The Dunning-Kruger Effect: The real problem with America

[Doc Savage Fan]

Well, for example, democrats want a middle class tax cut which would apply to most voters, but Republicans want those cuts to also add 700 billion to the deficit and go to the top 2 percent. An intelligent average person would see that Republicans are serving the wealthy and a tiny minority but folk who have power via money. But try to prove it and you will be fed a ton of bull shit. And the brain dead won't see it.

Democrats are great! See how smart I am!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzqkOn9YMQ8

 

[HumblePie]

Okay first off, Moonbeam actually made two intelligent posts for once in my opinion at the very beginning of this thread. After that, I have no idea what he degenerated into except being off in Moonie world.

Second, Cyclo I have to ask this question. Why was LK's generalized comments of the "right" taken to heart by you? Not once did LK specifically state that you personally were pushing or even wanting some of the current crop of political airheads like Palin and O'Donnell as candidates. Yet you felt a need to rush right in here and start defending yourself.

bamacre. Wow, I'm impressed for once.

There is one more thing I would like to point out though from the Dunning-Kruger effect is that of "skilled" people that DO rate themselves correctly. They come off as either know-it-alls or showoffs. That severely irritates the hell of "unskilled" people when they see that. They don't exactly know "why" they feel threatened by someone that has skill and both shows and expresses it. They only know that the person is being an elitist ass, despite the fact that they are unskilled and constantly are over-rating themselves.

Do I feel that much of Western culture is being heavily influenced in a negative way by the Dunning-Kruger effect? Yes.

Do I feel that the East Asian countries where the have a culture that is the opposite of the Dunning-Kruger effect of that of the Western world is also having a negative effect? For example the populace at large is taught to always feel they are inadequate, despite not being so, and it leads to a higher suicide rate and lower birth rate as correlations. Yes.

The Dunning-Kruger effect is nothing but a natural coping survival mechanism. One, like many, that can be destructive if it reaches blown out proportions. Society is replete with the destructiveness of overdone survival mechanisms that once brought our race from the past. This is just another example.


But I will state I do agree with LK's assessment about the current "push" of the right's political figures and media output channels at this current time to prey upon this effect with their current attacks who's basis focus on intellectualism, science, and religion to name a few examples.

 

[werepossum]

Hehe, surely you see the silliness of your claim. In the first place what you take from that quote is what you are able to carry, not much in your case, and two, what was said there is only a tiny fraction of what he means by change. You really need to examine the shallowness of your thinking. This is deeply robotic.

I do have this silly habit of believing people mean what they say until proven otherwise. Granted he means much more by change, but this little quote very well symbolizes his plan for us - near-total control by the government elite over every facet of our lives. You can't get much more intrusive than how much one eats or the temperature of one's home, nor much farther from the core concept of America than the concept that "every other country" should have a veto of these things.

Why is his middle named included in the quote? Did you use Bush's middle name every time you referred to him in a post? What is the relevance of his middle name that requires it be highlighted in this manner when it isn't done for other presidents?

- wolf

Bush II was known by his middle name, or at least initial. I think the quote I copied and pasted had it. I've removed the Hussein just for you, Wolf, though for the life of me I can't see how that makes the quote any more palatable.

 

[nobodyknows]

Prove anything you just said.

Until you've been around the horn as many times as I (and apparently Moonie) have you won't or would refuse to accept as proof anything we could present, so why even try??

 

[piasabird]

My, my, you are as intelligent as my shoe size. Name calling is for school kids.

 

[TheDoc9]

This seems to be a very real problem. Too many on the right are too stupid to understand what their own intellectual shortfalls are. You see it on this forum every day. You see it in candidates such as Palin, O'Donnel, Angle...etc. You see these idiots shout from the rooftops without any logic, reason, or basis. They do it because they cannot understand they are stupid.

What's worse is that these are the people the stupid people are advocating.

We have fallen far as a population. Paine, Jefferson, Franklin, Adams...etc, may not have all been the best educated, but they were smart. They were intelligent. They had logic. Now we think that the dumber the person, the better. It started with Reagan and rolled through to GW.

Why the battle against intellectualism? Because the stupid people are too stupid to understand they are too stupid to understand.

http://www.demsfightinwords.com/wordpress/?p=2837

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

Why did you come back to this forum LK, I for one was enjoying your absence.

 

[Atreus21]

Until you've been around the horn as many times as I (and apparently Moonie) have you won't or would refuse to accept as proof anything we could present, so why even try??

Because it might at least indicate that you have an argument.

 

[Atreus21]

Nice try, but in a thread where the topic is folks are too stupid to know they are stupid you're asking for proof they are stupid. You seem not to have picked up on the fact that's impossible if you are one of them.

Fools convinced against their will are of the same opinion still.

Okay, let's see if your method works for me.

Democrats are baby-murderers. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a victim of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Again, are you guys listening to yourselves?

I think I used to respect LK before he posted this thread. It says alot about the supposed intellectual-superiority of the left when they are so bewildered by the opposition that, ironically, they forsake intellectual argument in favor of insults.

 

[JSt0rm]

Okay, let's see if your method works for me.

Democrats are baby-murderers. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a victim of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Again, are you guys listening to yourselves?

I think I used to respect LK before he posted this thread. It says alot about the supposed intellectual-superiority of the left when they are so bewildered by the opposition that, ironically, they forsake intellectual argument in favor of insults.

Your strawman doesnt fit because only one side is intellectually dishonest and is propping up candidates that are not intellectual or intelligent and they see that as a good trait. This is the problem with the modern republican party. They are devolving.

 

[mrCide]

Why did you come back to this forum LK, I for one was enjoying your absence.

P&N's been a shit-hole for years, what difference does it make?

 

[woolfe9999]

I do have this silly habit of believing people mean what they say until proven otherwise. Granted he means much more by change, but this little quote very well symbolizes his plan for us - near-total control by the government elite over every facet of our lives. You can't get much more intrusive than how much one eats or the temperature of one's home, nor much farther from the core concept of America than the concept that "every other country" should have a veto of these things.



Bush II was known by his middle name, or at least initial. I think the quote I copied and pasted had it. I've removed the Hussein just for you, Wolf, though for the life of me I can't see how that makes the quote any more palatable.

It doesn't make the quote any more palatable. The issue of the middle name is separate. Bush II was only known as "W" (the initial, but not the actual name) to dintinguish him from his father. If we didn't have two George Bushes as POTUS, know one would ever have used it. In any event, you know very well why some people choose to include the middle name in Obama's case. The whole "Obama is a secret Muslim" thing is beneath you.

I think it was prudent to remove it.

- wolf

 

[Bird222]

I do have this silly habit of believing people mean what they say until proven otherwise. Granted he means much more by change, but this little quote very well symbolizes his plan for us - near-total control by the government elite over every facet of our lives. You can't get much more intrusive than how much one eats or the temperature of one's home, nor much farther from the core concept of America than the concept that "every other country" should have a veto of these things.

Nowhere in that quote did I see him saying anything about government forcing people to do anything. I could make the statement that 'we can't keep eating like we are', but that doesn't mean I am going to get government to make people stop eating at McDonalds.

 

[werepossum]

Nowhere in that quote did I see him saying anything about government forcing people to do anything. I could make the statement that 'we can't keep eating like we are', but that doesn't mean I am going to get government to make people stop eating at McDonalds.

Ah, the "everything he says is meaningless fart gas" defense. One of my favorites! If we are to assume that candidates' statements are not candidates' intentions, then I suppose a handsome face and swell TelePrompter performance are as good reasons as any to select the leader of the free world.

The last part of that quote - and it's not usually mentioned in the quote because he didn't use it in every speech with this phrase and it's often lost in the thunder applause - is "and that's not going to happen on my watch." If you want to believe his preferred mechanism to make these changes is the Easter Bunny (Ramadan Bunny?) or perhaps just his own electrifying almightiness, it's still a free country. Actually he DID say his election would be marked as the day the seas began to recede, so you may have a point . . .

Politics is so hard, do we want a President whose election can control the sea level and presumably global warming, or a President whose election will cause the crippled to walk . . . (That last was John Edwards' promise on the election of John Kerry if you've forgotten.)

 

[Atreus21]

Your strawman doesnt fit because only one side is intellectually dishonest and is propping up candidates that are not intellectual or intelligent and they see that as a good trait. This is the problem with the modern republican party. They are devolving.

They'd say the exact same thing of the democrat party.

 

[CycloWizard]

Second, Cyclo I have to ask this question. Why was LK's generalized comments of the "right" taken to heart by you? Not once did LK specifically state that you personally were pushing or even wanting some of the current crop of political airheads like Palin and O'Donnell as candidates. Yet you felt a need to rush right in here and start defending yourself.

Except for when he said,

So what have you presented here? I've already shown we can go in this circle forever. However, it does nothing to refute the actual behavior you guys are showing in advocating the candidates that really show ignorance, thus, you advocate ignorance and cannot realize it because you lack the skill to see such ignorance.

My posts before this nonsensical one were simply pointing out the absurdity of making such an accusation in the form of a logical fallacy. LK stated that the right refused to use logic, all the while using a hasty generalization as the foundation of his argument.

 

[LegendKiller]

Why did you come back to this forum LK, I for one was enjoying your absence.

I never left. Where'd you scrape out underneath from? My left nut?

 

[LegendKiller]

Your strawman doesnt fit because only one side is intellectually dishonest and is propping up candidates that are not intellectual or intelligent and they see that as a good trait. This is the problem with the modern republican party. They are devolving.

This is what even bamacre (who agrees with me on...practically nothing) can recognize. The Republican party is devolving into a bunch of "not me's" and knuckle dragging freaks.

Instead of utterly disowning them (as I have), they just keep accepting whoever is tossed at them, without any consideration as to their intellectual, logical, or moral viability.

I mean, for fucks sake, the *LAST* person who should be preaching family values is McCain (who dumped his wife who was in an accident for a beauty queen), or Palin (my daughter is a slut), or O'Donnel (who has never had a family)...etc.

Yet, somehow, these people are their heroes. When was the last time you saw Cyclo, Fear, or anybody else starting a thread deriding Palin or her ilk? You won't because they can't be intellectually honest and say..."Wow, these people are fucking morons, do I really want them to represent me?"

This self deception and devolution of their party, their intelligence, and their logic, has resulted in a brain-dead dittohead mentality led by the likes of Beck (Cash4Gold!) and Limbaugh (who himself is a drugged out man-whore who has no morality or scruples).

Effectively the right has sold their soul for what? A handful of platitudes and money (I will eat my own lunch and not share, fuck all of you poor people).


I mean, seriously, can you guys honestly justify your party anymore? Can you honestly say that you aren't deceiving yourselves?

Quite frankly, I don't think you can because one can just look at this thread and see Dunning Kruger in effect.

What I find amazing is that the single person I would call a Republican in this thread, actually is the only one who has stood up and recognized the reality of the situation. I applaud that and admire him massively for it.

The rest of you are RINOs.

 

[LegendKiller]

Except for when he said,

My posts before this nonsensical one were simply pointing out the absurdity of making such an accusation in the form of a logical fallacy. LK stated that the right refused to use logic, all the while using a hasty generalization as the foundation of his argument.

Self-identify much? This faux duhversion and righteous indignation is a joke. You take umbrage not because you have a problem with me lumping you into the crowd falling victim to the Dunning Kruger, but because you self-identify with them without me having to do it.

If the shoe fits...

 

[MooseNSquirrel]

Liberals must be really, really smart to figure out that the group of people unable to provide for their own health care, income, education, child care, etc. are actually the smart ones. Yup, no way THAT could be selfish stupidity, clearly the party that demands that "someone else" provide all things for them are so super intelligent that they've evolved beyond self-sufficiency and competency to focus on recognizing intelligence. Soon liberals will be so smart that they'll have to have people to change their diapers.

Run, Forrest. Run! You're a smart Gump!

Dumbass.

As yes the old "if you are poor you must be dumb" canard, but even worse, the idea that wealth exists in a vacuum.

What is it that infamous person once said? "Let them eat cake?"

Ha.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I never left. Where'd you scrape out underneath from? My left nut?

"Why the battle against intellectualism? Because the stupid people are too stupid to understand they are too stupid to understand." - LegendKiller

You should get some kind of prize...best thread ever!

 

[HumblePie]

My posts before this nonsensical one were simply pointing out the absurdity of making such an accusation in the form of a logical fallacy. LK stated that the right refused to use logic, all the while using a hasty generalization as the foundation of his argument.

Generalizations for a demographic when speaking at large are considered part of context. the fact you chose to include yourself in that generalization is what I find strange. There is no logic fallacy being done when speaking with a generalization if it is in context to the subject at hand.

Yes, people will take umbrage at the fact that a generalization seems to be a 100% thing, when most rational people that hear it realize that it is not. There are exceptions to every rule. Don't be so think skinned to feel as if he was directly insulting you. To do so is to use a logic fallacy.

 

[CycloWizard]

Self-identify much? This faux duhversion and righteous indignation is a joke. You take umbrage not because you have a problem with me lumping you into the crowd falling victim to the Dunning Kruger, but because you self-identify with them without me having to do it.

If the shoe fits...

You're an ignorant prick. You think your political views make you an intellectual. Them's the facts. Everything else you've said in this thread and elsewhere stems from your stupidity, which flows forth from your premises. Reality is evident in the text of this thread as I have already quoted, regardless of how you try to divert attention from your own idiociy.

 

[CycloWizard]

Generalizations for a demographic when speaking at large are considered part of context. the fact you chose to include yourself in that generalization is what I find strange. There is no logic fallacy being done when speaking with a generalization if it is in context to the subject at hand.

Yes, people will take umbrage at the fact that a generalization seems to be a 100% thing, when most rational people that hear it realize that it is not. There are exceptions to every rule. Don't be so think skinned to feel as if he was directly insulting you. To do so is to use a logic fallacy.

Yes, master. Your Jedi mind tricks worked on me. Wave your hands some more, borrow some more verbage from LegendKiller, and your conversion to the dark side will be complete: you will become the pseduo-intellectual you think you are now.

 

[HumblePie]

You're an ignorant prick. You think your political views make you an intellectual. Them's the facts. Everything else you've said in this thread and elsewhere stems from your stupidity, which flows forth from your premises. Reality is evident in the text of this thread as I have already quoted, regardless of how you try to divert attention from your own idiociy.

Wow, calm down. You are the one that baited him when you took umbrage to a demographic generalization. You came at him first, and he was immature to be flippant back, but your response here is not warranted. You do nothing for your position with this post.

 

[Mursilis]

I mean, for fucks sake, the *LAST* person who should be preaching family values is McCain (who dumped his wife who was in an accident for a beauty queen), or Palin (my daughter is a slut), or O'Donnel (who has never had a family)...etc.

How's that relevant, exactly? I've never been a doctor, but I know smoking is bad for my health.

Yet, somehow, these people are their heroes. When was the last time you saw Cyclo, Fear, or anybody else starting a thread deriding Palin or her ilk? You won't because they can't be intellectually honest and say..."Wow, these people are fucking morons, do I really want them to represent me?"

What's the point of starting a thread to state the obvious?