This video made me think of how I sometimes fear that I'm retarded. It's a logical fear because retarded people never seem to realize that they are retarded. I don't think I'm retarded; ergo I may be retarded. Of course I was a theoretical physicist for thirty years...but maybe all those people were just humoring me to spare my feelings.
I think it's funny how the god-wad says "diluted" instead of deluded. It reminds me of another who called Sam Harris a "demi-god" instead of a demagogue.
Great video. I've been working very hard in improving my logic and reasoning capabilities over the past year, but it's taken some work. I think being a sheltered Christian theist for 17 years didn't exactly help my ability to logically assess the world and cosmos... haha.
I don't know where I'd lie on the curve, though I'd be curious where I stand. I think I'd postulate I'm in the upper 15 percent, but not as high as the top 3. Time for a Google search to satisfy my curiosity... :P
I've watched this three times now and I'm just about to get a coffee for the fourth time around with notes! I absolutely love your videos! Thanks for posting them :)
Another factor here is people's tendency to only remember their own performance at it's best while judging the performance of others by their average.
I was just commenting on the "there are no gods 3" video and got into a "debate" with a person like the one described in the first part of this video... damn he got me pissed off U_U
I don't think McArthur Wheeler is a good demonstration of the effect; if anything it speaks to the man's total gullibility. Of course, Wheeler may have thought that his "untouchable skill" would allow him to get away with the crime. Also, the quote from the zealot seems more like hypocrisy and absolutism than inflated assessments about his arguing skill. If he had persisted with his intractable fallacies and always thought himself "the better debater" then it would definitely apply.
Interesting video! However, I'm not sure if anyone else had this problem, but it was so hard to hear! I had to put my dang ears right up to the side of my laptop to hear what was being said! haha :/ (I think I may possibly have -the- worst speakers, ever!) Funny enough though, all other sounds (music etc., system sounds...) on my pc are functioning fine! *wondering...is it the flash? the video itself? or deliberate? Curious :P
It is so true. I'm a musician and when I started I was a fairly good guitarist, but what I was performing was pretty awful. It was passable on the open mic circuit. Nothing more. Maybe a bit less than passable. But I thought I was brilliant, destined for fame. Now I've been playing for years and I think I'm reasonably good. But I don't think I'm amazing. I can recognise talent and don't think my abilities are that unique. It's amazing how this works.
Some overtly "confident" people I have known at work (IT) have turned out to be rather unable to produce good work (but they seem to get on well with management!!). I noticed a degree of projection. Genuinely confident people tend to be very capable and don't feel the need to convince people around them that they are. Another thought provoking video TT
Through debate, or even friendly conversation, have you ever been in a situation where your initial belief had been either proven to be wrong, or caused you to reconsider your initial belief and think to yourself, "You know what...? He/She is right about that." And if so, how did you handle that? Did you admit a change to your point of view?
This video should become the basis for an academic version of rick-rolling : you tell your moronic opponent to ''click on this link for an explanation of XYZ'' but actually, you link them here. How cool would that be?
"Congratulations... You've just been Dunning-Krugered."
A VERY ENLIGHTENING VIDEO . ONE FACTOR MISSING IN THE ARGUMENT THOUGH , THE FACTOR OF TIME , IF YOU GIVE YOURSELF AND EVERYONE ELSE TIME , THE GRAPHS WOULD MERGE EQUALLY EVENTUALLY .
PROCRASTINATE , SMELL THE AIR , FEEL THE FUTURE , THEN DECIDE .
Your opening statement about the sodomites are "the filth of society" being an opinion is not very valid due in part to the fact that the God that created all of creation says sodomy is BUT He also says that 'every sin IE cheating lying stealing adultery' is equally filthy and worthy of Death. On the flip side I will give you the way that this person wrote what he wrote was inherently wrong as one claiming to be a Christian, or a follower of Jesus.
"the fact that the God that created all of creation says sodomy is"
This is not a fact. Facts require evidence. This is properly called a 'belief', or more specifically, a 'faith belief'. Don't mislabel it in an attempt to give it some credence.
If someone was less competent but somehow managed to judge themselves accordingly, would this make them believe that they're just underestimating themselves?
It is impossible not to note this syndrome, including the tendency for the upper end to down grade their own assessment. Some have argued that the unrealistic down grading is a motivator for success but I think that might be true but only for a particular personality type. For some it leads to making bad decisions based on bad advice that should have been assessed differently. It inhibits your ability to know when to trust your own thinking. I hope that makes sense.
@MacNutz2 In general the down grading skill by the upper end has to do with what is called social comparison. It's also an interesting phenomenon, though personally I'm more enthralled by illusory superiority. :)
I have plenty of interesting two-sided debates with people, but those epic facepalm ones are always where the person I'm arguing with for some reason can't understand why my counter-arguments totally dismiss theirs needing them to come up with new explanations.
I really think everyone should be forced to take logic classes (or more maths) at school to avoid this really common problem.
[I realise how smug this comment looks, and don't care]
@hotdoh Maybe they don't want us to think. Wooooo spooky!
Nah, I think it's just that they don't see the direct application of teaching children logic, or don't think that it can be done effectively for young children, but I think that it can be, especially if they start from early on. There aren't so many immediate advantages, but I think society as a whole would benefit.
@jamma246 I know! Just stumbled onto the "Dunning-Kruger effect" wikipedia page and was very amused to see someone has done research on the psychology behind the guy in class always saying "What? This must be wrong!! I got an F??" Smug, schmug...people wouldn't know anyway :P
thought I had seen all of your vids but after half a year of discovering your channel I found this one. Good piece as well, thnx for all your uploads, I enjoyed all of them more than once!
Actually, let me amend that previous comment. Most Christians I've shared this with seem to get hung up on the first few sentences because they think it's a fact that sodomites are filth.
@RelixKondor Yeah but socialists are RIGHT - how you can think otherwise after capitalists just blew up THE ENTIRE GLOBAL ECONOMY, have missed peak oil (oopsy), know NOTHING about the problems of exponential grown, know ZERO about '23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism'(on youtube)and wont tackle global warming See in that argument it is YOU that is ignorant and can't judge your incompetency. Also look up Robert Anton Wilson's 'Cosmic Smuck' theory (which of course I include myself in).
@StunnedByStupidity Yes, attacking me and saying a bunch of links instead of 1 point are the best courses of action. Because, you know, I expect that sort of overwhelming and impossible to converse behaviour from conspiracy theorists who lack a frontal lobe. I'd love to hear a point, but I highly doubt feeding a troll is the best decision. But like conspiracy theorists, you can't deal with one other person saying one negative thing on a youtube video. :P
@RelixKondor Aw bless, I know you are only a kid, but I just can't resist having one more go :). First I am NOT a conspiracy theorist, my post was about your erroneous assertion that people who support socialism were the sort of people the video was aimed at and IRONICALLY it was YOU and NOT them that was wrong there... But I would like to TRY to make you think (I just know you are a conservative and don't 'do' rational thought - but what the heck) a bit more. So there are no such things as
@StunnedByStupidity conspiracy theories? REALLY? So can I hear you say that George Bush DIDN'T steal at least one election? That Iraq DID have something to do with 911? That there WERE weapons of mass destruction? That Blair DIDN'T create a 'doggy dossier'. That EVEY SINGLE legal council didn't NOT advise Bl;air NOT to go to war 'cos it was illegal. That the security council WOULD give Bush a mandate for war. That Bush DIDN'T torture people. That the Iraq war WASN'T for OIL. That
@StunnedByStupidity the I(raq war only lasted a couple of months. That the troop levels WERE adequate. That the war DIDN'T cost $3-5,000,000,000,000. That it DIDN'T cause more terrorism. That it WASN'T a war crime. That there wasn't corruption just about every step of the way that led to the financial melt down. That conservatives AREN'T moving to crush the middle class. That freemarket capitalism has been great for everyone over the last 30 years. That there is no such thing as
@StunnedByStupidity IMF 'structural adjustments' and they are NOT used to destroy fledgling economies. That there is no conspiracy to stop all action on climate change by vested interests. That we dont live on a finite planet and there is no efforts by right wing think tanks to claim otherwise. That America and Britain DO stand for 'freedom and democracy' in the world and they never use 'realpolitik'. That the gulf of ton kin was a real event. That the US HAD to use nukes in Japan. That
@StunnedByStupidity Ummm... you clearly didn't read what I said at all and still resort to ad homenem arguements mixed with.. well hell, I don't know: Mess maybe? And what part of overwhelming don't you understand? Christ, look at how many posts you made! You really need help and you really need to listen to yourself.
Considering how many odd keystroke errors there are, I think you might be foaming at the mouth. Aren't you a little too over confident in believing who is wrong? Ironic, right?
@StunnedByStupidity I'm stunned by your intelligence! (compared to the public's average, I mean, not to your own over time, since this is the first thing I've read by you!)
@StunnedByStupidity Guess you didn't get my comment as a COMPLIMENT of you, NOT an insult - which I feared might happened in general - which is why I went to great lengths to EXPLAIN it afterwards with
"compared to the public's average": meaning, I am stunned that there is somebody of great intelligence like yours in this sea of stupidity. And, NOT to imply "StunnedByStupidity finally said something smart, because he usually says dumb things."
@StunnedByStupidity That's kind of a dumb comment. Being Republican or Democrat is not so cut and dry. Being registered to one or the other does not mean you are beholden to the extremist ideals. If you're a Democrat, does that mean you MUST believe in Communism? If you're a Republican, does that mean you MUST believe in a militaristic papacy? I'm not sure if I'm dumb, OR smart... but I only try to work on myself when I can see a failure. I'm mostly sure that I'm at least somewhat intelligent.
@Todd82TA Actually it isn't. 10-29 years ago you statement would be correct. However the political spoectrum is being increasingly polarised along the stereo-typical lines. The 'Right Wing Authoritarians' are being mopped up by the conservative wing because they are so easily duped and they are the only remaing group that buy's into conservative stupidity... And democrats do NOT believe in communism (WTF - that statement SHOUTS right wing moron I'm afraid). And militariam is ONLY split
@StunnedByStupidity in the right wing because of the nutty libertarian stream. Not that you would dream of doing so but there is 4 DECADES of research on this free on the net. Just google 'The Authoritarians' for the free ebook. The research was also used by John Dean in his book (which was to be jointly written by Barry Goldwater before he died) 'Conservatives Without Conscience'. You create these people by having a bizarrely strong father and a subordinate mother or by being a fundy...
@StunnedByStupidity And as an after comment. YES I know I sound angry and ranting but I am convinced that the right wing fruit brigade has just fucked up the future for us all... And that is NOT hyperbolic..
@StunnedByStupidity Actually, you might just be a hard-core liberal, and think anything to the contrary is pure evil. That's no more intelligent than the hard-core conservative who has similar views about his own beliefs. I'm mostly Republican, but that hasn't stopped me from voting for a Democrat Senator or Congressman when I found them to be more fiscally conservative than the alternative. You seem incapable of having views other than how you are apparently hard-wired at present.
@Todd82TA Actually you are a right wing scum bag... And that false equivalency - PROVED WRONG BY BOOK YOU DIDN'T READ... Bigotry being the hall mark oi the conservative and what you are clearly showing... And 'fiscally conservative' - you are clearly effin insane and need help. And as a final explain this:
'6% Of Scientist Are Republicans ' on youtube
See SCIENTISTS - you know those people that study REALITY have a political bias - hmmm there goes you argument down in flames...
I think I may have encountered a few of those incompetents making comments on my videos. For example, check out the comments made by theman77777777232 and DracOverLordHaton on this video:
Awesome, Thanks for directing me here zarkoff. An open forum where I (hopefully) won't be blocked for asking genuine questions. Maybe it's just the fact that I can't understand this guy's accent, but I couldn't watch past 2 minutes. Can you please simply explain now why you don't believe that our senses are accurate?
"Zarkoff doesn't believe our senses are accurate"
If our senses are not accurate, what instruments (besides our senses) will you use to determine this?
Please just explain what you would use to test your senses (besides your senses) to determine that they are inaccurate. You already sent me to this video, now you send me to another. Do you not understand the material in the videos that you are sending me to? Please tell me the exact second in either video that answers my about question directly. Exactly what OTHER method besides your senses will you use to determine that they are invalid. The forum is all yours...
"There's a link in the underbar." Then someone else says... "Some will say that I was too stupid to understand that it was a simple chemical reaction in my brain that was a response to stimulus. To that I say, 'Well so is every other thought that you will ever have. Does that make any moment in your life less of a reality?" And then you respond, "Yes, it does. In a way it makes all your moments less real."
So Zarkoff, Your response at 6:50 at watch?v=zahFKGVpQGg seems to say that you are sure that you are unsure about reality. Am I missing something??????
Okay, I'm open to learning. Don't wanna watch no more videos. I'm fully capable of understanding what you can teach me. I really want to learn. So please type it loud and clear....
How exactly can you be sure that you are unsure?
How exactly can you know that we cannot know?
Or what exactly am I missing?
What's the point of your videos if you are not willing to teach me? What are you doing on youtube?
@theman77777777232 "How exactly can you be sure that you are unsure?" I can't. I just have a justifiable level of confidence. "How exactly can you know that we cannot know?" Too many different answers to the same questions. "Or what exactly am I missing?" A lot of neurons. "What's the point of your videos if you are not willing to teach me?" Other people have more neurons than you do. "What are you doing on youtube?" Rick Rolling people.
Alright man, everyone reading knows that you're embarrassed, but there's no need for insults. I mean you obviously don't have it all together upstairs. I mean, you say we can't know, but then you contradict yourself by saying that you can know that. You say that we can't be sure, but then you contradict yourself by saying that we can "have a justifiable level of confidence" which is the same thing as pretty sure that we can't be sure.
So, you can't have a justifiable level of confidence about reality, however, you have a justifiable level of confidence that you can't have a justifiable level of confidence about reality? Does that about sum it up? And I'm the one missing neurons? Are you sure neurons even exist zarkoff?
We might be in the Matrix, or you might be hallucinating. Can you prove to me that your 5 senses are trustworthy and valid without using any of your 5 senses or the 5 senses of other people?
"We might be in the Matrix, or you might be hallucinating."
This does nothing to do with the fact that you have a justifiable level of confidence that you cannot have a justifiable level of confidence about anything. The only thing that you have a justifiable level of confidence about is the fact that you cannot have a justifiable level of confidence about anything, which is self contradicting.
"Can you prove to me that your 5 senses are trustworthy and valid without using any of your 5 senses or the 5 senses of other people?"
Exactly. This was my exact question to you zarkoff. If you believe that our 5 senses our not accurate, then nothing in science, or your branch of neuroscience, has any validity whatsoever. There's no point in furthering our knowledge in fields where the knowledge itself is inaccurate, such as science.
Do me a favor and stab yourself in the hand with a fork. Then tell me whether or not you believe your senses are accurate or whether or not you still believe you are hallucinating inside of the matrix.
@theman77777777232 "If you believe that our 5 senses our not accurate, then nothing in science, or your branch of neuroscience, has any validity whatsoever."
Philosophical Bullshit. That's why you're a victim of Dunning-Kruger - you can't see why that is so.
There's truth, what we put together via scientific methodology and such, then there's Truth with a capital "T", absolute Truth, and then there's Truth(TM) which religions sell via philosophical bullshit. Only real one has a small "t"
Then you shouldn't have a problem explaining yourself as to why I am incompetent.
I just need to understand how it is that I can know for sure that I can't know anything for sure. Because this is what you are claiming. And if it is not, I'll need your helping breaking down EXACTLY what it is that you are claiming.
"Because you're so hung up on Truth that you can't see the truth."
Or maybe it's the fact that you don't care about truth at all whatsoever?
How does your new claim that I'm too hung up on truth support your claim that I can know for sure that I can't know anything for sure? Because if I can't know anything for sure, how is it possible to know that for sure?
"Because you're so hung up on Truth that you can't see the truth."
Or maybe it's the fact that you don't care about truth at all whatsoever?
How does your new claim that I'm too hung up on truth support your claim that I can know for sure that I can't know anything for sure? Because if I can't know anything for sure, how is it possible to know that for sure?
@theman77777777232 - "2 + 2 = 4, Please explain why I can't know that for sure."
Because you don't know what the numbers refer to. It's just an abstraction that defines a useful set of rules that you learned. Applying the rules to the real world isn't always so sure. It gives you no assurance beyond its limited mathematical domain.
IF I give Bob 4 apples, and Jim a different set of 4 apples and they make apple sauce, why will Bob have more sauce than Jim? How is it that possible if 4 = 4?
It's possible because I gave Bob larger apples. There's a case where one instance of 4 did not equal another instance of 4. Yet the abstract rules declare they should be equal. If so, what was equal about them?
I have already. Are you familiar with Godel’s Uncertainty Theorem? Do you know anything about the problems Alfred North Whitehead and Bertrand Russell had trying to prove that 1+1=2 in Principia Mathematica?
Godel showed that if you have a consistent logical system which includes arithmetic, then you can always construct a proposition which can be neither proven nor dispoved within the system. Therefore a consistent logical system must be incomplete. Of course, his method of constructing such a proposition might mean that it is extremely large, and extremely useless, so Godel's theorem may have no real practical significance.
Godel showed that constructing a complete mathematical system is unattainable. However, 2 + 2 = 4 is not a COMPLETE mathematical system.
So are you still SURE that you can tell me for sure that I can't be sure about whatever it is that I think I'm sure about?
Even if you're correct that I'm wrong about 2 +2 =4, it's still impossible for you to be so sure that you'll be able to tell me that I'm unsure. Why is it that you don't understand this???
What if I told you I was sure that you could knock down anything I mention? Would that screw up your game plan? Or would I just sound like an idiot for assuming that?
@theman77777777232 "What if I told you I was sure that you could knock down anything I mention? Would that screw up your game plan?"
Depends on what you mean by "sure." If you're talking about absolute certainty, then you would be wrong, I don't believe that absolute, capital "T," Truths are knowable, but if you're talking about confidence you'd be right and it wouldn't screw up my game plan - I merely have confidence, that's not the same as absolute certainty. You are confused on that point.
Do you absolutely know that absolute truths are unknowable? Because I'm really not interested in your opinion. I'm more interested in what you know for sure.
Zarkoff, let's get to the heart of it here. You said that if I mention something/anything that I'm sure of, you will be able to tell me why I cannot be sure of. This is self-refuting my friend. You are so sure that you will be able to tell me I'm unsure.
"You're looking for something that doesn't exist."
You are making a positive claim to knowledge here my friend. You are positively stating that absolute truth does not exist. But you have stated an absolute truth.
"That's your problem right there. You're looking for something that doesn't exist."
So you know for sure that knowing something for sure can't exist?
Self-refuting zarkoff.
You are making a positive claim to knowledge when you say that I'm looking for something that doesn't exist. What is it again that doesn't exist zarrkoff?
Zarkoff, let's get to the heart of it here. You said that if I mention something/anything that I'm sure of, you will be able to tell me why I cannot be sure of. This is self-refuting my friend. You are so sure that you will be able to tell me I'm unsure.
"You're looking for something that doesn't exist."
You are making a positive claim to knowledge here my friend. You are positively stating that absolute truth does not exist. But you have stated an absolute truth.
@theman77777777232 "You're certain that absolute truth does not exist?"
No. I feel certain that absolute truth does exist, but you can not know it absolutely. And if you deny the validity of your senses you can know nothing.
@theman77777777232 "Because the android is the only one who knows whether or not he has a soul."
That line is me quoting Marcin P2 before I argue against him. After that quote I say: "how would it be possible for the android to know if people didn't know for sure."
Certainty is about the state of a person's mind, not about a property of the universe. A person can be certain that the world is flat and be utterly wrong.
Absolute truth is like "there are absolutely no square circles." However, you don't even get that Mr. a-lot-of-7s because you said "Prove to me that your 5 senses are trustworthy and valid without using any of your 5 senses or the 5 senses of other people." Without senses you cannot know anything about circles.
My exact point. Have you stabbed yourself in the hand yet to see whether or not you are confident about your senses? Do you really need to falsify your senses using something other than your senses to be 100% sure that your gonna scream your ass of once that fork penetrates the skin?
Your comment on my video was philosophical bullshit. We can only assume our sensory data, when compared with others in rigorous experiments as I noted in my video, will yield scientific truths. We have confidence in this and if you want to deny it using your argument because we can not prove it absolutely with out sensory information then you are full of shit.
@theman77777777232 "Have you stabbed yourself in the hand yet to see whether or not you are confident about your senses?"
Being confident in your senses is not the same as knowing absolutely. I'm also not going to jump off a building and assume I can fly, but I can not be absolutely sure that we are not living in the Matrix and that I could do it.
Why should a person that knows he has a soul deny that he has a soul? It would be the same as denying his senses since he is the only one who knows whether or not those are valid. Do you get what I'm saying yet?
@theman77777777232 "It would be the same as denying his senses since he is the only one who knows whether or not those are valid."
No, you don't know whether your senses are valid. People hear voices that are not there. They hallucinate and feel pain in phantom limbs. Often it can be proved to someone that their senses are not giving them accurate information.
Whatever, there's no need for semantics. I'll retract the 2 + 2 = 4 statement if it makes you feel better if we can get down to the nitty gritty...
How is it that you can be so sure that you'll be able to tell me why I can't know anything for sure, no matter what I mention? How can you be so sure that you'll be able to accomplish the task when within the very same sentence you imply that it is not possible to know anything for sure?
lol
Orephiuchus 13 minutes ago
I'll be sure to remember that term ;)
ThatDanmGuy 1 day ago
Well done! I'll share this with my friends.
ferengoid 3 days ago
This video made me think of how I sometimes fear that I'm retarded. It's a logical fear because retarded people never seem to realize that they are retarded. I don't think I'm retarded; ergo I may be retarded. Of course I was a theoretical physicist for thirty years...but maybe all those people were just humoring me to spare my feelings.
Snakepliskinist 1 week ago
I think it's funny how the god-wad says "diluted" instead of deluded. It reminds me of another who called Sam Harris a "demi-god" instead of a demagogue.
Snakepliskinist 1 week ago
Great video. I've been working very hard in improving my logic and reasoning capabilities over the past year, but it's taken some work. I think being a sheltered Christian theist for 17 years didn't exactly help my ability to logically assess the world and cosmos... haha.
I don't know where I'd lie on the curve, though I'd be curious where I stand. I think I'd postulate I'm in the upper 15 percent, but not as high as the top 3. Time for a Google search to satisfy my curiosity... :P
n3wbuo 2 weeks ago
I've watched this three times now and I'm just about to get a coffee for the fourth time around with notes! I absolutely love your videos! Thanks for posting them :)
ThoughtfulGeek 2 weeks ago
@ThoughtfulGeek LOL cheers! ;8)
TheraminTrees 2 weeks ago
Another factor here is people's tendency to only remember their own performance at it's best while judging the performance of others by their average.
NeuronTree 2 weeks ago
i like your drawings....they make me smile and remind me of blues clues....i thank you for this.
bbong787 2 weeks ago
with the ill outro haha. great vid.
lowlowseesee 3 weeks ago
Beautiful, eloquent and thoroughly educational
forestguy2009 1 month ago
I was just commenting on the "there are no gods 3" video and got into a "debate" with a person like the one described in the first part of this video... damn he got me pissed off U_U
Punkekito123 1 month ago
@Jamma246, guy is proof this effect exists.
Shalashaska2099 1 month ago
I'm incompetent at making videos, but for what it's worth, I thought this video was excellent.
Bookmarked.
timw1971 1 month ago
I don't think McArthur Wheeler is a good demonstration of the effect; if anything it speaks to the man's total gullibility. Of course, Wheeler may have thought that his "untouchable skill" would allow him to get away with the crime. Also, the quote from the zealot seems more like hypocrisy and absolutism than inflated assessments about his arguing skill. If he had persisted with his intractable fallacies and always thought himself "the better debater" then it would definitely apply.
chinngis83 2 months ago
Comment removed
createallow3126 3 months ago
Good work.
zenmonkgenryu 3 months ago
Interesting video! However, I'm not sure if anyone else had this problem, but it was so hard to hear! I had to put my dang ears right up to the side of my laptop to hear what was being said! haha :/ (I think I may possibly have -the- worst speakers, ever!) Funny enough though, all other sounds (music etc., system sounds...) on my pc are functioning fine! *wondering...is it the flash? the video itself? or deliberate? Curious :P
CandyApple2QT 3 months ago
28 people can't assess their own incompetence.
xenalaskan 3 months ago 2
really enjoyed the video, great way of learning something new. Lots to ponder and apply. Ta mate
eikodai57 4 months ago
It is so true. I'm a musician and when I started I was a fairly good guitarist, but what I was performing was pretty awful. It was passable on the open mic circuit. Nothing more. Maybe a bit less than passable. But I thought I was brilliant, destined for fame. Now I've been playing for years and I think I'm reasonably good. But I don't think I'm amazing. I can recognise talent and don't think my abilities are that unique. It's amazing how this works.
jgonsalk 4 months ago
Some overtly "confident" people I have known at work (IT) have turned out to be rather unable to produce good work (but they seem to get on well with management!!). I noticed a degree of projection. Genuinely confident people tend to be very capable and don't feel the need to convince people around them that they are. Another thought provoking video TT
uncleboring 4 months ago
u talk soooo strange.
MrLokiKatz 4 months ago
I think most Americans suffer from that.
LacobrigusRomanicus 4 months ago
@LacobrigusRomanicus I was almost offended until I saw "most".... then I gave it a thought... and I died a little inside.
Parkinstarkey 4 months ago
HannibalBarca13 has got the juice!
apekillssnake 4 months ago
"Remember these two words..... wait they're not really words they're names" LOL!!!
Tallshipdreamer 5 months ago
Hey a jack handey quote!!
brenan6 5 months ago
One Two Freddy's coming for you...
filorps 5 months ago
Through debate, or even friendly conversation, have you ever been in a situation where your initial belief had been either proven to be wrong, or caused you to reconsider your initial belief and think to yourself, "You know what...? He/She is right about that." And if so, how did you handle that? Did you admit a change to your point of view?
viciousbloodbath 5 months ago
Love your accent explaining this thing. It just fits somehow.
Zimnyification 5 months ago
Great video - although it looks like 27 people are a little D-K :-)
Phaero 5 months ago
Now, the end of the video: that was funny!
nothingnesswithouten 5 months ago
TVP/TZM proponents: Dunning Kruger
axe863 5 months ago
This video should become the basis for an academic version of rick-rolling : you tell your moronic opponent to ''click on this link for an explanation of XYZ'' but actually, you link them here. How cool would that be?
"Congratulations... You've just been Dunning-Krugered."
USERNAMEfieldempty 6 months ago 3
A VERY ENLIGHTENING VIDEO . ONE FACTOR MISSING IN THE ARGUMENT THOUGH , THE FACTOR OF TIME , IF YOU GIVE YOURSELF AND EVERYONE ELSE TIME , THE GRAPHS WOULD MERGE EQUALLY EVENTUALLY .
PROCRASTINATE , SMELL THE AIR , FEEL THE FUTURE , THEN DECIDE .
GIANFRANCO FRONZI . AUGUST /14 / 2011
9493760 6 months ago
Thanks for that. Now I understand why my boss is not fired by our employer. Interesting.
the82spartans 6 months ago
Your opening statement about the sodomites are "the filth of society" being an opinion is not very valid due in part to the fact that the God that created all of creation says sodomy is BUT He also says that 'every sin IE cheating lying stealing adultery' is equally filthy and worthy of Death. On the flip side I will give you the way that this person wrote what he wrote was inherently wrong as one claiming to be a Christian, or a follower of Jesus.
anjhindul 6 months ago
@anjhindul Two words for you: Dunning-Kruger.
fdasherv 6 months ago
@anjhindul
"the fact that the God that created all of creation says sodomy is"
This is not a fact. Facts require evidence. This is properly called a 'belief', or more specifically, a 'faith belief'. Don't mislabel it in an attempt to give it some credence.
FreeRational 4 months ago 3
I LOVE TheraminTrees!
CJones990 6 months ago
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.
I love Charles Darwin.
Barkspawn 7 months ago
If someone was less competent but somehow managed to judge themselves accordingly, would this make them believe that they're just underestimating themselves?
wolfgoblin 7 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
1,665 people thought this shit made them smarter, and liked this. 25 people realised they didnt give a shit and dont actually give a fuck.
ClassicZoot 8 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Heard this was good.. watched this and realised I just wasted the last 7.10 minutes of my life. Fml.
ClassicZoot 8 months ago
It is impossible not to note this syndrome, including the tendency for the upper end to down grade their own assessment. Some have argued that the unrealistic down grading is a motivator for success but I think that might be true but only for a particular personality type. For some it leads to making bad decisions based on bad advice that should have been assessed differently. It inhibits your ability to know when to trust your own thinking. I hope that makes sense.
MacNutz2 8 months ago
@MacNutz2 In general the down grading skill by the upper end has to do with what is called social comparison. It's also an interesting phenomenon, though personally I'm more enthralled by illusory superiority. :)
muesk3 7 months ago
@muesk3 thanks, that is what I was attempting to say or describe, didn't have the terminology.
MacNutz2 7 months ago
God, this is so on the mark it's unbelievable.
I have plenty of interesting two-sided debates with people, but those epic facepalm ones are always where the person I'm arguing with for some reason can't understand why my counter-arguments totally dismiss theirs needing them to come up with new explanations.
I really think everyone should be forced to take logic classes (or more maths) at school to avoid this really common problem.
[I realise how smug this comment looks, and don't care]
jamma246 8 months ago 53
@jamma246
"I really think everyone should be forced to take logic classes (or more maths) at school to avoid this really common problem."
It's utterly unbelievable that schools cram so much shit down our throats without ever teaching us how to think.
hotdoh 6 months ago
@hotdoh Maybe they don't want us to think. Wooooo spooky!
Nah, I think it's just that they don't see the direct application of teaching children logic, or don't think that it can be done effectively for young children, but I think that it can be, especially if they start from early on. There aren't so many immediate advantages, but I think society as a whole would benefit.
jamma246 6 months ago
@jamma246 I think if the benefits are obvious to you and I, then they should be obvious to professional educators and policy makers.
hotdoh 6 months ago
@jamma246 I know! Just stumbled onto the "Dunning-Kruger effect" wikipedia page and was very amused to see someone has done research on the psychology behind the guy in class always saying "What? This must be wrong!! I got an F??" Smug, schmug...people wouldn't know anyway :P
deslegumes 5 months ago
Dude is hitting critical levels of smugness and self-satisfaction
l33tpwnzord 8 months ago
I much prefer the HugeDork - CoolFilterBro Effect
Randomly spouting psychobabble from the DSM doesn't give any more weight to your argument.
l33tpwnzord 8 months ago
thought I had seen all of your vids but after half a year of discovering your channel I found this one. Good piece as well, thnx for all your uploads, I enjoyed all of them more than once!
Delcasa88 8 months ago 16
Fascinating! I know several people who do this but also realize that, on some things, I am also guilty.
Nice video.
micometer 8 months ago 3
bla bla bla , could you make we some money now??
janroarkjolberg 9 months ago
great video style
djcondra 9 months ago
hahaha, ending's Ownage.
rahxephon52 9 months ago
The best part about this is that anyone you're arguing with who you show this video to immediately applies its message to you.
TheNeverborn 10 months ago
Actually, let me amend that previous comment. Most Christians I've shared this with seem to get hung up on the first few sentences because they think it's a fact that sodomites are filth.
TheNeverborn 10 months ago
Amazing video, man! As an amateur in psychology I enjoyed it a lot. Keep it up!
glamprom 10 months ago
That almost always happens with theists. They say things like "Be a little open minded and believe in God"!??!??! lol
geniusjas87 10 months ago
I've had that argument thing happen with conspiracy theorists and socialists. Strange mix, eh?
RelixKondor 11 months ago
@RelixKondor Yeah but socialists are RIGHT - how you can think otherwise after capitalists just blew up THE ENTIRE GLOBAL ECONOMY, have missed peak oil (oopsy), know NOTHING about the problems of exponential grown, know ZERO about '23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism'(on youtube)and wont tackle global warming See in that argument it is YOU that is ignorant and can't judge your incompetency. Also look up Robert Anton Wilson's 'Cosmic Smuck' theory (which of course I include myself in).
StunnedByStupidity 10 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity Yes, attacking me and saying a bunch of links instead of 1 point are the best courses of action. Because, you know, I expect that sort of overwhelming and impossible to converse behaviour from conspiracy theorists who lack a frontal lobe. I'd love to hear a point, but I highly doubt feeding a troll is the best decision. But like conspiracy theorists, you can't deal with one other person saying one negative thing on a youtube video. :P
RelixKondor 10 months ago
@RelixKondor Aw bless, I know you are only a kid, but I just can't resist having one more go :). First I am NOT a conspiracy theorist, my post was about your erroneous assertion that people who support socialism were the sort of people the video was aimed at and IRONICALLY it was YOU and NOT them that was wrong there... But I would like to TRY to make you think (I just know you are a conservative and don't 'do' rational thought - but what the heck) a bit more. So there are no such things as
StunnedByStupidity 9 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity conspiracy theories? REALLY? So can I hear you say that George Bush DIDN'T steal at least one election? That Iraq DID have something to do with 911? That there WERE weapons of mass destruction? That Blair DIDN'T create a 'doggy dossier'. That EVEY SINGLE legal council didn't NOT advise Bl;air NOT to go to war 'cos it was illegal. That the security council WOULD give Bush a mandate for war. That Bush DIDN'T torture people. That the Iraq war WASN'T for OIL. That
StunnedByStupidity 9 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity the I(raq war only lasted a couple of months. That the troop levels WERE adequate. That the war DIDN'T cost $3-5,000,000,000,000. That it DIDN'T cause more terrorism. That it WASN'T a war crime. That there wasn't corruption just about every step of the way that led to the financial melt down. That conservatives AREN'T moving to crush the middle class. That freemarket capitalism has been great for everyone over the last 30 years. That there is no such thing as
StunnedByStupidity 9 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity IMF 'structural adjustments' and they are NOT used to destroy fledgling economies. That there is no conspiracy to stop all action on climate change by vested interests. That we dont live on a finite planet and there is no efforts by right wing think tanks to claim otherwise. That America and Britain DO stand for 'freedom and democracy' in the world and they never use 'realpolitik'. That the gulf of ton kin was a real event. That the US HAD to use nukes in Japan. That
StunnedByStupidity 9 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity Ummm... you clearly didn't read what I said at all and still resort to ad homenem arguements mixed with.. well hell, I don't know: Mess maybe? And what part of overwhelming don't you understand? Christ, look at how many posts you made! You really need help and you really need to listen to yourself.
Considering how many odd keystroke errors there are, I think you might be foaming at the mouth. Aren't you a little too over confident in believing who is wrong? Ironic, right?
RelixKondor 9 months ago
@RelixKondor Bless...
StunnedByStupidity 9 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity I'm stunned by your intelligence! (compared to the public's average, I mean, not to your own over time, since this is the first thing I've read by you!)
mphello 8 months ago
@mphello Look your fly weight intellect is incapable of stepping in the ring so suggest you keep your childish ad hominems to yourself...
You are a right winger BECAUSE you are divorced from reality - you cant embrace reality and be right wing - its really simple...
StunnedByStupidity 8 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity Guess you didn't get my comment as a COMPLIMENT of you, NOT an insult - which I feared might happened in general - which is why I went to great lengths to EXPLAIN it afterwards with
"compared to the public's average": meaning, I am stunned that there is somebody of great intelligence like yours in this sea of stupidity. And, NOT to imply "StunnedByStupidity finally said something smart, because he usually says dumb things."
mphello 8 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity That's kind of a dumb comment. Being Republican or Democrat is not so cut and dry. Being registered to one or the other does not mean you are beholden to the extremist ideals. If you're a Democrat, does that mean you MUST believe in Communism? If you're a Republican, does that mean you MUST believe in a militaristic papacy? I'm not sure if I'm dumb, OR smart... but I only try to work on myself when I can see a failure. I'm mostly sure that I'm at least somewhat intelligent.
Todd82TA 8 months ago
@Todd82TA Actually it isn't. 10-29 years ago you statement would be correct. However the political spoectrum is being increasingly polarised along the stereo-typical lines. The 'Right Wing Authoritarians' are being mopped up by the conservative wing because they are so easily duped and they are the only remaing group that buy's into conservative stupidity... And democrats do NOT believe in communism (WTF - that statement SHOUTS right wing moron I'm afraid). And militariam is ONLY split
StunnedByStupidity 8 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity in the right wing because of the nutty libertarian stream. Not that you would dream of doing so but there is 4 DECADES of research on this free on the net. Just google 'The Authoritarians' for the free ebook. The research was also used by John Dean in his book (which was to be jointly written by Barry Goldwater before he died) 'Conservatives Without Conscience'. You create these people by having a bizarrely strong father and a subordinate mother or by being a fundy...
StunnedByStupidity 8 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity And as an after comment. YES I know I sound angry and ranting but I am convinced that the right wing fruit brigade has just fucked up the future for us all... And that is NOT hyperbolic..
StunnedByStupidity 8 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity Actually, you might just be a hard-core liberal, and think anything to the contrary is pure evil. That's no more intelligent than the hard-core conservative who has similar views about his own beliefs. I'm mostly Republican, but that hasn't stopped me from voting for a Democrat Senator or Congressman when I found them to be more fiscally conservative than the alternative. You seem incapable of having views other than how you are apparently hard-wired at present.
Todd82TA 8 months ago
@Todd82TA Actually you are a right wing scum bag... And that false equivalency - PROVED WRONG BY BOOK YOU DIDN'T READ... Bigotry being the hall mark oi the conservative and what you are clearly showing... And 'fiscally conservative' - you are clearly effin insane and need help. And as a final explain this:
'6% Of Scientist Are Republicans ' on youtube
See SCIENTISTS - you know those people that study REALITY have a political bias - hmmm there goes you argument down in flames...
StunnedByStupidity 8 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity Man, you're right... there goes my argument... down in flames. Oh well.
Todd82TA 8 months ago
My intuition and experience leads me to think Im a 3.
OsyenVyeter 11 months ago
I think I may have encountered a few of those incompetents making comments on my videos. For example, check out the comments made by theman77777777232 and DracOverLordHaton on this video:
watch?v=77XBZHJcoK4
What's going on in their heads?
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
Awesome, Thanks for directing me here zarkoff. An open forum where I (hopefully) won't be blocked for asking genuine questions. Maybe it's just the fact that I can't understand this guy's accent, but I couldn't watch past 2 minutes. Can you please simply explain now why you don't believe that our senses are accurate?
"Zarkoff doesn't believe our senses are accurate"
If our senses are not accurate, what instruments (besides our senses) will you use to determine this?
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "If our senses are not accurate, what instruments (besides our senses) will you use to determine this?"
Your answer is here:
watch?v=zahFKGVpQGg
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
Please just explain what you would use to test your senses (besides your senses) to determine that they are inaccurate. You already sent me to this video, now you send me to another. Do you not understand the material in the videos that you are sending me to? Please tell me the exact second in either video that answers my about question directly. Exactly what OTHER method besides your senses will you use to determine that they are invalid. The forum is all yours...
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232
"Please tell me the exact second in either video that answers my about question directly."
I meant to say...
Please tell me the exact second in either video that answers my aboVE question directly.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "tell me the exact second in either video that answers my about question directly."
at 6:50 here:
watch?v=zahFKGVpQGg
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
Okay, at 6:50 you say...
"There's a link in the underbar." Then someone else says... "Some will say that I was too stupid to understand that it was a simple chemical reaction in my brain that was a response to stimulus. To that I say, 'Well so is every other thought that you will ever have. Does that make any moment in your life less of a reality?" And then you respond, "Yes, it does. In a way it makes all your moments less real."
My question to you zarkoff is "ARE YOU SURE"???
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "ARE YOU SURE"???
No.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
So Zarkoff, Your response at 6:50 at watch?v=zahFKGVpQGg seems to say that you are sure that you are unsure about reality. Am I missing something??????
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "Am I missing something??????"
Yes.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
Okay, I'm open to learning. Don't wanna watch no more videos. I'm fully capable of understanding what you can teach me. I really want to learn. So please type it loud and clear....
How exactly can you be sure that you are unsure?
How exactly can you know that we cannot know?
Or what exactly am I missing?
What's the point of your videos if you are not willing to teach me? What are you doing on youtube?
theman77777777232 11 months ago
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
"Other people have more neurons than you do."
Alright man, everyone reading knows that you're embarrassed, but there's no need for insults. I mean you obviously don't have it all together upstairs. I mean, you say we can't know, but then you contradict yourself by saying that you can know that. You say that we can't be sure, but then you contradict yourself by saying that we can "have a justifiable level of confidence" which is the same thing as pretty sure that we can't be sure.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232
So, you can't have a justifiable level of confidence about reality, however, you have a justifiable level of confidence that you can't have a justifiable level of confidence about reality? Does that about sum it up? And I'm the one missing neurons? Are you sure neurons even exist zarkoff?
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "Does that about sum it up?"
No.
We might be in the Matrix, or you might be hallucinating. Can you prove to me that your 5 senses are trustworthy and valid without using any of your 5 senses or the 5 senses of other people?
zarkoff45 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@zarkoff45
"We might be in the Matrix, or you might be hallucinating."
This does nothing to do with the fact that you have a justifiable level of confidence that you cannot have a justifiable level of confidence about anything. The only thing that you have a justifiable level of confidence about is the fact that you cannot have a justifiable level of confidence about anything, which is self contradicting.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
"Can you prove to me that your 5 senses are trustworthy and valid without using any of your 5 senses or the 5 senses of other people?"
Exactly. This was my exact question to you zarkoff. If you believe that our 5 senses our not accurate, then nothing in science, or your branch of neuroscience, has any validity whatsoever. There's no point in furthering our knowledge in fields where the knowledge itself is inaccurate, such as science.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232
Do me a favor and stab yourself in the hand with a fork. Then tell me whether or not you believe your senses are accurate or whether or not you still believe you are hallucinating inside of the matrix.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "If you believe that our 5 senses our not accurate, then nothing in science, or your branch of neuroscience, has any validity whatsoever."
Philosophical Bullshit. That's why you're a victim of Dunning-Kruger - you can't see why that is so.
There's truth, what we put together via scientific methodology and such, then there's Truth with a capital "T", absolute Truth, and then there's Truth(TM) which religions sell via philosophical bullshit. Only real one has a small "t"
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
Then you shouldn't have a problem explaining yourself as to why I am incompetent.
I just need to understand how it is that I can know for sure that I can't know anything for sure. Because this is what you are claiming. And if it is not, I'll need your helping breaking down EXACTLY what it is that you are claiming.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "why I am incompetent."
Because you're so hung up on Truth that you can't see the truth.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@zarkoff45
"Because you're so hung up on Truth that you can't see the truth."
Or maybe it's the fact that you don't care about truth at all whatsoever?
How does your new claim that I'm too hung up on truth support your claim that I can know for sure that I can't know anything for sure? Because if I can't know anything for sure, how is it possible to know that for sure?
theman77777777232 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@zarkoff45
@zarkoff45
"Because you're so hung up on Truth that you can't see the truth."
Or maybe it's the fact that you don't care about truth at all whatsoever?
How does your new claim that I'm too hung up on truth support your claim that I can know for sure that I can't know anything for sure? Because if I can't know anything for sure, how is it possible to know that for sure?
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
How can I know for sure that I can't know anything for sure?
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "How can I know for sure that I can't know anything for sure?"
Describe something you think you can know for sure and I'll tell you why you can't know that for sure.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
2 + 2 = 4
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
"Describe something you think you can know for sure and I'll tell you why you can't know that for sure."
2 + 2 = 4
Please explain why I can't know that for sure. Thanks.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 - "2 + 2 = 4, Please explain why I can't know that for sure."
Because you don't know what the numbers refer to. It's just an abstraction that defines a useful set of rules that you learned. Applying the rules to the real world isn't always so sure. It gives you no assurance beyond its limited mathematical domain.
IF I give Bob 4 apples, and Jim a different set of 4 apples and they make apple sauce, why will Bob have more sauce than Jim? How is it that possible if 4 = 4?
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
"How is it that possible if 4 = 4?"
Dude, you really need to see a psychiatrist.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "How is it that possible if 4 = 4?"
It's possible because I gave Bob larger apples. There's a case where one instance of 4 did not equal another instance of 4. Yet the abstract rules declare they should be equal. If so, what was equal about them?
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
Dude, you don't know what you're saying. I'd stop before you embarrass yourself any further.
There is NEVER a case where 4 does not equal 4. You better ask a mathematician.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "You better ask a mathematician."
I have already. Are you familiar with Godel’s Uncertainty Theorem? Do you know anything about the problems Alfred North Whitehead and Bertrand Russell had trying to prove that 1+1=2 in Principia Mathematica?
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
Godel showed that if you have a consistent logical system which includes arithmetic, then you can always construct a proposition which can be neither proven nor dispoved within the system. Therefore a consistent logical system must be incomplete. Of course, his method of constructing such a proposition might mean that it is extremely large, and extremely useless, so Godel's theorem may have no real practical significance.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232
Godel showed that constructing a complete mathematical system is unattainable. However, 2 + 2 = 4 is not a COMPLETE mathematical system.
So are you still SURE that you can tell me for sure that I can't be sure about whatever it is that I think I'm sure about?
Even if you're correct that I'm wrong about 2 +2 =4, it's still impossible for you to be so sure that you'll be able to tell me that I'm unsure. Why is it that you don't understand this???
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "2 + 2 = 4 is not a COMPLETE mathematical system."
Which means it's an incomplete system that you're sure about. Why?
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@theman77777777232
What if I told you I was sure that you could knock down anything I mention? Would that screw up your game plan? Or would I just sound like an idiot for assuming that?
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "What if I told you I was sure that you could knock down anything I mention? Would that screw up your game plan?"
Depends on what you mean by "sure." If you're talking about absolute certainty, then you would be wrong, I don't believe that absolute, capital "T," Truths are knowable, but if you're talking about confidence you'd be right and it wouldn't screw up my game plan - I merely have confidence, that's not the same as absolute certainty. You are confused on that point.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
Do you absolutely know that absolute truths are unknowable? Because I'm really not interested in your opinion. I'm more interested in what you know for sure.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "Do you absolutely know that absolute truths are unknowable?"
I've never met a convincing absolute truth and thus I merely have confidence they are unknowable.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "I'm more interested in what you know for sure."
That's your problem right there. You're looking for something that doesn't exist. You are philosophically delusional.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@zarkoff45
Zarkoff, let's get to the heart of it here. You said that if I mention something/anything that I'm sure of, you will be able to tell me why I cannot be sure of. This is self-refuting my friend. You are so sure that you will be able to tell me I'm unsure.
"You're looking for something that doesn't exist."
You are making a positive claim to knowledge here my friend. You are positively stating that absolute truth does not exist. But you have stated an absolute truth.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@zarkoff45
"That's your problem right there. You're looking for something that doesn't exist."
So you know for sure that knowing something for sure can't exist?
Self-refuting zarkoff.
You are making a positive claim to knowledge when you say that I'm looking for something that doesn't exist. What is it again that doesn't exist zarrkoff?
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232
Zarkoff, let's get to the heart of it here. You said that if I mention something/anything that I'm sure of, you will be able to tell me why I cannot be sure of. This is self-refuting my friend. You are so sure that you will be able to tell me I'm unsure.
"You're looking for something that doesn't exist."
You are making a positive claim to knowledge here my friend. You are positively stating that absolute truth does not exist. But you have stated an absolute truth.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "But you have stated an absolute truth."
Nope.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@zarkoff45
"Nope. "
Oh you didn't? Well then, what exactly were you referring to that I was looking for that does not exist?
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
What is it that I'm looking for that doesn't exist?
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232
Absolute truth.
You don't think people can have confidence without having absolute truth.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
Synonyms for confident... certain, positive. Now check your dictionary.
It seems to me that you're confident that you can't have confidence in anything.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
or a thesaurus.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232
In what thesaurus is "confidence" synonymous with "absolute truth"?
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
Thesaurus . com says confidence is a synonym with certainty. Sounds like you want to play word games.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232
certainty is not absolute truth.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@zarkoff45
"certainty is not absolute truth."
I didn't say that it is. I said certainty is a synonym for confidence. So you are certain that absolute truth does not exist.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@zarkoff45 I said certainty and confidence are synonymous. You're certain that absolute truth does not exist?
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "You're certain that absolute truth does not exist?"
No. I feel certain that absolute truth does exist, but you can not know it absolutely. And if you deny the validity of your senses you can know nothing.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
"but you can not know it absolutely"
That's an absolute statement, and a positive claim to knowledge.
"And if you deny the validity of your senses you can know nothing."
It would be absurd to deny your sense zarkoff. Just like it's absurd to argue against the fact that square circles don't exist..
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "That's an absolute statement, and a positive claim to knowledge."
Nope, it is still only truth with a small "t." It could be proven wrong. I am just confident it will not be.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
Here's what it boils down to zarkoff.
The android having a soul and being sure of it is no different than you being sure of your senses.
Case in point. And thanks for helping me make my case on this forum.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "The android having a soul and being sure of it is no different than you being sure of your senses."
But that's what my video says, you moron - the android can not know it has a soul - you didn't understand the video. The high voice is a quote.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@theman77777777232
dun da dun dun, dun da dun dun dun!!
pwned
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232
The only thing you've pwned is your own inability to comprehend my video. I'm the one who says the android cannot know it has a soul.
Watch again:
watch?v=77XBZHJcoK4
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
Because the android is the only one who knows whether or not he has a soul.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@theman77777777232 "Because the android is the only one who knows whether or not he has a soul."
That was a quote, you moron. That was the point I argued against.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@theman77777777232 "Because the android is the only one who knows whether or not he has a soul."
That line is me quoting Marcin P2 before I argue against him. After that quote I say: "how would it be possible for the android to know if people didn't know for sure."
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@theman77777777232
Certainty is about the state of a person's mind, not about a property of the universe. A person can be certain that the world is flat and be utterly wrong.
Absolute truth is like "there are absolutely no square circles." However, you don't even get that Mr. a-lot-of-7s because you said "Prove to me that your 5 senses are trustworthy and valid without using any of your 5 senses or the 5 senses of other people." Without senses you cannot know anything about circles.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
My exact point. Have you stabbed yourself in the hand yet to see whether or not you are confident about your senses? Do you really need to falsify your senses using something other than your senses to be 100% sure that your gonna scream your ass of once that fork penetrates the skin?
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "My exact point."
Bullshit.
Your comment on my video was philosophical bullshit. We can only assume our sensory data, when compared with others in rigorous experiments as I noted in my video, will yield scientific truths. We have confidence in this and if you want to deny it using your argument because we can not prove it absolutely with out sensory information then you are full of shit.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
Nope, I'm saying the android knowing he has a soul = you knowing that your senses are valid ding dong.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "Have you stabbed yourself in the hand yet to see whether or not you are confident about your senses?"
Being confident in your senses is not the same as knowing absolutely. I'm also not going to jump off a building and assume I can fly, but I can not be absolutely sure that we are not living in the Matrix and that I could do it.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
Why should a person that knows he has a soul deny that he has a soul? It would be the same as denying his senses since he is the only one who knows whether or not those are valid. Do you get what I'm saying yet?
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "Why should a person that knows he has a soul..."
How can you know you have a soul?
zarkoff45 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@zarkoff45
"How can you know you have a soul?"
How can you know you have a mind?
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232
Do you understand why you've been pwned yet, zarkoff?
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "Do you understand why you've been pwned yet, zarkoff?"
I sort of see why you think that - but you have still failed to make a case for souls existing now that you've moved to that argument.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "It would be the same as denying his senses since he is the only one who knows whether or not those are valid."
No, you don't know whether your senses are valid. People hear voices that are not there. They hallucinate and feel pain in phantom limbs. Often it can be proved to someone that their senses are not giving them accurate information.
voidCaptain 11 months ago
@theman77777777232
It's like pulling teeth.
But thanx for refuting yourself. Over and over and over again, after blocking me from your channel, like veritas blocked you.
theman77777777232 11 months ago
@theman77777777232 "so Godel's theorem may have no real practical significance."
"may have"??? You don't sound so sure to me.
zarkoff45 11 months ago
@zarkoff45
"'may have'??? You don't sound so sure to me."
Whatever, there's no need for semantics. I'll retract the 2 + 2 = 4 statement if it makes you feel better if we can get down to the nitty gritty...
How is it that you can be so sure that you'll be able to tell me why I can't know anything for sure, no matter what I mention? How can you be so sure that you'll be able to accomplish the task when within the very same sentence you imply that it is not possible to know anything for sure?
theman77777777232 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@theman77777777232 "How is it that you can be so sure that you'll be able to tell me why I can't know anything for sure,..."
I can't. You still don't get it.
zarkoff45 11 months ago