would at best have unpredictable results and at worst would be reckless. So the best course of action would be not to do anything. If you literally make no conscious effort to do anything? It's likely you will die of dehydration in the next few days. Doing nothing is very likely to be much worse than randomly picking from actions deemed culturally reasonable... and you can probably do a lot better than random through weighing what uncertain information you have. I mean, complexity is hard, but it's ultimately going to get you better decisions than a system where you are absolutely certain of things.
baxtr 9y ago
No I agree it’s not. But, my experience from many years is: people want leadership that is confident, which way to go. Event though, it might not be the right (I wonder if there is ever a right way, because as you correctly say, the world is utterly complex)
- slx26 9y ago
  Well, and that's precisely what we need to adress, some of the things people want. I firmly believe we should teach about this in schools. Knowledge about biases is very relevant to critical thinking, and critical thinking to a fairer society. ^ I was writting with more confidence and assertively than usual there ;)
  - baxtr 9y ago
    Maybe. But then again it is really difficult to change human nature

gowld 9y ago

You should read the link you shared, since it contradicts your claims. Your post is an illustration of the false Dunning-Kruger effect that is astoundingly commonly seen in forum posts citing the Dunning-Kruger effect. "The group of competent students underestimated their class ranks, while the group of incompetent students overestimated their ranks; yet the incompetent group did not estimate their class ranks as higher than the ranks estimated by the competent group."

jamesrcole 9y ago
That doesn't contract my claim at all. It would only contradict it if I had claimed that the incompetent people estimated their rant as above some competent group. All that is required for my claim is that they overestimate their abilities.
- Nomentatus 9y ago
  Right - you claimed mere imperfection, in a limited case. But we also know that experts making predictions outside their field are on average more confident but less accurate than non-experts. So the "folk mythology" version of D-K actually does apply at times, just not to "people of low ability."
- aaron695 9y ago
  It absolutely constricts you. You being funny? >> unfortunately, confidence isn't a perfect signal. >I think that's a major understatement. >There's the Dunning–Kruger effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect "major understatement" People rank themselves very well. They don't rank "spacing" all that well but they rank absolutely accurately. For a "major understatement" I would expect it would be so bad they rank incorrectly which is NOT the case (as per stated by your wiki link, Dunning–Kruger could be wrong) People rank themselves in the order they should be accurately. (With variance blah blah blah)

xg15 9y ago

I think the problem boils down to how to take meaningful action without confidence. E.g., if I admit that, not only am I not confident, but I see the world as so complex that I can't be possibly confident about it, how can I decide what to do? If my view of the world is correct than my actions would at best have unpredictable results and at worst would be reckless. So the best course of action would be not to do anything. However, would strip me of all agency and any ability to do anything about things in the world I see as problematic.

cableshaft 9y ago
> if I admit that, not only am I not confident, but I see the world as so complex that I can't be possibly confident about it, how can I decide what to do? You get input from others with knowledge, consider things as much as you can, and recommend a course of action / make a decision based on what you know, understanding that it might not end up being the right one. I've seen it happen often in small businesses and startups I've worked with, and I've seen people make what in hindsight were the wrong decision. But that's just the way things are for everyone, really. You can't see the future but have to make a decision anyway at some point.
lsc 9y ago
>E.g., if I admit that, not only am I not confident, but I see the world as so complex that I can't be possibly confident about it, how can I decide what to do? You need to learn to face uncertainty. You know some of your data is incorrect, and that you sometimes make mistakes processing that data. But if you are calibrated correctly, you should be more sure of some things (that the sun will rise tomorrow) than others (that I'll get that job I just interviewed for) - I mean, I think both of those things are true, but one I'm very certain of the first, the other? I'd say it has a 60% chance of happening. It's totally reasonable to make a bet that will cause me to lose something important if the sun doesn't come up tomorrow. It's much less reasonable to make a bet that will cause me to lose something important if I don't get that job. >If my view of the world is correct than my actions would at best have unpredictable results and at worst would be reckless. So the best course of action would be not to do anything. If you literally make no conscious effort to do anything? It's likely you will die of dehydration in the next few days. Doing nothing is very likely to be much worse than randomly picking from actions deemed culturally reasonable... and you can probably do a lot better than random through weighing what uncertain information you have. I mean, complexity is hard, but it's ultimately going to get you better decisions than a system where you are absolutely certain of things.

baxtr 9y ago

No I agree it’s not. But, my experience from many years is: people want leadership that is confident, which way to go. Event though, it might not be the right (I wonder if there is ever a right way, because as you correctly say, the world is utterly complex)

slx26 9y ago
Well, and that's precisely what we need to adress, some of the things people want. I firmly believe we should teach about this in schools. Knowledge about biases is very relevant to critical thinking, and critical thinking to a fairer society. ^ I was writting with more confidence and assertively than usual there ;)
- baxtr 9y ago
  Maybe. But then again it is really difficult to change human nature