4 ms·

There's an inverse relationship between how good folk think they are vs. how good they actually are. Anyone who's spent time in musician communities will be in

There's an inverse relationship between how good folk think they are vs. how good they actually are. Anyone who's spent time in musician communities will be intimately familiar with the phenomenon. Anyone who's spent time in musician communities will also understand just how good you need to be if you're still doing it after two decades.

ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago
Isn't that pretty much the definition of the Dunning-Kruger effect? I was actually a pretty decent bassist, way back, when mullets were en vogue, but I also knew that I wasn't good enough to stand out from the crowd.
- SaberTail 2y ago
  It's a common misunderstanding of the Dunning-Kruger effect. In actuality, there's a direct relationship between how good a person thinks they are and how good they actually are. Not inverse. The Dunning-Kruger effect is that the people at the low end of the scale tend to rate themselves as slightly better than they are, and people at the high end of the scale tend to rate themselves as slightly worse than they are. The best people know they're good, but they tend to think they're not the best. The worst people know they're bad, but they tend to think they're not the worst.
  - richrichie 2y ago
    This is the best and most succinct explanation of DK. DK is the most abused pop psych in the world.
YZF 2y ago
Good musicians know they're good though. I'm not sure the comparison holds that well for software people. With music you have a lot more immediate feedback. You can record yourself and play back. You can see how long it takes you to learn something technically complex (if you even can learn something very technical). With software sometimes the outcome of decisions can only be seen years later and there's really very little in terms of absolute metrics you can rely on for feedback. Music is a hobby for me but in my circle I haven't seen people that thought they were amazing musicians but really are terrible.

ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago

Isn't that pretty much the definition of the Dunning-Kruger effect? I was actually a pretty decent bassist, way back, when mullets were en vogue, but I also knew that I wasn't good enough to stand out from the crowd.

SaberTail 2y ago
It's a common misunderstanding of the Dunning-Kruger effect. In actuality, there's a direct relationship between how good a person thinks they are and how good they actually are. Not inverse. The Dunning-Kruger effect is that the people at the low end of the scale tend to rate themselves as slightly better than they are, and people at the high end of the scale tend to rate themselves as slightly worse than they are. The best people know they're good, but they tend to think they're not the best. The worst people know they're bad, but they tend to think they're not the worst.
- richrichie 2y ago
  This is the best and most succinct explanation of DK. DK is the most abused pop psych in the world.

YZF 2y ago

Good musicians know they're good though. I'm not sure the comparison holds that well for software people. With music you have a lot more immediate feedback. You can record yourself and play back. You can see how long it takes you to learn something technically complex (if you even can learn something very technical). With software sometimes the outcome of decisions can only be seen years later and there's really very little in terms of absolute metrics you can rely on for feedback. Music is a hobby for me but in my circle I haven't seen people that thought they were amazing musicians but really are terrible.