• Three types of people

    From DogHouseDiaries:


    What proportion of people are each of these three types? More to the point of the chart’s title, what proportion of people think they are each of these three types? I know the truth, but I’m not certain you can handle it.


    Comments closed
    • I think it is really an issue of self-perception. The problem is not where people know all of the truth (the third type), it is where they THINK they know all of the truth. And I don’t know anybody who knowingly believes something that is untrue (the first type). So people cannot place themselves in these categories. And neither could an outside judge, unless the judge knows how much of the truth the person thinks he or she knows.

      It might be more useful to ask if people ever question themselves, or if they think it is important to question themselves.

    • This seems difficult. Is it understanding the *likelihood* of their views being correct? Because if not it implies group 1 — which is apparently awesome — has knowingly wrong views. Which seems more strange than anything else.

      • I think the implication is not that they knowingly hold incorrect views, but that they have an awareness that the views they hold may not be entirely correct, and perhaps subject to revision or correction. It follows then, that they would be more willing to modify their views if presented with compelling evidence, or maybe even just a persuasive argument.

        Or as I like to say, if someone come along with a better idea than I have, I’m happy to steal it and claim it as my own.

      • The Venn diagrams are abstractions about your beliefs, not the result of adding up all your specific beliefs (which isn’t feasible). Do you think that some of the things you currently take to be true are actually, despite your efforts and desire to be right, wrong? There is no assumption that you can say which ones now.

    • Which one would Beavis and Butthead fit into?

    • So does your last sentence mean we should run from this post?

    • Surely something has gone wrong here. Is not the objective of any scientist, seeker of knowledge and mental self-improver (including any doctor) to reach the stage of DANGEROUS? Should they not be whole-heartedly working towards RUN?
      By those standards, AWESOME is childish, egotistical and mentally lazy, unless of course, it is applying to a young person who is learning to be DANGEROUS.
      The central question is about how people acquire and value their views, beliefs and ‘knowledge’. It is about objectivity, rationality and self-objectivity. The real danger comes from those that believe that personal, overemotional conviction, sales, ratings and Facebook likes define truth.