Slashdot Mirror
We Are All Confident Idiots
An anonymous reader writes: If you've ever heard of the Dunning-Kruger effect, you'll be familiar with David Dunning, professor of psychology at Cornell. He's written an article on the "psychology of human wrongness," explaining how confidence in one's answers tends to be high for people who don't know what they're talking about. He says, "What's curious is that, in many cases, incompetence does not leave people disoriented, perplexed, or cautious. Instead, the incompetent are often blessed with an inappropriate confidence, buoyed by something that feels to them like knowledge."
Dunning goes on: "A whole battery of studies conducted by myself and others have confirmed that people who don't know much about a given set of cognitive, technical, or social skills tend to grossly overestimate their prowess and performance, whether it's grammar, emotional intelligence, logical reasoning, firearm care and safety, debating, or financial knowledge. College students who hand in exams that will earn them Ds and Fs tend to think their efforts will be worthy of far higher grades; low-performing chess players, bridge players, and medical students, and elderly people applying for a renewed driver's license, similarly overestimate their competence by a long shot."
Dunning goes on: "A whole battery of studies conducted by myself and others have confirmed that people who don't know much about a given set of cognitive, technical, or social skills tend to grossly overestimate their prowess and performance, whether it's grammar, emotional intelligence, logical reasoning, firearm care and safety, debating, or financial knowledge. College students who hand in exams that will earn them Ds and Fs tend to think their efforts will be worthy of far higher grades; low-performing chess players, bridge players, and medical students, and elderly people applying for a renewed driver's license, similarly overestimate their competence by a long shot."
This sounds a lot like many of the +5 insightful comments on Slashdot these days. Bold, confident one-liners to get that quick +5 but not actually knowing what one is talking about...
He didn't mention /. posters.
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
I've never heard about David Dunning nor of the Dunning-Kruger effect, but I'm pretty sure I don't need to know.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
See Robert Ingersoll from over 100 years ago:
Thank God I know I suck at everything and don't know anything.
Thus my nickname.
I wonder if that means anything.
was "Microsoft CEO"
You sound pretty confident...
A definitive explanation for Beta??
I know this is petulant and pedantic, but Dunning-Kruger is statistical, and only reflects the naturalness of a lack of detailed introspection.
More over, some people are genuinely competent at things. I want to object to the notion that it's an inescapable human failing, because Dunning and Kruger's research didn't show that. Just a strong overall trend.
Politicians...
"What's curious is that, in many cases, incompetence does not leave people disoriented, perplexed, or cautious. Instead, the incompetent are often blessed with an inappropriate confidence, buoyed by something that feels to them like knowledge."
The truthiness of that seems pretty solid.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Bob Barber: I'm a lawyer, you idiot!
Actually, I'm not confident at all!
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell
If you do not try, and do not prepare for failure.
Because in preparing for failure, you conceive of how the plan could fail, and from that, accurately gauge the project cost.
Makes sense. The more you know, the more you know you that you don't know.
People who know their stuff also know just how little they really know, and they tend to be cautious with their answers. People who don't, but know just enough to THINK they know a lot lack that inhibition. And they won't hesitate to use this to assert they know a lot. This in turn will be seen as determination and having a vision by management and now take a wild guess who will be in charge of making all the important decisions.
And sometimes I can't help but wonder if knowing too much is actually keeping people from climbing the corporate ladder. It seems, the less you know, the higher your chance that you'll end up at the C-Level.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Incompetence generally isn't fatal in today's society.
So long as you can back it up with deflection ("Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM") which is a basic two year old skill ("I didna take da cookie!") you're not going to lose your position until you reach the level of GROSS incompetence and maybe not even then.
The real problem is when you have skilled people who make mistakes, KNOW they make mistakes and qualify their answers because they know they may not be right. They're overridden by these same people that never accept failure but still give the wrong answers.
Hell Yeah!
Did you say confident heterosexual?
"He knows just enough to be dangerous."
Most sw/dev managers I know fall in this category.
Or am I the dumbest?
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge" - Charles Darwin
When someone says, "Any fool can see
The projected confidence is a learned behaviour I suspect. One learns to effect change through convincing others to do their bidding.
So, its a misunderstanding that most idiots are even looking to give a "correct" answer but rather are caring more about personal status and influence.
Slashdotter geekoid has been on top of this for as long as I have left .sigs on
When I was a child I use to fret to myself if I was stupid would I be smart enough to know I was stupid. At the age of 56 this thought still comes back to me, but now as when my mental decline starts will I realize it?
One can get into a loop thinking about these things, as the converse is that people that worry they don’t measure up, typically more than measure up. So if I think I’m below average does that make me about average, then the second I think I might be above average, boom I might be below average again :-)
Actually I do think I’m above average in many area’s as evidenced by various testing measures, but I probably over estimate my knowledge in non-technical areas, just as the study suggests. That said I typically stand back aghast at today’s Republican conservatives – I may be wrong, but in general they seem mean and – yes I’ll say it – bigoted. Of course that could just be Dunning-Kruger blinding me to the brilliance of the current Republican vision.
Letter To Iran
You won't get a lot of comments on this matter, since we all already knew this. Next topic.
In Hearing, GOP Chairman Issa Misnames African Country, Repeatedly Mispronounces ‘Ebola’
Issa also thinks he knows more about ebola than doctors at the CDC
Idiocracy is happening.
There might as well be a Dunning-Kruger effect built in to Photoshop, considering the number of photographers who suffer under the delusion that the terrible shit they produce is actually art.
Full disclosure - I'm a cranky photographer who's not total shit but is still mostly shit.
Should be titled: Am I smart? I guess I'll never know. :-)
Answer seems clear now
Letter To Iran
"[T]he incompetent are often blessed with an inappropriate confidence, buoyed by something that feels to them like knowledge."
Bah. He doesn't know what he's talking about.
Each time I see someone mention the D-K effect, they focus only on the first manifestation: unskilled individuals tend to suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their ability much higher than is accurate.
But, there is an equal-but-opposite manifestation, as well: highly skilled individuals tend to rate their ability lower than is accurate.
Why is this one typically ignored?
"Professor Dunning is quite confident in the results of the study." (Paraphrased...sorta)
Table-ized A.I.
I know I can out-troll anybody. Watch this!...
Table-ized A.I.
"The study was inspired by the case of McArthur Wheeler, a man who robbed two banks after covering his face with lemon juice in the mistaken belief that, as lemon juice is usable as invisible ink, it would prevent his face from being recorded on surveillance cameras." - Wikipedia
In 1995 McArthur Wheeler actually tested this beforehand with a camera. One way or another his test proved he was invisible, at least to himself.... (lens cap maybe? bad film? somehow didn't get himself in frame when taking the picture?).. He robbed two banks in plain daylight. Later was showed the CCTV footage and still didn't understand how it captured his face..
I read about this a few months ago and just found this to be one of the funniest things. Imagine doing something so stupid a whole psychological theory was inspired.
s/©//g
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
High profile examples of this personified:
Homer Simpson
Peter Griffin
Sheldon Cooper
And society will follow a confident idiot off a cliff before they will follow an unsure genius anywhere.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
She asked me, "how do you know you are a good computer technician"
Me, "because I know how little I really know. When I was a good amateur, I thought I knew a lot, and was confident, but now, I know so much more that I know what I don't know. That makes me a good technician."
She was confused, but I now I know there there is a scientific name for what I was trying to explain.
getting a lot of flack in high school for answering "I don't know" to a lot of stuff. And not just from teachers ^^
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
People who had filed for bankruptcy "rated their overall financial knowledge more, not less, positively than other respondents did. The difference was slight, but it was beyond a statistical doubt: 23 percent of the recently bankrupted respondents gave themselves the highest possible self-rating; among the rest, only 13 percent did so. "
This is a basic misuse of statistics for a conclusion they don't support. What this shows is that people who go bankrupt are more likely to overrate their financial literacy than those that don't. That overconfidence sometimes leads to bankruptcy is hardly a surprise, is it? But it tells us nothing about the other 77% of respondents who also went bankrupt.
Moreover he can't seem to distinguish between people who are bluffing about what they know and those that are really clueless about their lack of knowledge. He seems to believe that what people say is always what they think.
I think most of us have heard the expression that someone "knows just enough to be dangerous." There are lots of things where limited knowledge makes us much more certain we are right because we lack the detailed knowledge that would make us doubt ourselves. Just read any news and you will find stories that is an occupational hazard of reporters and, naturally, they pass their cluelessness on to their readers.
Intelligence is knowing that everyone around you is full of shit.
Wisdom is knowing you are, too.
If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
The guys from this french site: fr.openclassrooms.com are a bunch of beginners who wants to change how teaching works.. Problem is they don't know what they're talking about, still they want to give people certifications... and they don't realize it because their audience is also mostly beginners..
I wish that were so. My dad was very successful. I chose to not do what he did (work his ass off at school and work).
Unsurprisingly, I was not successful. Later, I chose to do what he did - I had a full time job, a part time job, and was in school "full time". Lo and behold, I became successful.
Now I fully understand the CIO's decisions
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
Ugh. I don't buy the DK effect.
It's just another tool for attacking people at the University level; eroding confidence, teaching people to turn away from the development of their own instincts and senses of exploration. -To make people give up even trying to develop their own minds and souls and to instead turn toward authority figures for permission to think.
It's easy to point at idiots and psychopaths and say, "That could be YOU! For SHAME!"
Sorry, but there's a difference between Snakes and Monkeys. If you're a Monkey, it's okay to use your thumbs and your brains, it's okay to move forward with confidence even when you haven't got it 100% figured out. But that's okay. It's okay to make mistakes. It's nature's bio-feedback! It's how we Learn.
It's a tragedy that adults are so terrified of being wrong that they stop trying.
I'd like to coin a new phrase: The Kruger Hump.
This is the inflection point where you realize just how little you actually know. Up to that point is marked by the D-K effect.
Have gnu, will travel.
"Everyone is a terrible driver but me"
and
"My child is above average" (Lake Wobegone Effect)
"The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity."
William Butler Yeats
that sounds a bit confident. maybe it's too confident. maybe you are succumbing to Dunning-Kruger yourself!
I have found that if I sound confident, other people will listen and follow, regardless of whether I know what I am talking about. I have also found that women tend to be attracted to confident, self-assured men, and are less concerned about whether the guy is actually right or wrong. So, if my theory is correct, men should display more self-confidence. Maybe the author already considered gender differences, but I didn't RTFA, I am just assuming that I am right.
Sad to note that Christie the Gov of NJ is a monster in human skin who predates humans and uses his office and federal laws to accomplish his sexual exploits.
What perverts: Christie, Cumo, Scott and the insect Gov of Illinois and Maine.
We need the Orkin Man to exterminate the monsters among us, forget about Ebola, Ebola is NOT a problem, Crhistie is the Pervert Problem that need dealing with.
As John Cleese pointed out, you need a minimum level of intelligence to even realize that you are stupid.
Sadly, a huge percentage of the population is too stupid to realize that they're morons.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
Seriously, that asshole is still pretending to be an expert on the economy after having advocated the housing bubble as a remedy for the dot com bubble.
Example: I know I'm not competent at drawing. I need only look at the page to know I struggle even making a stick figure drawing. Just sayin'.
along comes better idiots?
mfwright@batnet.com
When I left him, I reasoned thus with myself: I am wiser than this man, for neither of us appears to know anything great and good; but he fancies he knows something, although he knows nothing; whereas I, as I do not know anything, so I do not fancy I do. In this trifling particular, then, I appear to be wiser than he, because I do not fancy I know what I do not know.
From Socrates, The Apology (399 B.C. or so)
Everything old is new again.
This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
apologies to the Daily Show
An internal system operation returned the error "The operation completed successfully.".
...in all but a few contexts. Sure, on standardized tests and in chess tournaments, confidently doing the wrong thing doesn't give you any advantage. But humans didn't evolve to do well on standardized tests and win chess tournaments. We're social animals, we evolved to impress one another to social advantage.
In politics, which is really just a giant test-bed for effective social messaging, there's a saying that for any complicated problem, there's an answer that's simple, straightforward, low-cost, and most importantly: wrong. Yet it goes without saying that this is still a winning message. Candidates who answer questions with: "Well, it's complicated, you need to factor in..." don't even make it through the primaries. Candidates who say "We can stop the spread of Ebola by applying this magic (and free!) federal policy lotion" win easily.
Of course, maybe I'm wrong...
The statement is "stupid people are confident" as in stupid(p) => confident(p).
It is not "confident people are stupid" (i.e. confident(p) => stupid(p)). Confident people are a mix of a small group that actually has a clue and a large group that is stupid.
As this discussion thread so far nicely shows, quite a few of the people here get the implication wrong. They are in the "large group".
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
I live in a third world, backwards country and the people here overestimate their own abilities. It's not even funny.
Adiane: "Are you humans that stupid?"
Yoko: "Unfortunately... yes, yes we are."
Attenborough: "Who cares! Fire!
Our fine species, in a nutshell.
The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
My first experience with this was from this article, which quite possibly has the best headline ever - "Incompetent People Really Have No Clue, Studies Find / They're blind to own failings, others' skills"
lvl1 - unconsciously incompetent - I don't know that I am dumb... so I sometimes think I know it all
lvl 2 - consciously incompetent - I now know that I don't know everything and have gaps in my knowledge/skills.
lvl 3 - consciously competent - I know that I know stuff
lvl 4 - unconsciously competent - I know so much stuff that I don't know that I know it all..
I would bet professors are mentally above average. Have you known many average people? below average? Average is pretty fucking stupid. Carlin had it right. Half the people are below average. You might have daddy get you in and thru a college degree but that happens for professors less than people win the lottery.
Seems to explain the effect where a little knowledge in a field appears to make one reckless and dangerous, whereas deeper knowledge makes one cautious.
Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
"A Man's Got to Know his Limitations"- Clint Eastwood, Magnum Force. This is said before he blows up the dirty cop... remember this as kid, and when I train people I tell them this. Poetry in motion. Maybe somewhat relevant to the D-K effect.
Personally I'm brilliant!
He's been just as incompetent.
As will anybody we put in charge. Wanting to be president is itself a sign of terminal idiocy.
People have understood this for a long time. This is what people refer to when they call our current president "the anointed one", someone whose incorrectly judges himself, and is judged by others, to be an expert on a lot of things he knows next to nothing about.
That is why many people want small government, because a large part of the so-called "experts" in government clearly don't know what they are doing; by that I mean that they fail to deliver what they promise. You have a better chance making decisions for yourself than having them imposed on you by a president, cabinet, or other meddling government expert with Dunning-Kruger effect.
Wouldn't I have to be confident to be a confident idiot... I know How uninformed I am if that's what you're saying....
"..the incompetent are often blessed with an inappropriate confidence, buoyed by something that feels to them like knowledge."
I sharply agree, but what does this have to do with politics?
I'm one of those overconfident idiots who never knows what he's talking about (being an expert in nothing), but I suspect it has to do with the higher mental effort required to intelligently form and express an idea about what is inadequately understood than to simply regurgitate what one thinks they already know. I remember when I was a kid my shrink gave me an IQ test and asked me why there were seasons. I had no fucking idea, but started thinking about possible reasons. I knew the Earth's orbit was elliptical and guessed our distance from the Sun was responsible (incorrectly, of course). I suppose demonstrating that I was able to use what little I knew to form a reasonable hypothesis was good enough for the test, but the point is the very act of pushing myself forward based on inadequate information gave me confidence.
What worries me are the people who speak confidently as pure, thoughtless bullshit pours from their mouth (politicians, for example). At least give it a really hard think before you make a fool of yourself.
Buy your next Linux PC at eightvirtues.com
obviously /. is one of them. Computer scientists especially are the most arrogant, no explanation required. Buisness majors can be arrogant also, always out to try and make money, any way possible. One kid I know started to learn Swift to program apps on apple products (really?), just because he wanted to make money and be the next Mark Zuckerberg, if he was truly smart he would know not to make such a move in time consumption.
Programming has always been just a hobby for me, a computer science major would be a bad move for alot of people. Instead I just take a math class or two every semester of my college career, and shit on master degree computer scientists by reading Donald Knuth "Concrete Mathematics" without taking one CS course, ofc this is just one of the few.
The title of the article is just another word for arrogance. Those who claim to be the "most rational", or "scientific", and always pondering about their IQ levels are usually the most arrogant of people. Religion to them is just a way for them to test their rationality, ofc religion is easily defeatable with the use of logical analysis, because it is all based on beliefs, because you belief in nothing (no god or afterlife) does not make you more rational or scientific.
Science creates the highest arrogance of it them all, they think because they know something most or the average person doesn't know it makes them smart. Yet if we look back in history even the smartest of people would be considered morons today, etc wrong. Einstein and Newton will look small in comparison to what we could be in thousands of years.
Intelligence or IQ is not based off of other people, or the general population (this is what creates arrogance), it is actually based off the universe.
Intelligence is done in comparison to the universe, not other people, in which if we compare ourselves to the universe (can we ourselves create a universe like this one using our intelligence?) we will actually know they we know nothing in comparsion.
The fact is you are all morons, those who consider themselves to be smart are actually making up for what they lack in other areas.
They will usually find some way to blame everything on Barack Obama.
You got it wrong too. There are stupid people who are not confident, so there is no implication. A lot of stupid people are confident. And a lot of smart people are not confident.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
"Confidence is what you have before you understand the problem."
— Woody Allen
az0
Doh! I'd misspelt the subject. :(
Overconfidence in unsubstantiated knowledge.
Hmmm, make me wonder: could the Dunning-Kruger effect explain this whole religion thing?
sigo ergo sum
A lot of knowledgeable, experienced and clever people have 'been there, done that' when it comes to committees etc. As their interest may not be in leadership but delivering tech or just getting things done without a lot of opinionated discussion from people who exhibit the D-K effect, they take a back seat and find excuses to avoid management meetings and responsibility. Many management methods are designed to leech the brains from the better qualified so why would I want to join in with what is essentially a bunch of amateurs diluting my competence, wasting my time, arguing and deciding to be idiots regardless of my clear advice.
...already pointed this out
Comment received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
Or has Dunning been Krugered?
Need Mercedes parts ?
...we have to date. That is all.
Who hasn't noticed that behaviour from a colleague, boss, ... ?
People not nearly as knowledgable on a field as they believe. Always going the wrong way. Always finding an excuse to spend months on a task where a few minutes, applied at the right place with the right way, are more than enough. ... since they know "everything" already.
The worst ? They are also very difficult to correct
Sigh ...
I am absolutely confident that I am fluent with SAP ABAP ERP and BE while working in the mega corporation in Mumbai.
Congratulations. You're hired!
We Are All Confident Idiots...In America.
I sometimes ask revealing, often ignorant-seeming questions. Maybe they're harder to answer than you think.
This is a "statistical implication", not a logical one, i.e. it just has a high likelihood for a random sample to be true. Really, your statement is complete BS as it ignores the context of the discussion.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Are you trying to demonstrate the topic of the article personally, or does it really bother you that much when someone implies you might be stupid (since apparently you do have confidence)?
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Now you have gone completely off the rails. This does not merit an answer.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
every Fox News anchor.
And yet you answered anyway.
In any case, even by "statistical implication" you are wrong.....if "confident people are a mix of a small group that actually has a clue and a large group that is stupid" (those are your words) then indeed confident(p) => stupid(p) more often than not. Surely you understand that.
Furthermore, another way you are also wrong is that the D-K effect indeed does say that skilled people tend to be less confident. That's "statistical implication" for you.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
It's okay, we can all hear your dog whistle words.
Finally, an explanation for Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld as well as why the U.S. had eight years of hell. Then again, it also explains the hopeless mess that Obama has made worse than it was when he inherited it. Oh, mark Rob and Doug Ford deciphered as well.
Sounds a lot like George W Bush. I think much of his support came from his confidence.
Stupid people are confident in their answers. Politicians also come usually with some simplistic ideology that they firmly believe in which is also pretty dubious.
Smart people question. Smart people are critical thinkers. Just regurgitating "facts" as gospel is a no no. Smart people know that most things are more complicated than they might seem. Everything has a story behind it, debate, perspective, and bias.
Two quick examples which recently proved to me more than ever that this is the case:
1) (This one I may have even learned on Slashdot) When I was in school I was taught that things fall due to gravity at 9.8m/s. If someone asked me the question, that would have been my response. However, they use this value to make it easy to do simple calculations. As it turns out, that 9.8m/s is an estimate. What it actually is, really depends on where the heck you are on the Earth, as it can vary from place to place. Sure I might have known that had I taken some more advanced courses on the subject, but all I had known was what I was taught, and they certainly didn't tell the younger audience the whole story as they likely didn't want to complicate the issue.
2) (This one I learned at a Trivia night at a pub) Simple question: What is the planet with the furthest orbit from the Sun. Again easy, I was taught in school that the furthest planet was Pluto (and this isn't even getting into a definition of what is a Planet and what is not). However that answer would be wrong. The planet with the furthest orbit is Jupiter. Even when I got the question, I started to question what I knew. A date was mentioned. I also knew independently that Pluto has a weird orbit. I could surmise that perhaps at given times, Pluto isn't the furthest planet. It isn't. It will be again in about 100 or whatever years or so, but currently Jupiter is further away. However again, likely the teacher, doesn't want to confuse the issue (facts), with details, like different orbits, and how it changes over time.
So there are two simple "facts" about hard science, that has more to the story that you might be aware of. Smart people know that they don't know everything, and that there will likely always be someone that knows some topic better than you do.
However in terms of politicians and running a country, factually explaining in detail the nuances of every question and what the possible answers are, and why you chose what to believe and your reasoned response, might be lost on the gray masses. Many like the comfort that confidence (even if false), that says; this is the issue, and I have the solution! Go back to enjoying your infotainment...
“Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.”
Socrates speaks like the Sicilian from Princess Bride. You knew I'd respond this way so I can clearly not choose the reply you expect! But then you'd know I'd know that so I must choose the reply you expect!
That's total bullshit and you know it. You come to Slashdot to run your mouth about things that you really don't know but think you do, ya know, like this article is telling us about. We'll argue with you and tell you you're wrong but you just double down on the derp and stay the course. Of course, your only reply will be "No one has told me I'm wrong in a way that's interesting enough to show me something new." The fact you qualify each and every comment you post like that is a dead give away that all you're here for is some debate, which isn't wrong fundamentally, but you don't EVER change your mind, and you certainly never apologize for being a pretentious douche when we do call you out on it.
How many times have I wished to be stupid.
Well, well
He doesn't know what he is talking about! That's why he thinks he's an expert at this.
It's fashionable to cite the Dunning-Kruger effect as evidence of human dark natures: overconfidence, insecurity, or the foolish tendency of the masses to overvalue bravado. But what of the advantages?
If the optimal knowledge and skill to make a decision is not the same as maximal knowledge and skill, then there's a backside to the advantage curve. More than diminishing returns, competence beyond a certain point may hinder and hobble decision making. Mental resources are finite. There may be such a thing as knowing too much.
Maybe there's a mental organ that tries to guess when we've learned enough and it's time to act. In fine-tuning any sensibility, it's the misfiring that gains undue attention. Certainly the headlines of any age are rich with examples of right action flummoxed by call for more study. To the extent that a company or a family or a nation needs a leader at all, is the best party always the smartest duck in the room? To the extent not, the sliver of human nature that recognizes this could be branded Dunning-Kruger and yet may have deep worth.
The most effective team may have the first-rate thinkers second in command.
Bob Stein, http://bobste.in
This certainly explains web designer syndrome, doesn't it?
Most of us suffer from severe case of self induced rectal cranial invergence because we like to think we are right. Which leads me to the definition of a conservative. That is a person so closed minded and opinionated that their mind cannot improve.