#Intellectual Humility

[lazyyogi]

Sometimes attaining the deepest familiarity with a question is our best substitute for actually having the answer.

Brian Greene

[jstor]

Dropping in to say JSTOR Daily dropped a podcast!

The series brings scholars and community leaders together to discuss what intellectual humility looks like beyond academia.

Listen here or wherever you get your podcasts 🥳

[mbti-notes]

with regards to learning it may be important to know about IEOD(illusion of explanation depth) which may sometimes lead us to believe we understand more about the world than we think this can be especially true for those with an intuitive preference i write this because I've fallen for it too I hope this helps

I have discussed such learning problems in previous posts. After spending many years teaching, tutoring, and coaching students from a variety of backgrounds, in a variety of subjects, it never ceases to amaze me just how little people understand about learning. I believe that basic knowledge of learning theory is necessary for optimizing the learning process, if one hopes to be a good student of anything.

With so much information at the fingertips, it's more important than ever that people are mindful about how they learn. Being in the role of "student" is hard because you're a newbie and you're ignorant and you don't know the best way to tackle a big subject. Without a good teacher or an expert to guide you, you might come to rely on dubious sources of information, misinterpret what you read, misapply the ideas, or hit a seemingly insurmountable block/plateau.

Unfortunately, there are not enough good teachers to go around. Unfortunately, many teachers in public education are tasked with "babysitting" rather than teaching, to the detriment of learning. As a result, too many students get to high school, i.e., into adulthood, without a solid foundation of study skills.

Just recently, I was helping a twelfth grade student with essay writing. Being a good student, they couldn't understand why they kept getting low marks in writing despite putting a lot of effort into the assignments. Turns out, they kept submitting summaries of the literature when the teacher was explicitly asking for analysis of the literature. When I brought this problem to their attention, they were even more confused, because they thought they had been doing analysis all along. They had no clue that there was a difference between summary and analysis, so they were incapable of getting to the level of depth that the teacher was demanding.

One of the first things I often have to do with students is explain the difference between lower order vs higher order learning. Lower order learning is usually enough to pass the class throughout K-12 or achieve basic competency. Higher order learning moves people into expert territory. Without a clear vision of what they should be aspiring to, students tend to get stuck in lower order learning.

The difference between lower and higher order learning is neatly summarized by Bloom's Taxonomy, a conceptual framework for evaluating cognitive/intellectual ability. It breaks down the learning process into six categories/levels: 1) remember, 2) understand, 3) apply, 4) analyze, 5) evaluate, 6) create. Since it's hard to quantify exactly what's happening in a student's mind during learning, this framework helps by asking concrete questions about what the student can or cannot do.

My student got stuck at level 2 when the average requirement for the class was 4. They gave me a sample essay that their teacher considered to be "excellent" and it was easily at 5. While they could "feel" that there was a difference between their own essay and the excellent essay, they weren't able to articulate the difference at all.

One learning problem that people, Ns especially, often suffer is that they tend to get ahead of themselves, which is related to illusion of explanation depth. It's basically trying to run before walking. For example:

they believe "gist" is enough and dismiss details

they conflate knowing (theory) and doing (real world)

they judge/conclude without proper analysis

they try to create without mastering the basics

The above problems arise when a person doesn't realize how much they don't know (and in the case of an unhealthy personality, they refuse to acknowledge it). My student (N) is a good example. They believed that being able to do level 2 stuff (paraphrase, summarize, interpret, give examples) qualified as level 4 "analysis" and that this meant they had "mastered" the material. They simply didn't know any better or that more was possible. It wasn't until I explained to them the differences between lower and higher order learning that they began to realize how low-level their writing actually was.

I've talked before about the differences between a good student vs a good learner. A simple way to think about it: A good student is preoccupied with proving how much they know, so they are mainly motivated by extrinsic rewards or egotistical gain. By contrast, a good learner is preoccupied with how much they don't know, so they are mainly motivated by intrinsic rewards or intellectual humility that naturally breeds intellectual curiosity.

[frank-olivier]

The Battle for the Truth: Science, Rhetoric, and the Public Sphere

Reality is nothing but a collective hunch. — Lily Tomlin

The pursuit of knowledge is marked by a paradoxical dynamic where systems embodying the principles of scientific inquiry, acknowledging their own incompleteness and embracing the provisional nature of truth, are frequently attacked by counterparts that proclaim absolute certainty yet often lack a foundation in empirical evidence. This phenomenon raises a profound question about why rigorously scientific systems, aware of their limitations, incur criticism from unscientific systems that claim completeness. The underlying reasons for this critique are rooted in epistemological, psychological, and sociological factors that drive this seemingly counterintuitive conflict.

At the heart of scientific systems lies an inherent humility, an acknowledgment of the complexity of the subject matter, and a willingness to revise or even overturn existing theories based on new evidence. This openness is not a sign of weakness but a hallmark of the scientific method, which thrives on skepticism, peer review, and empirical validation. However, this selfsame openness can be misconstrued by critics from closed systems as indecisiveness or uncertainty, providing a perceived foothold for attack. In contrast, closed systems often present themselves as comprehensive and definitive, eschewing the nuanced uncertainties of scientific inquiry for the comforting simplicity of absolute truths. This appeal to certainty resonates deeply with a public frequently overwhelmed by the intricacies of modern life, seeking clear, uncomplicated answers to complex questions.

A significant portion of the critique stems from a fundamental misunderstanding or deliberate misrepresentation of the scientific process. The iterative nature of scientific inquiry, where theories are refined or revised based on new evidence, is often portrayed as flip-flopping or lack of conviction. Critics from closed systems may fail to grasp or choose to obscure the distinction between the provisional nature of scientific knowledge and the method's robustness in approaching truth. Beneath the surface of these critiques often lie power dynamics and ideological differences. Closed systems may perceive scientific findings as a threat to their influence, audience, or worldview, prompting a defensive stance that manifests as attacks on the scientific system's legitimacy. Philosophical disagreements over the nature of truth, the role of empiricism, or the balance between consensus and dissent also fuel these conflicts, highlighting the deeply entrenched nature of these disputes.

To address this paradox, education and awareness are crucial. Enhancing public understanding of the scientific method can foster a broader appreciation for its strengths and the inherent value of acknowledging complexity. Scientists and science communicators must effectively convey the provisional nature of scientific knowledge, highlighting its adaptive and refining aspects as strengths rather than weaknesses. Encouraging respectful, open dialogue between proponents of different systems, while challenging, can facilitate mutual understanding and, in some instances, reconciliation of viewpoints. Strengthening science education and promoting clear communication are key strategies to navigate this paradox, ultimately fostering a more informed, critically thinking society.

The critique of scientific systems by unscientific counterparts underscores a profound misunderstanding of the scientific endeavor. Rather than a vulnerability, the acknowledgment of incompleteness is a badge of honor, reflecting the scientific community's unwavering commitment to the pursuit of truth, no matter how complex or provisional. Embracing education, clear communication, and engaged dialogue becomes paramount, not only for the integrity of scientific knowledge but for the fostering of a society that values critical thinking and the pursuit of knowledge. By navigating this paradox with awareness and strategies aimed at enhancing public understanding and dialogue, we can work towards a future where the scientific method is valued for its strengths, and the provisional nature of truth is seen as a catalyst for continuous learning and improvement.

Marjorie Shapiro: Supersymmetry, Extra Dimensions and the Origin of Mass - Exploring the Nature of the Universe Using PetaScale Data Analysis (Google Tech Talks, June 2007)

String Theory isn‘t Dead (Sabine Hossenfelder, December 2024)

The Problem With Sabine Hossenfelder (Professor Dave Explains, October 2024)

No, Sabine, Science is Not Failing (Professor Dave Explains, November 2024)

Lawrence Krauss: God, String Theory, and the State of Physics (Robinson Erhardt, March 2024)

Sabine Hossenfelder Can’t Stop Acting Like a Complete Fraud (Professor Dave Explains, February 2025)

Wednesday, February 26, 2025

[omegaphilosophia]

The Philosophy of Truth Seeking

The philosophy of truth seeking involves the rigorous and systematic pursuit of truth and understanding across various domains of knowledge. It encompasses the methodologies, ethical considerations, and intellectual virtues necessary for discerning what is true from what is false. This philosophy is fundamental to disciplines such as epistemology, science, and ethics, and it plays a crucial role in how individuals and societies form beliefs, make decisions, and establish values.

At its core, truth seeking is driven by the belief that truth is valuable and worth pursuing for its own sake, as well as for its practical benefits. Philosophers have long debated the nature of truth, the methods by which it can be discovered, and the criteria for determining its validity. Some key aspects of the philosophy of truth seeking include:

Epistemology: The study of knowledge and justified belief. It explores the nature, scope, and limits of human knowledge, as well as the methods for acquiring and validating it.

Scientific Method: A systematic approach to inquiry that relies on observation, experimentation, and empirical evidence to develop and test hypotheses about the natural world.

Intellectual Virtues: Traits such as open-mindedness, intellectual humility, critical thinking, and perseverance that are essential for effective truth seeking.

Ethical Considerations: The moral responsibilities associated with seeking and disseminating truth, including honesty, integrity, and respect for evidence.

Truth seeking is not just an individual endeavor but also a collective one. It involves the collaborative efforts of communities of scholars, scientists, and thinkers who build upon each other's work, challenge each other's assumptions, and refine their methods over time. In this way, the philosophy of truth seeking underpins the progress of human knowledge and the advancement of society.

[raffaellopalandri]

The Pursuit of Knowledge Without Wisdom or Virtue: An Intellectual Tragedy

Today’s topic is one of those that more often comes out during Sangha meetings or in lay discussions: knowledge, when isolated from wisdom (sophia / σοφία) and virtue (aretḗ / ἀρετή), is no longer a guarantor of human flourishing but may become a tool of hubris (hybris — ὕβρις) and ruin. Photo by Magda Ehlers on Pexels.com Knowledge (epistēmē / ἐπιστήμη) here must be distinguished from wisdom:…

[mathhombre]

Deborah Loewenberg Ball

@jstor has a great series on intellectual humility, and I thought it was interesting that they interviewed a math teacher educator for a math part. Dr. Ball is definitely one of the national leaders on teacher education in general, and did a lot of great work on math education when she was researching.

A colleague and I have a bit of an ongoing joke about how is she going to bring up Shea, because she always does...

This is a fairly well known story. Giggle.

But great interview, with links to lots of great articles because it's JSTOR. The main point is about how math is a good place to learn these things, but gets at the barriers that come from school being racialized and gendered.

[fandfnews]

Wikipedia Co-Founder Larry Sanger Shares Journey from Atheism to Christianity

In a candid interview, Larry Sanger, co-founder of Wikipedia and a lifelong skeptic, revealed his transformative journey from atheism to Christianity—a shift rooted in intellectual rigor, personal relationships, and a deep dive into scripture. Sanger, who holds a PhD in philosophy, spent 35 years questioning faith before embracing Christianity in his 50s. His story challenges stereotypes about…

[olayemi30]

The Power of Questioning

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about unleashing the power of critical thinking for good and today’s post is a continuation of that thought process about what it takes to think, know and do differently for our personal and collective good.  Everyday I hear and learn new things; my day involved a discussion on the right temperature to make a coffee and the question was, ‘should coffee be made with…

[darthfoil]

"When furious, Get curious"

Vanessa Zoltan

Harry Potter Sacred Text - Intellectual Humility: The Goblet of Fire

[cyphorical]

The benefits of the studied technique:

In a study by Igor Grossmann, participants who used "illeism" (referring to oneself in the third person) showed improvements in wise reasoning qualities like intellectual humility, perspective-taking, and finding compromise, compared to a control group.

Those using illeism were also more accurate in predicting their future emotional reactions, indicating better emotional regulation.

The benefits were seen after a 4-week daily diary intervention prompting illeism.

How one might use the technique themselves:

When facing a challenging situation, try silently referring to yourself in the third person, e.g. "David felt frustrated that..."

Keep a daily journal describing situations from a third-person perspective.

This can build wise reasoning skills over time. Use it particularly when making difficult decisions or during interpersonal conflicts to reduce bias and improve perspective-taking.

The more it is practiced, the more illeism can become a beneficial habit supporting wise reasoning and emotional regulation.

First person example: I'm absolutely fuming that my best friend since childhood cancelled our concert plans tonight with barely an explanation. We've had these tickets for months to see our favorite band that we've been obsessed with since middle school. She texted me an hour before we were supposed to leave saying she didn't feel like going anymore. I tried calling her to get a better reason but she wouldn't pick up her phone. Now I'm stuck having wasted money on an extra ticket and feeling like our decade-long friendship means nothing if she bails on me so easily.

Third person example: Ryan is absolutely fuming that his best friend since childhood cancelled their concert plans tonight with barely an explanation. They've had these tickets for months to see their favorite band that they've been obsessed with since middle school. She texted Ryan an hour before they were supposed to leave saying she didn't feel like going anymore. Ryan tried calling her to get a better reason but she wouldn't pick up her phone. Now Ryan is stuck having wasted money on an extra ticket and feeling like their decade-long friendship means nothing if she bails on him so easily.

[mbti-notes]

I'm an ESFJ wanting to study psychology to become a therapist. But I feel kind of let down when I see more N students in my field more than S, & in my school I haven't met an S yet. I feel left out tbh. In your time were there many Ss studying in this field? Also psychology deals with many theoretical concepts in which im not the best at understanding well as quickly as my N friends. Do you have tips for an ESFJ like me to study psychology better? Thank you.

The fact is that Ns tend to dominate in post-secondary educational settings. Since this is not something within your control, the best course of action is acceptance of reality. Fighting against reality wastes precious time and mental energy that could otherwise be spent on learning and study. Instead of wishing for reality to be different, adapt to it.

I'll share one of the best pieces of advice I've ever received: "If you want to become more intelligent, surround yourself with people more intelligent than you."

Don't get me wrong, I'm not implying that Ns are more intelligent than Ss. I'm saying that, in learning situations, you should always surround yourself with people who know more than you and/or can do things better than you because this will provide you with a constant flow of opportunities to challenge yourself to learn harder and faster, to rise to the occasion.

No matter where you go, there are always going to be people more gifted than you. Rather than fearing or resenting them, learn from them. On average, Ns do tend to be more proficient at learning theory than Ss, so take this opportunity to learn from them how to use your Ne function better. However, personality types aside, remember that all beginners must go through the early stages of memorization grunt work to lay a proper foundation for future mastery.

A general point to consider: Due to inferior Ti, Fe doms are prone to feeling insecure about their intellectual abilities, which means it's easy for them to get bogged down in pointless social comparison and the shame of feeling less than. Insecurity is a self-imposed obstacle that prevents them from maximizing their learning potential. It leads them to seek out more comfortable but also non-challenging social environments that slow down rather than speed up the learning process. For ESFJ, there is sometimes an additional obstacle that comes from unhealthy Si+underdeveloped Ne and not being open-minded enough to easily adapt to unexpected/challenging situations.

Insecurity goes hand-in-hand with pride. People often feel insecure because it hurts their pride to lose face or feel socially rejected. As an infant, you learned to walk by falling on your tush multiple times and getting laughed at by all the adults. Getting over insecurity requires you to understand that being wrong, failing, and falling flat on your face are inevitable stages in the learning process. Accept this reality and fully own your shortcomings - let go of ego. This is how you cultivate the intellectual humility that is required for optimal learning.

[mikasasrippedtoenail]

A woman would call the most well articulated essay you've ever read a "ramble" while a man would call his shittyreddit post an "intellectual thinkpiece"

[omegaphilosophia]

Aspects of the Philosophy of Doubt

The philosophy of doubt explores the concept of uncertainty and skepticism regarding knowledge, beliefs, and truth claims. It questions the reliability of human cognition and the certainty of our understanding of the world. Doubt can be seen as both a philosophical problem and a methodological approach, influencing epistemology, metaphysics, ethics, and other areas of philosophy.

Some key aspects of the philosophy of doubt include:

Epistemic skepticism: This is the view that knowledge claims are inherently uncertain or even impossible to justify. Epistemic skeptics raise doubts about the reliability of our senses, reasoning, and cognitive faculties to accurately perceive and understand reality.

Methodological doubt: This is a systematic approach to inquiry that involves questioning assumptions, beliefs, and conclusions in order to arrive at more reliable knowledge. Methodological doubt is often associated with the scientific method and critical thinking.

Cartesian skepticism: Named after the philosopher René Descartes, Cartesian skepticism is a form of radical doubt that seeks to doubt everything that can be doubted in order to find indubitable truths. Descartes famously expressed skepticism about the reliability of the senses and the possibility of being deceived by an evil demon.

Existential doubt: This form of doubt concerns questions about the meaning, purpose, and significance of human existence. Existential doubt often arises in response to existential crises or profound experiences that challenge conventional beliefs and values.

Moral skepticism: Moral skepticism is the view that there are no objective moral truths or that moral knowledge is inherently uncertain. Moral skeptics may doubt the existence of moral facts or argue that moral judgments are ultimately subjective or culturally relative.

Overall, the philosophy of doubt encourages critical reflection, open-mindedness, and intellectual humility in the pursuit of truth and understanding. It reminds us to question our assumptions, challenge our beliefs, and remain open to new possibilities, even in the face of uncertainty.

[raffaellopalandri]

Book of the Day - Clear Thinking

Today’s Book of the Day is Clear Thinking, written by Shane Parrish in 2023 and published by . Shane Parrish is an entrepreneur, investor, speaker, and the founder of the popular website Farnam Street where he writes about useful insights that you can use in your personal and professional life. Clear Thinking, by Shane Parrish I have chosen this book because I recently suggested the author’s…