"Ignorance more
frequently begets confidence than does knowledge”
~Darwin
“The Dunning–Kruger effect is a
cognitive bias in which unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority,
mistakenly rating their ability much higher than average. This bias is
attributed to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their
mistakes.
Actual competence may weaken self-confidence,
as competent individuals may falsely assume that others have an equivalent
understanding. David Dunning and Justin Kruger of Cornell University conclude,
"The miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self,
whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about
others".
Reasoning
errors aside, we know that people often acquire their beliefs about the world
for reasons that are more emotional and social rather than intellectual
discernment. Wishful thinking, self-serving bias, in-group loyalties, and self-deception
can lead to enormous departures from the norm of rationality.
Most beliefs
are evaluated against a background of other beliefs and often in the context of
an ideology that a person shares with others. Consequently, people are rarely
as open to revising their views as reason would seem to dictate.
On this
front, the internet has simultaneously enabled two opposing influences on
belief…On one hand it has reduced intellectual isolation by making it more
difficult for people to remain ignorant of the diversity of opinions on any
given subject. But, it has allowed bad ideals to multiply… as anyone with a
computer and too much time on his hands can broadcast his misguided beliefs and often enough find an audience.
So while
knowledge is increasingly open-source, ignorance is too (The irony of knowledge).
It is also
true that the less competent a person is in a given domain, the more he will
tend to overestimate his abilities. This often produces an ugly fusion of
confidence and ignorance that is very difficult to correct for.
Conversely,
those who are more knowledgeable about a subject tend to be acutely aware of
the greater expertise of others. This creates a rather disjointed dialogue in
public discourse…one that is generally on display whenever an exercise physiologist
speaks with appropriate cautiousness about controversies in his field, or about
the limits of his own understanding…while his opponents (TV fitness experts, medical weight loss experts, internet weight loss
gurus, and celebrities who have lost weight) will often make wildly
unjustified assertions about which diet plan or exercise program can be inserted
into the space provided.
Thus… one
often finds people with no scientific nutritional training speaking with
apparent certainty about the nutritional implications of specific diets and
weight loss products.
So, the
question becomes… “What should I believe, and why should I believe it?”
Believe a
proposition because it is well supported by theory and evidence…believe it
because it has been experimentally verified…believe it because a generation of
smart people have tried their best to falsify it and failed…believe it because
it is true.
This is the
normal cognition as well as the basis of any scientific mission statement. As
far as our understanding of nutrition is concerned…there are no “true” nutritional facts without
scientific verification.
“We must pursue knowledge without any
interference of our emotions. Only then will true knowledge manifest itself in
reality”.
What
the bleep do we know?
