Why are smart people often really dumb?

[ataraxia]

This is a great video examining confirmation bias and the tendency of those on the higher end of the spectrum to be more rigid ideologically.

Sorry, but evolutionary biology is still true, and the Earth is not just 6000 years old, vaccines work, including the recent Covid vaccine, and AGW climate change is real.

 

[ataraxia]

Farmers and trades people for example. Their lives actually depend on their abilities to learn how to think critically and creatively whereas the educated can be actually handicapped by their degrees, believing because they've learned more (in class) they therefore "know" more. That is simply not true.

Farmers today owe much of their productivity and technology to the biology, chemistry, agricultural science, and engineering departments at universities.

 

[soap box]

This is a great video examining confirmation bias and the tendency of those on the higher end of the spectrum to be more rigid ideologically.

If you want a real answer, it's been established for decades already. In his book, Frames of Mind, Howard Gardner described multiple intelligence. Ot explains how a star athlete might not be able to write a sentence straight, or an astrophysicist might not be able to dance.

 

[Slartibartfast]

This thread has a real Dunning-Kruger vibe.

 

[Opossum]

Well, if you are getting your sources from random YouTube clips that is definitely not clever.

Dumb non-response. You know there is a lot of solid shit on YouTube, right? I use it all the time for things like car and house repair, and many other things.

 

[OrphanSlug]

Dumb non-response. You know there is a lot of solid shit on YouTube, right? I use it all the time for things like car and house repair, and many other things.

There are some clips on YouTube that have reasonable purpose worthy of reasonable discussion, but in a sea of uselessness placed there by whoever, for whatever reason, based on information and sources we will never get to evaluate.

Opinions are one thing, and the OP could have easily added to the video with something more than a one liner intro.

 

[Uncensored2008]

“Why are smart people often really dumb?” For starters, we can blame random YouTube videos.

Maybe you should have watched it prior to replying.

But it is designed for those on the higher end of the intellectual spectrum so may not appeal to you.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Well, if you are getting your sources from random YouTube clips that is definitely not clever.

Do you ONLY get information from DNC approved media such as CNN?

Knowledge comes from many sources - this video is an extremely good source of knowledge. But it requires that one watch it, and have the requisite intellect to grasp the subject. For those who lack the latter, CNN is there.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Why don't you summarize the argument? Relying on a video but saying nothing about it doesn't cut it.

I did. Those with more advanced education and higher intelligence tend to be more rigid in bias and less open to arguments that challenge preconceived views, favoring to find arguments that support existing biases. Those convinced they are always right are not willing to entertain information that impugns their biases.

 

[ataraxia]

Do you ONLY get information from DNC approved media such as CNN?

Knowledge comes from many sources - this video is an extremely good source of knowledge. But it requires that one watch it, and have the requisite intellect to grasp the subject. For those who lack the latter, CNN is there.

What do you like about it? The fact that scientists are sometimes wrong?

Do you think that necessarily means that your most current common sense, personal opinions, and cultural values must always trump the most current science?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Because intelligence and wisdom don't automatically go hand in hand.

How do you define "wisdom?"

 

[Uncensored2008]

I don't think any of us can take a youtube cartoon supporting a biased opinion as a fact based study.
Do you have acceptable citation to offer?

It is designed for those with above average intelligence. It's simply not intended for those such as yourself.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Except that is not true. There is no group with more ideological rigidity than the millions upon millions of DUMB people who are now members of the Trump cult. No matter how many outright lies he tells them, they simply lap them up and beg for more. Just how DUMB does a person have to be to do that?

LOL.

This isn't about the political bigotry of the radical left. Watch or don't.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I'm not. Did my post zing right over your head then?

The video is designed for those with at least a baccalaureate who have higher than average intelligence. The majority of those on this board lack the intellectual curiosity to follow it.

This is enlightening, because I see my own confirmation bias at work. The usual suspects of the extreme left react exactly as I suspected they would - with a dull disdain for knowledge and their typical bigoted hatred of anyone that doesn't goosestep to their beat of their party.

My assumption was that the more intellectually challenged on the board would react with hostility - which is precisely what occurred.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Sorry, bud, smart people are never dumb. Those are opposites. Dumb people are never smart, either.
Why are short people often really tall?

Izatrite?

Another of the leftist brain trust who didn't watch the material.

Hey, you've got CNN to tell you what to think - you don't need anything else confusing you.

 

[Lycanthrope]

How do you define "wisdom?"

"Intelligence can be defined as the ability to think logically, to conceptualize and abstract from reality. Wisdom can be defined as the ability to grasp human nature, which is paradoxical, contradictory, and subject to continual change."

Or, to use a hoary but still good example - Intelligence is knowing that Frankenstein was the doctor. Wisdom is knowing that Frankenstein was the monster.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Perhaps people with high intelligence just happen to have never had any experience on the subject you are familiar with.
Give them a little time to learn the subject and they just might wipe the proverbial floor with you.

What is fascinating in the video is the explanation of why confirmation bias tends to be stronger in the better educated and more intelligent. We are trained in higher education to effectively argue points, to ensure that our point of view prevails. Anyone writing a scientific paper (with proper APA formatting) must present a convincing argument. We are trained in the process to prove our point. The result is that we seek information which conforms to our thesis. Rather than going where the fact lead, modern education teaches us to maneuver the data to support our preconceptions.

Science is the process of discovery that relies of the acceptance of data as it unfolds. We should evaluate data as it is and draw our conclusions from the data. But that isn't what happens, nor is it what Universities, particularly graduate programs stress. Again, this is a brilliant video - for those with the intellect requisite to grasp it.

 

[watsup]

Do you ONLY get information from DNC approved media such as CNN?

Knowledge comes from many sources - this video is an extremely good source of knowledge. But it requires that one watch it, and have the requisite intellect to grasp the subject. For those who lack the latter, CNN is there.

Or perhaps you could actually put the argument in your own words instead of hiding behind videos, eh? This is a DEBATE forum, not a “watch this video” forum. If we wanted to watch videos. We would go to YouTube.

 

[watsup]

I did. Those with more advanced education and higher intelligence tend to be more rigid in bias and less open to arguments that challenge preconceived views, favoring to find arguments that support existing biases. Those convinced they are always right are not willing to entertain information that impugns their biases.

That so-called “summary” does not contain any supporting information. In matter of fact, there is no group more dedicated to ideology with blinders on than the DUMB people who comprise the Trump cult.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Confusing education with intelligence is something smart people never do. Only dumb people do that.

How would you possibly know?

Seriously, what would you base such a claim on?

Education has nothing to do with intelligence, and vice versa.

Blanket generalizations are something that smart people avoid.

Especially in some venues. I know a lawyer who got his baccalaureate at Magdalen College who left Oxford because, as he said, there's degrees bought at Oxford for several kinds of currency.

We have all seen the fall of Harvard and the Ivy (gravy) Leagues where degrees have far more to due with political connections and who fill quotas than with actual education. And yet you besmirch thousands who legitimately worked hard and achieved. At Lockheed I worked with an engineer who graduated from Princeton and was a moron, having ridden through on daddy's money, along with an engineer who graduated from Devry and was utterly brilliant. Because the Devry man came from the Marines on the GI bill and worked hard - learned the materials, and applied it.

But to stereotype that this means everyone from Princeton is an buffoon is simply ignorant. One gets out of education what they put into it - institution is generally irrelevant. THAT is the lesson we should have learned with the fall of the Gravy Leagues. Set standards and expectations high - ignore social and political factors.

 

[watsup]

It is designed for those with above average intelligence

And yet another statement that you can’t actually substantiate. In matter of fact, from what I have observed in DP over a couple of years now, is that it is those with LESS than average intelligence that spend more time posting videos with which to hide behind instead of actively debating in a serious and thoughtful manner.
Again, can you summarize the arguments supporting conclusion of the video?

 

[watsup]

LOL.

This isn't about the political bigotry of the radical left. Watch or don't.

And once again, more obvious IRONY from you. Is this really the “best” that you can do.

 

[watsup]

The video is designed for those with at least a baccalaureate who have higher than average intelligence. The majority of those on this board lack the intellectual curiosity to follow it.

This is enlightening, because I see my own confirmation bias at work. The usual suspects of the extreme left react exactly as I suspected they would - with a dull disdain for knowledge and their typical bigoted hatred of anyone that doesn't goosestep to their beat of their party.

My assumption was that the more intellectually challenged on the board would react with hostility - which is precisely what occurred.

And yet more and more irony!

 

[Uncensored2008]

I found the video to be very obvious. Truthful, but obvious.

The scientific method. You establish truths. 2+2=4. The definition of gravity. Golden Rule Ethical Thinking. These are straight forward. Basic. Fundamental truths. You then grind all new data against these established truths as tests. It builds on your established truths as bits pass these tests and add to your base making you more effective in recognizing truth from fiction as your set of knowns grow.

Good character is essential. It creates the desire to seek truth and to place truth over falsehoods even if they present personal gain. Like recognizing the falsehood of situational ethics for example, even though it can be opportunistic to do otherwise.

That the obvious, like that good character is important, is added to your fundamental truths and becomes part of what you grind new data against to test its veracity.

You then apply this and learn more as experience testing this block of truths adds to the end result.

In this way we mature. We become increasing objective as that fundamental block of known truths grow and make us more effective at parsing fact from fiction in new data. One becomes increasingly objective. Common sense is the practical application of that objectivity.

Data gets parsed effectively in this matter becomes knowledge. This knowledge tested by experience becomes wisdom.

This seems all quite relevant to me, but also quite obvious. This is so NOT because I’m anything more because of it or the knowing of it makes me something above for the knowing of it. It is because it is a fundamental fact passed down in philosophical thinking. One of those truths time tested by folks smarter than myself left to be intellectually ingested. Like 2+2=4, the definition of gravity, and that it is right to treat others as we’d have ourselves treated in like circumstances. It’s a fundamental. A known. Recorded in our history, ready to be intellectually ingested.

It’s the human truths starter kit we use to teach our kids, and give them practice in using it to parse with via The Socratic Method. Something, perhaps, we should get back to?

Thank you for your thoughtful reply.

I think the heart of the video is the question, do we actually become more objective? Or does our confidence in our own knowledge impugn our ability to accept ideas that fall outside of our preconceptions and biases?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Sorry, but evolutionary biology is still true, and the Earth is not just 6000 years old, vaccines work, including the recent Covid vaccine, and AGW climate change is real.

What does your reply have to do with anything?

Ah, you didn't watch the video and instead chanted political mantras.

No worries, the video is intended for an intelligent audience, it simply isn't geared toward those such as you.