Double Dunning-Kruger

[Black Rose]

At any peak in confidence, people do not realize they are at the top because of how successful they are. An example would be that someone at 155, even if at the genius level, has the lowest levels of confidence above 145. The reason is that they cannot find anyone above them and yet they yearn to be apreciated. All other people do not "get" them and they succumb to believe they are the peak themselves. This is not the case but as with no confidence, with no reinforcement from others, they latch onto the idea of superiority.

With confidence, a person does not have self-esteem issues so they have positive reinforcements from the society around them in their nitch. This can lead to its own delusions but that is true at any level of confidence. When people do not have to prove themselves though it makes things easier and they have less cognitive stress. It is best to be in the mid-range of confidence where you do not feel the need to prove yourself to be superior nor control others when at the peak of a group hierarchy.

 

[ZenRaiden]

I find this type of graph really unrealistic.
I can for instance trust my self to do better than a person with IQ 100 at certain activities.
When I would be thinking at IQ 130 my abilities cannot correlate with IQ 100.
My confidence in self vs confidence to compare is different animal.

Kind of like someone telling you F1 racer develops same confidence as someone riding horses.
Going 400 km an hour and 40 km hour are two very different skills sets requiring two very distinct measures.
Both skills require some mastery that cannot be gotten on mere IQ, but require experience and expertise to be top of skill bar.

For instance I can be certain I can beat non trained person in running.
But if I train to be a sprinter, and you want me to be a marathon runner then we are talking about different skills and hence forward different confidence.

Two people with IQ 150 can also master same abilities differently.
If you know what I mean.

vs

 

[Black Rose]

if I train to be a sprinter, and you want me to be a marathon runner then we are talking about different skills and hence forward different confidence.

Confidence is not on the axis of skills. That is why I tried to make my description clear: social reinforcement vs isolation + ability. If you are semi-smart and everyone is telling you are smart this will be different from a person who is smart and everyone is telling them they are dumb. 155 is the most isolated of genius levels sort of like a middle child. They don't get positive reinforcement, they are isolated and they are not at the top genius level. Their skills don't matter much to society and they do not care about interacting with most people. 145 is the peak for persons who have lots of friends and can have them impressed by what they do. Look at Eminem for example. After that intelligence becomes an isolating factor until you can overcome isolation by caring about other things to do with intellect.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Confidence is not on the axis of skills. That is why I tried to make my description clear: social reinforcement vs isolation + ability. If you are semi-smart and everyone is telling you are smart this will be different from a person who is smart and everyone is telling them they are dumb. 155 is the most isolated of genius levels sort of like a middle child. They don't get positive reinforcement, they are isolated and they are not at the top genius level. Their skills don't matter much to society and they do not care about interacting with most people. 145 is the peak for persons who have lots of friends and can have them impressed by what they do. Look at Eminem for example. After that intelligence becomes an isolating factor until you can overcome isolation by caring about other things to do with intellect.

Yes for sure, validation internal validation matter.
So we are talking about confidence as purely self reported?
So its merely psychological?

Here is what I mean... This guy F Dyson... Very smart, very high IQ, but he is intellectual sprinter.
He starts solves problems in few days weeks etc, then is done.
Some intellectuals are marathon runners. They work hard for very long.
But qualitatively they are different.

 

[dr froyd]

i didn't understand a single thing in OP

what does it drop at 155? Why does someone need people "above" them to feel confident?

 

[ZenRaiden]

i didn't understand a single thing in OP

what does it drop at 155? Why does someone need people "above" them to feel confident?

Apparently at this IQ range people suffer great deal of perfectionism and imposter syndrome.
Watch this if you want some facts from the horses mouth.
Watch from 2:30
Don't take here seriously this is some major research stuff that is still in process.
I think the research into profound giftedness started only in the 80?
Either way separating myth and reality here and good research is mostly psychology mashed with myth of geniuses.
That said most of it is literally factual. There is just much more room for interpretation.

 

[Black Rose]

i didn't understand a single thing in OP

what does it drop at 155? Why does someone need people "above" them to feel confident?

peer group is hard to form and this is not about people above them but about people close to them in relateability. fewer people can be among 155 in intellect and in what they find interesting.

 

[ZenRaiden]

People around higher ranges of IQ simply have different neurology.
What remains to be seen is how exactly that effects their life and their perception.

What I get the impression from high IQ education and psychology, its mostly about preventive approach.

Ergo making sure high IQ people don't implode or underachieve or become unhappy, or commit suicide.
What the recipe for success is still mystery.

Some high IQ individuals just succeed naturally.

I remember when I was young reading about this kid that had very high IQ.
He committed suicide at very young age.
Not uncommon occurrence.

So a lot of people might think helping high IQ individuals is just attempt at producing Gs, but its actually life saving stuff.

Low self-esteem can be rooted in variety of things, and is absolutely necessary for healthy functioning of all people.
Having high IQ and low self-esteem is a brilliant way to make life a misery.

 

[Black Rose]

People around higher ranges of IQ simply have different neurology.
What remains to be seen is how exactly that effects their life and their perception.

The wiring is set to handle multiple things at once.

I have ideas of how to make computers do the same thing.

It is about directing information in and out of long term memory.

And it is about holding perceptual information as well.

-

The problem is that when you can see so much about the way things are and you try to tell people what you have seen and what needs to be done, they do not arrive at the same conclusions you do. You have to explain a lot to them just to get them up to speed. They cannot automatically understand like you do.

If people will not listen to you or you find it hard to get the reactions from people necessary for the required interactions you will find it pointless to repeat yourself to them. That is why these kids look towards adults because adults have leaned to listen mostly.

The information inside them is always looking to increase. It cannot increase because it is like trying to get help on your calculs formula from four years olds. You need a peer group but that group is not there. You do not want to play games you want to learn and share ideas.

So a person who has ideas will most likely have ideas they cannot share and that is madining. But as I suspect this is only at a certain level, higher up a person may have the ability to overcome loneliness and only focus on themselves.

 

[Hadoblado]

Show us the source of that graphic because I'd bet all of froyd's life savings it's fabricated from source: IMITFU and you're making this a triple.

 

[Black Rose]

Show us the source of that graphic because I'd bet all of froyd's life savings it's fabricated from source: IMITFU and you're making this a triple.

Yes, I made the image from another image. Would that change anything to do with the discussion about confidence levels? Do you have an opinion on that?

 

[Black Rose]

 

[Hadoblado]

My opinion on confidence levels is that you made up how they map onto IQ

Or... at least... that's what you make it look like with that graphic. Theory follows observation, so I'd want to see what the actual observation is before putting forward a theory. Did you just make those numbers up or are they drawn from somewhere?

 

[Black Rose]

Theory follows observation, so I'd want to see what the actual observation is before putting forward a theory. Did you just make those numbers up or are they drawn from somewhere?

Well, it would not be a "theory" it would be a hypothetical first.

1. Confidence is a matter of self-reinforcement.
2. Groups create cohesion in per-group self-reinforcement.
3. Intelligence can isolate people from other groups.
4. This isolation happens at certain density levels.

115 is the baseline for college student graduates. So many exist that they can find lots of people to interact with. Fewer people are 125 but they are in professions that are more mid-managers. 130 - 145 are people a the top of any profession and so lead the groups. 110 and 120 people are average in confidence because they would just get their jobs done and do not bother with anything else.

Once you hit a higher level you begin to lose the drive to be a leader.
That would be because it is boring to be a leader. It is not stimulating enough.

-

I visit many high IQ blogs and read what they say and how people have made observations of different ability levels and so I compiled all of it into the image. There really is no way to get accurate observations of this phenomenon without looking for it. I was told on the Kurzweil forum by a guy who was 175 that his observations were from his own experience with people. That when you have the ability to see all the problems people have and cannot solve them because people would not understand you it becomes very depressing.

 

[ZenRaiden]

But as I suspect this is only at a certain level, higher up a person may have the ability to overcome loneliness and only focus on themselves.

All I am going to say to this is welcome to hell.

 

[ZenRaiden]

I recommend watching this....

 

[Black Rose]

I recommend watching this....

Seems like he is talking about himself in all those things.

schizoid - deprived in infancy of safety, puts all effort into safe things: intellect
OCPD - avoid a painful memory, put efforts into work or addiction, compulsion to perform.
Borderline - emotional instability
Narcissism - over self-preservation, critical parents
Dependency - deficiency of self-preservation - compliance - care - had to be an adult in childhood, grow up fast.

 

[Hadoblado]

Okay, so this is second-hand anecdotal? Aight yall have fun now.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Seems like he is talking about himself in all those things.

How did you assume that?

schizoid - deprived in infancy of safety, puts all effort into safe things: intellect
OCPD - avoid a painful memory, put efforts into work or addiction, compulsion to perform.
Borderline - emotional instability
Narcissism - over self-preservation, critical parents
Dependency - deficiency of self-preservation - compliance - care - had to be an adult in childhood, grow up fast.

Essentially yes.

------------------------

I would largely argue competency is ratio of difficulty and effort.
If one would take easy tasks one can always feel competent.
Learning happens really when we feel least competent.

 

[scorpiomover]

i didn't understand a single thing in OP

what does it drop at 155? Why does someone need people "above" them to feel confident?

Success in the modern world is mostly about things like soft skills, attitude and confidence, most of which don't seem to have much to do with IQ, and seem to be highly correlated with how your parents raised you, and which schools you went to (the schools where the wealthy send their children, teach these things to their students, because the kids who know these things often turn out as successful adults).

Having a high IQ, is thus like someone who is born with super-powerful legs and is told that he should be capable of winning the 100m hurdle in the Olympics. If he isn't taught how to jump over hurdles, he can run as fast as he wants. But every time he comes up against a hurdle, he just runs right into it and falls over. Always loses the race.

The guy with average legs who has an Olympic coach, is trained how to jump over hurdles, and so wins every time.

 

[dr froyd]

i remember a winnie the pooh episode from when i was a kid where Tigger was supposed to compete against the rabbit in a jumping contest, and the rabbit put stones in Tigger's boots to demoralize him while they were training. But since Tigger was training with stones in his boots he ended up super strong and jumped high af in the contest

that episode was good shit, it made an impression on me for the rest of my life lol

 

[ZenRaiden]

If people interacted like normal humans in schools, they would not need EQ coaches today. It would be seamless. Yet in schools in early years of development we spend most days facing the teacher not other people.
So I had to learn to face talk at work.
We learn to be conscientious and outcome based, so employers nowdays need creative people who can adapt and solve problems that no one else can see.
We learn to work alone mostly for ourselves, and so we have no team spirit or ability to work harmoniously as a group. SO every company has team building as remedy.
We learn to rote memorize and gobble up information, so employers want logical people, because logic seems missing.
Employers seem to ask for things that schools don't train for.

When it comes to IQ, its like ability to put on muscle.
But having strong genetic predisposition has no meaning without the gym.
Unfortunately most schools are like gyms where people go according to some preplanned outcome.
The reality is having high IQ requires lot of work to match for it to be useful.
High IQ students are special needs category believe it or not.

 

[ZenRaiden]

The guy with average legs who has an Olympic coach, is trained how to jump over hurdles, and so wins every time.

Most people cannot afford Olympic coaches.
Hence the reason most people are spit out of the system at uni level and all the got is what they got and they run with it as far as they can.

I can definitely acknowledge isolation has made me lot worse, but I seem to never be able to learn from other people.
I have tried and tried and it never sticks.
Ironically I spend time alone figuring things out for ever, but they tend to work. Not sure why. But I would not say I am olympic sprinter type.
I feel like a cross country guy.

 

[scorpiomover]

iThe guy with average legs who has an Olympic coach, is trained how to jump over hurdles, and so wins every time.

Most people cannot afford Olympic coaches.
Hence the reason most people are spit out of the system at uni level and all the got is what they got and they run with it as far as they can.

Yup. It's one of the reasons why the rich usually stay rich, and the most of the poor stay poor.

I can definitely acknowledge isolation has made me lot worse, but I seem to never be able to learn from other people.
I have tried and tried and it never sticks.
Ironically I spend time alone figuring things out for ever, but they tend to work. Not sure why.

Me too. When I tried to do what others did, it would come out wrong. I had to learn everything consciously, my way.

It has pros and cons. The con are that it takes me a lot longer to learn things. The pro is that when I finally learn something, I know it much, much better than most people, and that allows me to easily do things they cannot imagine.

I'm also starting to understand that emotions are a big part of that learning process. The more you can get in touch with your feelings and let them flow, the easier it becomes to imitate others automatically.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Me too. When I tried to do what others did, it would come out wrong. I had to learn everything consciously, my way.

It has pros and cons. The con are that it takes me a lot longer to learn things. The pro is that when I finally learn something, I know it much, much better than most people, and that allows me to easily do things they cannot imagine.

I'm also starting to understand that emotions are a big part of that learning process. The more you can get in touch with your feelings and let them flow, the easier it becomes to imitate others automatically.

Me too, and I agree, emotions seem to be pretty big deal, though I did not realize it until now just how even little emotion can completely change the way I think.

Emotions seem like gravity, and thoughts are just these objects that get pulled where ever the pull of gravity takes them. But thoughts albeit tiny have a gravity to them too.
But its like Earth vs Ant.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Okay, so this is second-hand anecdotal? Aight yall have fun now.

Most of psychology is second hand anecdotal?
Are we to believe you talk only about things that are scientifically verified.
So 20 years from now we can nod to the reality of it hey, its the truth brother.

 

[Hadoblado]

I'm not saying "don't talk about only scientifically verified things". What I'm saying is don't treat unverified things like verified things, and definitely don't fabricate charts unless you're really clear on it being speculation.

These sorts of graphics are generally to communicate an empirical observation. Data visualisation is about visualising actual data. It's fine to propose a speculative piece regarding how you think the observation might look, but that's not what they did.

If there were an actual effect like the one AK suggests, this would be groundbreaking. There isn't though. They're just making it up.

And yes, any psychology that isn't verified empirically should be called out for what it is: baseless speculation and pet theories.

 

[Black Rose]

I'm not saying "don't talk about only scientifically verified things". What I'm saying is don't treat unverified things like verified things, and definitely don't fabricate charts unless you're really clear on it being speculation.

These sorts of graphics are generally to communicate an empirical observation. Data visualisation is about visualising actual data. It's fine to propose a speculative piece regarding how you think the observation might look, but that's not what they did.

If there were an actual effect like the one AK suggests, this would be groundbreaking. There isn't though. They're just making it up.

And yes, any psychology that isn't verified empirically should be called out for what it is: baseless speculation and pet theories.

Are you worried that people will be too stupid to figure this out though?

Are you suggesting that people will be so deficient intellectually to think this has been verified in any way and was not just me speculating?

Are you expecting people on this forum to inject bleach to cure a disease or something?

I didn't even link a study or anything yet you took it seriously?

Why are you making this into a moral issue?

 

[Black Rose]

intellectually deficienct

For these people on this or any other forum, I guess I will always need to preference the difference between what I made up and what I came across somewhere else.

 

[Hadoblado]

Aight yall have fun now.