Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Constraints of the Dunning-Kreuger and Backfire Effects on Meaningful Dialogue

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Constraints of the Dunning-Kreuger and Backfire Effects on Meaningful Dialogue

    The Dunning-Kreuger and Backfire Effects are well established phenomena. How do they effect the discussion of Current Events, or just about anything else for that matter? Given the negative effects of these phenomena is there a way to have a meaningful dialogue; specifically one from which the participants can learn from one another or are people doomed to an unending cycle of mutual misunderstanding and ignorance?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunnin...3Kruger_effect

    https://www.brainpickings.org/2014/0...ffect-mcraney/

  • #2
    Yep, something prevalent on the Left in particular, and something I have noted here several times before.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
      Yep, something prevalent on the Left in particular, and something I have noted here several times before.
      I think these are well established phenomena.. Can you provide some sources that address your claim they are "prevalent on the Left in particular,...?"

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by JustAGuy View Post

        I think these are well established phenomena.. Can you provide some sources that address your claim they are "prevalent on the Left in particular,...?"
        Well, the first and most obvious is that Progressivism, and ideas of the Left are hardly some recent or new phenomena. They have been around for several centuries now. Yet, not one Leftist / Progressive state has proven to be a true success. Instead, the more virulent of them have turned into essentially hell holes for their citizens. Communism proved repeatedly to be an utter fail. Heavy handed Socialism was no better. Europe has backed away from the worst excesses of that that existed in the 60's and 70's. Look at Venezuela or North Korea.
        Yet, Progressives and the Left still want the exact same things to be tried again in numerous countries around the world today.

        Visit the university of your choice. Talk to Progressives and Leftists on campus. Even when you present factual, rational, hard evidence they will deny that you've got some valid argument. They won't even consider they could be wrong. Recently, I attended a local political get together of Progressives (I believe in what Sun Tzu advocated: "Know the enemy and know yourself and you will be safe in one-hundred battles"). My particular issue was a ballot proposition / measure that would force Arizona to become 50% "renewable" energy in the next 20 years. It pretty much forces solar as the ends to that requirement.
        I confronted the spokesperson for that proposition and pointed out all sorts of technical detail as to why it would be a costly disaster. She responded by sighing heavily and rolling her eyes (Yes, I did tell her that she was being insulting which got a shocked reaction from her). She didn't want to even listen to me. I listened to her spiel and paid attention. I was polite.
        Two weeks later she was supposed to be at another of these, but she failed to show up. I wonder why.

        Or, the Democrat running for Mine Inspector (weirdly, this is an elected office in Arizona the only state where it is). I confronted him about how wrong he was on what he'd said about uranium and uranium mining. It was obvious to me that he knew little or nothing about things nuclear and radiation. He didn't want to hear what I had to say, and repeated his talking points which amounted to It's radioactive and nuclear, so it's evil and bad!

        You can look at the current economy. Like it or not, it has gotten way better than it was limping along under Obama. Sure, neither Trump nor Obama are wholly responsible for how the economy does, but both do have a role-- particularly through the executive branch and how the government regulates things.
        Yet, cognitive dissonance on the Left is obvious.



        There is truly a disconnect on the Left. You can't hold a rational argument with them if it differs from their beliefs and political position. You get met with anger, vitriol, and violence. This is clearly cognitive dissonance. The Left simply cannot, or will not, accept a point of view that isn't in line with what they think and want. They can't be wrong and this time they'll prove it!

        Climate change, same thing. "The science is settled..." "98% of scientists agree..." You can try to point out the logical and factual fallacies of statements like that, but the Left won't listen. They've made their mind up and there's nothing you can do to change it.

        It's sort of like this. They've tried in the past:



        And this time for sure:



        Rocky even notes it won't work, not that Bullwinkle pays attention. Cognitive dissonance...

        Comment


        • #5
          So you have no sources to support your claim that the Dunning-Kreuger and Backfire Effects only affect people on the "Left."

          Your lengthy diatribe is proof that these phenomena affect people on the "Right" as well.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by JustAGuy View Post
            So you have no sources to support your claim that the Dunning-Kreuger and Backfire Effects only affect people on the "Left."

            Your lengthy diatribe is proof that these phenomena affect people on the "Right" as well.
            So, your response is an ad hominem coupled to an appeal to authority hum? How do a couple of logical fallacies amount to a rebuttal?

            Comment


            • #7
              The left is not low information the information is just wrong. More specifically statistics don't lie but liars us statistics. The problem with sources to prove a point is that are universities are populated by left leaning people that produce left leaning research. It isn't so much a conspiracy as human nature.
              We hunt the hunters

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                So, your response is an ad hominem coupled to an appeal to authority hum? How do a couple of logical fallacies amount to a rebuttal?
                No and No, I just stated the facts of your reply. You provided no sources and you are subject to the same phenomena as everyone else, Left or Right or Otherwise.

                I'll bet we have a lot more in common than you are willing to believe. Want to compare notes on it?
                Last edited by JustAGuy; 22 Oct 18, 18:04.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
                  The left is not low information the information is just wrong. More specifically statistics don't lie but liars us statistics. The problem with sources to prove a point is that are universities are populated by left leaning people that produce left leaning research. It isn't so much a conspiracy as human nature.
                  So in your opinion the game is rigged in favor of the "left" so to speak. Interesting. It never occurred to me.

                  It does occur to me that you are assuming a position of superior knowledge in which you claim as fact that the two effects are "wrong" and have doubled down on it.

                  I also think you are as affected by the Dunning-Kreuger and Backfire effects as the rest of us.

                  I'll bet we have a lot more in common that you are willing to believe. Want to compare notes on it?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by JustAGuy View Post

                    No and No, I just stated the facts of your reply. You provided no sources and you are subject to the same phenomena as everyone else, Left or Right or Otherwise.

                    I'll bet we have a lot more in common than you are willing to believe. Want to compare notes on it?
                    Telling me I provided no sources is a logical fallacy called appeal to authority. Your claim is my argument is invalid simply because I did not cite authorities or others to back it up. I don't necessarily have to to make a valid point, or argument. Dismissing my argument simply on lack of citation is to make an appeal to authority.

                    It is also, to an extent, an example of the Dunning-Krueger effect in action. In dismissing my argument simply for lack of citation in effect says "I know you are wrong because you didn't provide any citations!" In effect, it is the reverse of throwing a bunch of citations up without presenting any argument to go with them. That amounts to the same sort of irrelevant appeal to authority.

                    And, "Your lengthy diatribe..." is an ad hominem. You do not show how my rebuttal is a diatribe.
                    di∑a∑tribe

                    [ˈdÓəˌtrÓb]




                    NOUN



                    Therefore, what you are doing is simply slinging an insult at the piece making that statement an ad hominem by definition.

                    Aside from that, I didn't say that the Right, or Center, or any other part of the political spectrum doesn't suffer from Dunning-Krueger, only that it afflicts the Left more often than the rest of the spectrum.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                      Telling me I provided no sources is a logical fallacy called appeal to authority. Your claim is my argument is invalid simply because I did not cite authorities or others to back it up. I don't necessarily have to to make a valid point, or argument. Dismissing my argument simply on lack of citation is to make an appeal to authority.

                      It is also, to an extent, an example of the Dunning-Krueger effect in action. In dismissing my argument simply for lack of citation in effect says "I know you are wrong because you didn't provide any citations!" In effect, it is the reverse of throwing a bunch of citations up without presenting any argument to go with them. That amounts to the same sort of irrelevant appeal to authority.

                      And, "Your lengthy diatribe..." is an ad hominem. You do not show how my rebuttal is a diatribe.
                      di∑a∑tribe

                      [ˈdÓəˌtrÓb]




                      NOUN


                      Therefore, what you are doing is simply slinging an insult at the piece making that statement an ad hominem by definition.

                      Aside from that, I didn't say that the Right, or Center, or any other part of the political spectrum doesn't suffer from Dunning-Krueger, only that it afflicts the Left more often than the rest of the spectrum.
                      It's just that I am not interested in your unsubstantiated opinions. I am here to have serious dialogue on an important subject, and the only way to have a profitable exchange of ideas is to bring facts to bear. In your case, stop trying to demonize a group you dislike, and get on with the discussion.

                      So for that reason I ask again: Please provide proof of your claim that the D-K effect "afflicts the Left more often than the rest of the spectrum." If you can't, admit it so we can push on.

                      I'm now thinking this "ad hominem" thing is a ploy. If you repeat it often enough, people who don't actually read my posts may believe it is true. After all, if you can't back up your arguments with facts, perhaps you can get me suspended by using a mantra of "ad hominem attacks" which in and of itself is an "ad hominem" attack on me.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The inability to be self critical effects the dominant culture more which has shifted to the left over the last 6 decades. It's easier to fall into confirmation bias when most of the media, entertainment, and educational institutions confirm your preferred beliefs.

                        One thing that you have to be careful of is that the more intelligent you are the better able you are at rationalization. Logical statements should not be confused with truths. Philosophical logic is related to empiricism only as an aid to formulate testable hypotheses. Mathematical logic is primarily about internal consistency.

                        Knowing how smart you are is useful if it informs you on what strategy you will have to take to come to a conclusion. Often two people of different intelligence can solve the same problem with the major difference being speed. It of course depends on the problem somethings being to complex on a sliding scale of intelligence and difficulty.

                        The best way to judge if your confirmation bias is effecting you is to honestly evaluate your predictions. If you consistently find that things do not work out the way you expected then regardless of intelligence you may be lying to yourself.

                        I understand that we are not talking about confirmation bias but making the switch eliminates the complexity that differences in intelligence adds. Thinking you are smarter than you actually are may or may not be a factor in how likely you are to come to a truthful conclusion. It depends on many unrelated factors.
                        ​​​​​
                        We hunt the hunters

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by JustAGuy View Post

                          It's just that I am not interested in your unsubstantiated opinions. I am here to have serious dialogue on an important subject, and the only way to have a profitable exchange of ideas is to bring facts to bear. In your case, stop trying to demonize a group you dislike, and get on with the discussion.
                          When you do that, and claim that, you're are doing two things to yourself. Firstly, you're providing yourself as a prime example of what he was posting about in post #4 by waving off his post as nothing but "unsubstantiated opinions". Second, you are showing to the rest of us that you are a hypocrite, as the first sentence contradicts the start of the second part.

                          So for that reason I ask again: Please provide proof of your claim that the D-K effect "afflicts the Left more often than the rest of the spectrum." If you can't, admit it so we can push on.
                          Proof was provided. Not only by TAG, but you are giving yourself as proof to this D-K effect with your dismissal of his posts.

                          I'm now thinking this "ad hominem" thing is a ploy. If you repeat it often enough, people who don't actually read my posts may believe it is true. After all, if you can't back up your arguments with facts, perhaps you can get me suspended by using a mantra of "ad hominem attacks" which in and of itself is an "ad hominem" attack on me.
                          If you don't know exactly what "ad hominem" means, then you shouldn't use it against someone--by labeling his post as "diatribe" and not actually engaging it with a counter of your own, you are belittling it and insulting him with a claim that he did not post anything of important, when he clearly answered your question.

                          I honestly thought, from your first couple of posts, that you were seriously interested in discussion and open dialogue--which would have been refreshing from any leftist. Now you've clenched it and shown me, at least, that you are definitely not. That'll be all from you.
                          The First Amendment applies to SMS, Emails, Blogs, online news, the Fourth applies to your cell phone, computer, and your car, but the Second only applies to muskets?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Hida Akechi View Post

                            Proof was provided. Not only by TAG, but you are giving yourself as proof to this D-K effect with your dismissal of his posts.

                            I honestly thought, from your first couple of posts, that you were seriously interested in discussion and open dialogue--which would have been refreshing from any leftist.
                            Thank you for your comments, but I am my own man. I do not let anyone tell me what to think or what to do.

                            I am not a "leftist," and find it offensive to be labeled as such. But I will not whine about it.

                            I am not interested in long, gut-winded, biased opinions and diatribes. Seemingly ridiculous claims such as TAG made require support from reliable sources. His and now, by proxy, your wounded feelings, real or imagined, are not my concern.

                            I am interested in thoughtful, nuanced, reality-based dialogue on the topic of this thread.
                            Persons who are unwilling or incapable of this should not be surprised if I call BS on their BS. For more on the subject of BS see: https://theconversation.com/why-bull...han-lies-96331





                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by JustAGuy View Post
                              So you have no sources to support your claim that the Dunning-Kreuger and Backfire Effects only affect people on the "Left."

                              Your lengthy diatribe is proof that these phenomena affect people on the "Right" as well.
                              Ironic, isn't it?

                              Originally posted by JustAGuy View Post
                              I am here to have serious dialogue on an important subject, and the only way to have a profitable exchange of ideas is to bring facts to bear. In your case, stop trying to demonize a group you dislike, and get on with the discussion.
                              Sorry, but you've come to the wrong place for that. You're not going to get an objective conversation out of them.
                              "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
                              - Benjamin Franklin

                              The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X