deepstash

Beta

Known Unknowns vs Unknown Unknowns: Two Sides of Ignorance

Sharing knowledge makes us think we are smart

Immediate access to knowledge makes us all feel like experts, when in reality we're not. And we certainly don’t consider ourselves to be stupid when we can research anything.

But it’s not just the rapid access to information that makes us fall for the Illusion of Explanatory Depth, it’s the way we consume this information.

168 SAVES


This is a professional note extracted from an online article.

Read more efficiently

Save what inspires you

Remember anything

IDEA EXTRACTED FROM:

Known Unknowns vs Unknown Unknowns: Two Sides of Ignorance

Known Unknowns vs Unknown Unknowns: Two Sides of Ignorance

https://www.learning-mind.com/known-unknowns-unknown-unknowns/

learning-mind.com

5

Key Ideas

Known unknowns and unknown unknowns

  • Known unknowns are the things we know we don’t know about (space travel, brain surgery, etc.) We can learn anytime about them but we’re not really expected to know about them.
  • Unknown unknowns are the things we think we should know about, but we actually don’t (how a bicycle works or what makes a toilet flush). These are common, everyday things we take for granted and assume we know how they function.

Illusion of explanatory depth

We think understand complex phenomena with far greater precision and depth than we rally do. We are are subject to an illusion.

Believing we know more than we actually do can lead us to prejudice without us even knowing.

The ignorance of our own ignorance

The main reason for the ignorance of our own ignorance is that we don’t need to know how everyday things work. They just do. We are used to seeing them wherever we go.

Sharing knowledge makes us think we are smart

Immediate access to knowledge makes us all feel like experts, when in reality we're not. And we certainly don’t consider ourselves to be stupid when we can research anything.

But it’s not just the rapid access to information that makes us fall for the Illusion of Explanatory Depth, it’s the way we consume this information.

Superficial information consumption

We browse the top of news items, we choose clickbait-y headlines and we allow tweets to inform us of global political moves. We tap into viral videos, we listen to soundbites and agree with memes.

This is a superficial way of ingesting knowledge. We never really deep dive into a topic. As a result, we know a lot of stuff, but not in that much detail: we know a little bit about a lot.

EXPLORE MORE AROUND THESE TOPICS:

SIMILAR ARTICLES & IDEAS:

Win the black belt in political argument
  • People think emotionally, so forget facts
  • When people are asked to explain their beliefs about how a given thing works, they’ll actually become less confident...
The Illusion of Explanatory Depth

We are overconfident about what we think because we're familiar with the material. 

We think we know more than we actually do because it's ava...

How to Win an Argument

If you want to win an argument, simply ask the person trying to convince you of something to explain how it would work.

Chances are they have not done the work required to hold an opinion. If they can explain why they are correct and how things would work, you'll learn something. If they can't you'll soften their views, perhaps nudging them ever so softly toward your views.

To Persuade or Convince

When people disagree with us we assume they are ignorant … that they lack information. So we try to convince them with information. It seldom works.

  • Persuasion appeals to the emotions and to fear and to the imagination. Convincing requires a spreadsheet or some other rational device.
  • It’s much easier to persuade someone if they’re already convinced, but it’s impossible to change someone’s mind merely by convincing them of your point.

3 more ideas

Science providing anwers
Science providing anwers

Despite the advances in science over the past century, our understanding of nature is still limited. Scientists still don't know what the vast majority of the universe is made up of or how cons...

Mysterian arguments

"Mysterian" thinkers give an important role to biological arguments and analogies.

Late philosopher Jerry Fodor argued that there are bound to be thoughts we are unable to think. Similarly, philosopher Colin McGinn claimed that all minds suffer from "cognitive closure" about particular problems. Just as animals will never understand prime numbers, so human brains are unable to consider some of the world's wonders.

Mysterians and pessimism

Mysterians present the question of cognitive limits in fixed terms: either we can solve a problem, or we will never be able to.

A possibility that eludes mysterians is one of slowly diminishing returns. We keep slowing down, even as we exert more effort, and there is no point where progress becomes impossible.

4 more ideas