VisualCapitalist just shared an infographic showing the Average IQ by state. It caught my eye and my interest. Here it is.
via VisualCapitalist.
When I first examined the chart, I focused on the state-by-state differences. Honestly, I was taken aback that some states scored higher than others. And by that, I mean it wasn't necessarily the states I would've predicted. But then I took a closer look at the scale and realized these differences are probably insignificant. The results essentially show that, on average, states' intelligence levels are... well, average.
I know a lot of smart people.
I also know many people who think they're smarter than they are (even the smart ones ... or, perhaps, especially the smart ones).
It's common. It's so common that there's a name for it—the Dunning-Kruger Effect.
Have you ever met someone who's so confident about what they think that they believe they know more than an expert in a field? That's the Dunning-Kruger effect. It's defined as a cognitive bias where a lack of self-awareness prevents someone from accurately assessing their skills.
Here's a graph that shows the general path a person takes on their journey towards mastery of a subject.
via NC Soy
The funny thing about the above image... it's not actually a part of the paper on the Dunning-Kruger Effect. But it's now so commonplace that people report that chart as fact—a fitting example of the effect.
David Fitzsimmons via Cagle Cartoons
Recognizing the "victims" of this effect in our daily lives can often be funny or frustrating. But we're all prone to this; it's a sign of ignorance, not stupidity.
This is a problem with all groups and all people. You're not immune to it, even if you already know about the cognitive bias resulting from the Dunning-Kruger Effect.
It should be a reminder to reflect inward - not cast aspersions outward.
Two different ways that people get it wrong, first is to think about other people and it’s not about me. The second is thinking that incompetent people are the most confident people in the room, that’s not necessarily true.
Usually, that shows up in our data, but they are usually less confident than the really competent people but not that much... - David Dunning
To close out, even this article on the Dunning-Kruger presents a simplification of its findings. The U-shape in the graph isn't seen in the paper, the connection that lack of ability precludes meta-cognitive ability on a task is intuitive, but not the only potential takeaway from the paper.
Regardless, I think it's clear we are all victims of an amalgam of different cognitive biases.
We judge ourselves situationally and assume "the best". Meanwhile, we often assume "the worst" of others.
We can do better ... it starts with awareness.
Progress starts by telling the truth.
Futurism and The Epidemic of Impossible Statistics
I can’t pretend this is a new phenomenon, but I also can’t pretend it’s not becoming a pet peeve of mine.
If you’ve been following me for any amount of time, you’ll know I love the future, and I love random statistics. If I’m not talking about AI or entrepreneurship, it’s generally because I’m sharing some interesting chart or statistic.
At the intersection of my two loves comes a pretty severe issue ...
Bullshit statistics.
Futurists can’t help themselves. If you repeat something enough times, it begins to feel true. This is a key part of the reality distortion field that surrounds charismatic leaders. Their “functional fiction” becomes useful - not because it’s grounded in fact, but because it enables us to envision what’s possible and work to make it real.
In their defense, nobody minds if you talk about the future broadly. However, a problem arises when directional belief masquerades as fact or science. For example, if someone has thought about something many times, there is a tendency to confidently discuss or project exponential growth with specific timelines and metrics (rather than broadly discussing what will eventually come).
This tendency can make intelligent people seem delusional (or at least out of touch).
Elon Musk is a great example. While he has undeniably been a significant force for innovation and progress in the world, here are a few of the outlandish claims he’s made recently.
Some of those may be true, and all of them might turn out to be right ... but they are still wild-ass guesses.
Elon is by no means the only one doing this.
I routinely make up statistics to help me simplify or understand things better. The key is to acknowledge these “shortcuts” are still essentially educated guesses. Here’s an example. When I imagine how advanced AI will become by the end of my lifetime, I have to consider my current age (and expected lifespan) and how rapidly AI is improving. If I assign the number “100” to how good AI will be at the end of my life, what value would I assign to it now? Turns out, I’d give it a value of three. Of course, there’s always the possibility I could get hit by a bus tomorrow. I’m not a scientist. I haven’t done detailed research about chips or when we move to quantum computing. Realistically, I don’t have to. The precise numbers aren’t what matters here. I don’t take that statistic literally. It’s directional, and it gives a sense of the rate of change and the velocity of invention. In that sense, even though it isn’t factual, it’s useful.
I’d say any serious scientist knows that you can’t reliably predict the future with that level of precision – but it doesn’t take a scientist to know that.
First, the statistic or shortcut has to pass a simple “sniff” test. Then, you have to account for likely bottlenecks or constraints. Too many of these crazy estimates assume almost infinitely scaling results with no setbacks or limitations in materials or energy.
Don’t underestimate the value of a good rule-of-thumb or mental model. Moore’s Law is a great example of that. It stemmed from an observation and prediction about the semiconductor industry made by Intel co-founder Gordon Moore in 1965. A grossly simplified version is that computing power doubles every two years. That has held true for more than 50 years.
I have two Gaping Void illustrations that express fundamental truths about this: “First, Bring Order to Chaos” and “Wisdom Comes from Finer Distinctions.”
Here’s the reality. The future is exciting ... and it’s coming fast. In many ways, it will likely be bigger and cooler than you could have imagined. In other ways, it will radically underperform your expectations.
I can say that not because I know any more than you, but because I’m focused on what doesn’t change. We’ve had many periods of innovation ... each bigger than the last. It’s likely there will be aspects of the next 20 years no one can predict. But, we know what innovation looks like.
We’ve been here before.
As a reminder, if it sounds too good to be true ... there’s a good chance it is. Yet, to pretend there’s not a chance outlandish claims will come true would be to make too precise a claim again.
In many ways, predicting how your business or product will change is much easier than how the world will change.
The best way to predict the future is to create it - and the most effective way to create it is to focus on the elements within your control.
While it’s important to play an exponential game ... you can start “locally”.
Food for thought!
Posted at 07:32 PM in Art, Business, Current Affairs, Gadgets, Ideas, Market Commentary, Personal Development, Science, Trading, Trading Tools, Web/Tech | Permalink | Comments (0)
Reblog (0)