On Understanding and Difficulties

On Understanding and Difficulties

Grasping concepts is often seen by the majority populace as difficult, requiring years of study and specialization in order to understand. This is, in fact, a thoroughly ignorant view based on outdated theories of mind implemented by industrialists more than 100 years ago.

Specialization is an issue which is more complex than many people would like to lend credence to. For starters, those in favor of specialization posit that “there is too much information for anyone to be properly educated on a broad enough range, and specialization leads to more thorough knowledge of a topic”.
The second half of this claim I cannot argue against. The first, however is easily refuted and in fact there are many people and institutions which have written of and acted upon this concept over the past 20 years (that I know of). And in fact I myself make use of this.

What I call relational intelligence, a system of intelligence which is centered around the relating of things in memory to novel items in experience. In 2009 at stanford, a professor gave a lecture which was recorded and posted on the internet, in aforementioned lecture this professor described comparing concepts or objects using analogy in order to enhance the intellect.
In 2019, a man by the name of David Epstein had an authored work of his published, and this book was titled “Range” and discussed much of the scientific studies surrounding the most successful and uniquely advanced individuals within a field of study or work, and the studies purporting to explain why it is the case that most of the best operators within any given field would have the most widely spread set of experiences and education.

Relational intelligence (again, this is simply what I have decided to name it as it seems most precise in description) functions by allowing the holder of the intellect to compare new information to information retained in the memory. The more information one has access to, the less difficult a time they will have comprehending a new piece of information. Thusly relational intelligence can technically be expanded and improved upon.

Though specialization absolutely can and does lead to more in-depth and thorough understanding of a topic, relational intelligence can aid one in rapidly learning a new topic, and one can use this in conjunction with other techniques in order to learn equally as deeply as a specialist, yet in much less time.
Of course specialization also prevents hazards from forming. After all, who would honestly desire an inexperienced knee surgeon to begin attempting his first brain surgery after only a few weeks of study?

To paraphrase Heinlein (I am working off of memory here so I know this is not an exact quote)
“Humans are not insects, we are capable of a huge range of tasks and skills”

Now there are in fact many problems with human understanding. An individual’s ego itself can actually interfere with their grasp on concepts. For example with the origins debate. I take neither side in said debate, and both sides are guilty of observable dishonesty and sophistry. Yet this serves as a prime example, as both evolutionists and creationists tend to do this during debate; they will interpret the evidence in favor of the theory they personally feel is best while entirely rejecting the slightest possibility that any other explanation could be correct. And don’t dare explain to any evolutionist that just because their idea is logically consistent does not automatically make it true, as they’ll jump down your throat, generally without any sort of rationality and a large amount of namecalling, proving they are emotionally motivated in the interaction.

Ego presents a huge issue when it shuts down discussion and debate, especially when it prevents scientific knowledge from being advanced. And we can discuss a great many articles of knowledge which have been prevented from being explored when they were first discovered, many historical examples exist. Off the top of my head an automated radar switcher was prevented from advancing military technology and saving lives during world war 2, and this was due to the fact that the inventor was a female.

Removing ego from both discourse and observation, then, is a goal with a clear and positive goal for those who wish to find truth or advance the collective knowledge of mankind.

Further, sometimes there are people who believe they understand a concept very deeply and yet upon conversing with them one recognizes rapidly that they are wholly incognizant of the topic at hand. For example I recently attempted to explain to an individual about field mechanics and my personal theory on not only how and why academic quantum study has devolved into its current state, but also my theory of field mechanics.
This individual agreed with my assessment that academia has suffered great degeneration and confusion, yet upon encountering my field theory seems to have suddenly lost any semblance of what reality was.
He began spouting off about toroids and æther and chromatic electromagnetism and quantum tunneling (it is difficult to recall exactly what he was discussing and in attempting to do so I am perhaps reformatting what was said to make it more consistent with reality), and none of it was coherent. I explained to him that he was clearly misunderstanding certain things as he was using terms in ways that do not even begin to make any sense. I asked the person to clarify what they believed and how they came to that belief and instead of explaining why they believe or clarifying what they believe they spewed more words they apparently did not understand.

What I have described is the Dunning-Kruger effect and unfortunately it appears that these people cannot be cured or treated whatsoever.
If one cannot explain what it is that they believe in such a way that a young child could understand it, then one does not understand the concept they are presenting in the first place. As fate has it, I happen to have a high level of intelligence and a large vocabulary. Yet when I point out misapplied terms or falsehoods or fallacious bits of reasoning, I still get accused of not understanding what is being stated. Yet I can explain the terminology, etymology, entire pathology of logic used, and can cite legitimate academic sources. The people who accuse me of lacking intellect never seem to be able to explain anything, or do as much as cite a salon article let alone an actual academic source.

It is unfortunate but as neither I nor anyone else has found and tested a method of rehabilitating these lesser primates, and so the best I am able to do is propose a caste system that prevents dunning-krugers from ruining intellectual advancement for the rest of us.

This aside, I have a much greater faith in the capacity of the majority of individuals to think critically and investigate things than I did just a few years ago.
I have witnessed nearly falling over drunk individuals who most urbanites would consider unevolved relics of ancient history (not to insult any of these people at all), who were able to easily keep up with me when i explained complex concepts such as artificial intelligence, consciousness and quantum physics. There seems to be a large group of people across the United States who are low class but who believe that they are not intelligent enough to carry out the intellectual tasks at a high level, yet observation and interaction shows that these people are easily able to carry out these tasks.
We have an issue of people who could easily advance themselves if only they recognized that it was possible, if only they were shown the way.

Given that one cannot know whether an individual one encounters is a dunning-kruger or a Fermi in disguise, and given that the furthering of humanity’s collective knowledge relies upon expanding communications and understanding across more and more individuals, and also given that optics is important, it becomes important that one should also attempt to extend thorough, honest, and respectful conversation with all those one encounters.

What you choose to do if and when encountering someone who is a dunning-kruger or a dishonest individual is up to you. But always try to hold a decent conversation first. This usually requires a large deal of patience, but I maintain is always worth it.

I intend on releasing a full treatise of science in the near future.

Comments (0)
Join the discussion
Read them all
 

Leave a Reply

Hide Comments
Back

This is a unique website which will require a more modern browser to work!

Please upgrade today!

Share
%d bloggers like this: