Dunning-Kruger Effect: inaccurate self-assessment concerning our own competence

[john11inc]

Foregoing my standard form of replying to this type of stuff (since there is just so effing much of it and it's all ferociously repetitive, quote/reply is going to be too tedious), I'm just going to overview.

Firstly: I am really annoyed nobody fell for my trap near the top of this thread.  You people should be ashamed of yourselves for leaving me hanging like that.  You know I wanted to do some philosophizing beat down.  That's obviously the most glaring issue with this thread, and signaled its downfall.

Second: SPAM.  Both of you.  Whiny spam.  Take it to the pages if you're going to go on and on.  And on and on and on.  And on like that.  Nobody really cares, especially considering you're talking about stuff in a completely separate thread.

Third: Thal.  Moderately funny.

Fourth: That recording of Marik's 25-6 is a reason to not take his opinion seriously.  It's amateur-professional, semi-professional, piano teacher (whichever way you want to put it) grade, not professional.  It's just not very good.  I'm not saying he hasn't uploaded good recordings here in the past, but that performance was sloppy in nearly every regard, so I really don't think it should accord any baring.

Fifth: Just my opinion, but Stevebob's posts in that thread were far more civil than Marik's, and probably more respectful.  Marik's posts are condescending, and listing a bunch of pianists you claim to know that all agree with you is insecure at best, god-awfully annoying and pompous at worst, not to mention reeking of ego and delusions of grandeur.  I'm not saying Stevebob's opinions are more/less valid/incorrect, but his aren't full of rhetoric and patting himself on the back.  By the way, an interesting little factoid about Marik's behavior you probably didn't see.  That being because several of his posts in that thread were actually so ridiculous and egotistical Nils deleted them.  He's not the darling, little angel K is making him out to be.

Sixth: Karli, quit being an instigator.  If anyone owes anyone an apology, you own Steve one, for making wild accusations at him, belittling his opinion, dragging him into this muck you have gone out of your way to create somewhere it doesn't belong, and doing all this under what to me looks like a glaring misinterpretation of the actual situation.  Like Marik, you are also exhibiting quite the superiority complex (in this, particular case; I wouldn't normally say that about you), and you're not listing famous pianists.  You're listing Marik, a complete unknown to everyone except members of this forum.  Please keep in mind that Marik is not a famous pianist, and there is no reason Stevebob should assume such.  Also, your argument holds no water, as it was Marik that responded to Steve, and not the other way around.

Seventh: Sup Alistair?

Eighth: Nobody wins this thread.  Everyone loses.  This thread is a huge pile of fail.  However, if I was forced to choose, I'd have to give the gold medal to Thal.  Although we're talking like, Special Olympics gold medal; sure you'd rather have the gold, but you should feel bad anyway.

Ninth: Apparently Steve met the end of his rope and made crude comments to Karli?  Well, you probably deserved it.  Seriously.  Don't be a baby; poke something and it will bite.  Although I have to say that disappoints me in Steve (greatest irony ever?), who seems to be able to maintain his cool much better than most.  I know how quickly I'd be banned if I was in Steve's shoes.

Tenth, and finally: Opinions are opinions, and facts are facts.  Don't mix them up just because you have a crush on Marik.  Specifically, Marik's mention of 25-3 and 25-4 as the most difficult etudes of the entire set should clue you into the fact that Marik may not be the absolute end-all on this subject, seeing as the majority of his own arguments are based on the notion that everyone agrees about this matter.  Seems pretty contradictory that we're supposed to believe him because everyone agrees with him while he calls two etudes usually considered in the middle range of the difficulty scale to be the absolutely most difficult.

In true overview fashion, I will say that I find this whole thread completely destroyed, and while I think Stevebob is in the right in the matter that is actually being argued, nobody getting mixed up in this garbage is doing the right thing; this should have been kept respectful, this is in the wrong place, it should have been ended a long time ago, or, even better, it shouldn't have been brought up at all.  There was no reason for this to start; it's not like one of you was doing something outrageous or insulting the other person, or even really saying something stupid.  That's just what it suddenly exploded into, for absolutely no reason as far as I can tell, except that you (Karli) decided it was appropriate, for whatever reason, to derail a thread to try to get in a snide, little comment that has nothing to do with the thread you posted it in.

[stevebob]

Foregoing my standard form of replying to this type of stuff (since there is just so effing much of it and it's all ferociously repetitive, quote/reply is going to be too tedious), I'm just going to overview.

Firstly: I am really annoyed nobody fell for my trap near the top of this thread.  You people should be ashamed of yourselves for leaving me hanging like that.  You know I wanted to do some philosophizing beat down.  That's obviously the most glaring issue with this thread, and signaled its downfall.

Second: SPAM.  Both of you.  Whiny spam.  Take it to the pages if you're going to go on and on.  And on and on and on.  And on like that.  Nobody really cares, especially considering you're talking about stuff in a completely separate thread.

Third: Thal.  Moderately funny.

Fourth: That recording of Marik's 25-6 is a reason to not take his opinion seriously.  It's amateur-professional, semi-professional, piano teacher (whichever way you want to put it) grade, not professional.  It's just not very good.  I'm not saying he hasn't uploaded good recordings here in the past, but that performance was sloppy in nearly every regard, so I really don't think it should accord any baring.

Fifth: Just my opinion, but Stevebob's posts in that thread were far more civil than Marik's, and probably more respectful.  Marik's posts are condescending, and listing a bunch of pianists you claim to know that all agree with you is insecure at best, god-awfully annoying and pompous at worst, not to mention reeking of ego and delusions of grandeur.  I'm not saying Stevebob's opinions are more/less valid/incorrect, but his aren't full of rhetoric and patting himself on the back.  By the way, an interesting little factoid about Marik's behavior you probably didn't see.  That being because several of his posts in that thread were actually so ridiculous and egotistical Nils deleted them.  He's not the darling, little angel K is making him out to be.

Sixth: Karli, quit being an instigator.  If anyone owes anyone an apology, you own Steve one, for making wild accusations at him, belittling his opinion, dragging him into this muck you have gone out of your way to create somewhere it doesn't belong, and doing all this under what to me looks like a glaring misinterpretation of the actual situation.  Like Marik, you are also exhibiting quite the superiority complex (in this, particular case; I wouldn't normally say that about you), and you're not listing famous pianists.  You're listing Marik, a complete unknown to everyone except members of this forum.  Please keep in mind that Marik is not a famous pianist, and there is no reason Stevebob should assume such.  Also, your argument holds no water, as it was Marik that responded to Steve, and not the other way around.

Seventh: Sup Alistair?

Eighth: Nobody wins this thread.  Everyone loses.  This thread is a huge pile of fail.  However, if I was forced to choose, I'd have to give the gold medal to Thal.  Although we're talking like, Special Olympics gold medal; sure you'd rather have the gold, but you should feel bad anyway.

Ninth: Apparently Steve met the end of his rope and made crude comments to Karli?  Well, you probably deserved it.  Seriously.  Don't be a baby; poke something and it will bite.  Although I have to say that disappoints me in Steve (greatest irony ever?), who seems to be able to maintain his cool much better than most.  I know how quickly I'd be banned if I was in Steve's shoes.

Tenth, and finally: Opinions are opinions, and facts are facts.  Don't mix them up just because you have a crush on Marik.  Specifically, Marik's mention of 25-3 and 25-4 as the most difficult etudes of the entire set should clue you into the fact that Marik may not be the absolute end-all on this subject, seeing as the majority of his own arguments are based on the notion that everyone agrees about this matter.  Seems pretty contradictory that we're supposed to believe him because everyone agrees with him while he calls two etudes usually considered in the middle range of the difficulty scale to be the absolutely most difficult.

In true overview fashion, I will say that I find this whole thread completely destroyed, and while I think Stevebob is in the right in the matter that is actually being argued, nobody getting mixed up in this garbage is doing the right thing; this should have been kept respectful, this is in the wrong place, it should have been ended a long time ago, or, even better, it shouldn't have been brought up at all.  There was no reason for this to start; it's not like one of you was doing something outrageous or insulting the other person, or even really saying something stupid.  That's just what it suddenly exploded into, for absolutely no reason as far as I can tell, except that you (Karli) decided it was appropriate, for whatever reason, to derail a thread to try to get in a snide, little comment that has nothing to do with the thread you posted it in.

Q.F.T.

[weissenberg2]

Q.F.T.

What does that stand for.

[m19834]

Dear Mr. Inch,

One does not need to know everything within the world to be known, but to know just enough, to be capable of recognizing when words clearly reflect the untrue and unknown.  

[stevebob]

Dear Mr. Inch,

One does not need to know everything within the world to be known, but to know just enough, to be capable of recognizing when words clearly reflect the untrue and unknown. 

You're right:  one does not.  So you're hardly alone in having such refined powers of observation and judgment, despite the implications of self-admiring screeds that suggest you've got uniquely deep insights into everything that must be shared.  You don't, and a blog (or a bar stool) is generally the preferred venue for such pontificating and philosophizing.

[m19834]

No story would be a story without some kind of adversity and antagonist.  The thing is, these things are formulaic, and all part of a pattern -- they are mere devices which don't necessarily achieve what the author may think they are achieving.  That's the problem with uncontrolled "experiments," and when we are talking about individual beings, it's nearly impossible to truly know what's actually happening inside of them unless everybody is seeing their relation with each other in something bigger than oneself.  Many teachers use the same devices in teaching, based on perhaps some yogic philosophy or psychology or some mixture of both.  Personally, I can 'get' the "value" in it, and I think it may be generally one of the highest forms known to mankind so far, but something about it just doesn't sit right with me, some part of me believes there can be so, so much more.  I guess it's just a matter of finding the right match.

[m]

.

[mephisto]

Marik is obviously a very impressive pianist. He doesn't have to be famous. Just listen to his Ballade no.4 by Chopin, Scriabin sonata no 10 or Feinberg piano sonata 6.

When that is said, this thread shouldn't be about him or stevebob, it's about the Dunning-Kruger effect!

[stevebob]

I am still amused, somebody who supports half of the messages with quotes from Wikipedia and doesn't have a first hand experience (or just one single insight) even with such a common repertoire piece as Chopin Op.25/12, starts ranking Chopin Etudes difficulties, to start with... and then gets offended  ? Com'on...

This is obviously directed at me.  Dang, big surprise we haven't heard the last from you:  the grander the exit, the more likely it is that the person who flounces off in a self-pitying huff will be back.

I'm here primarily to help people.  Sometimes, if it weren't for a quote from Wikipedia or a pointer in the right direction to someone seeking help, they wouldn't get any at all.  I don't care how lame or unfounded you consider my ranking of Chopin etudes!  The fact is that I offered something reasonably on-target, and offered it promptly.  Do you even think the original poster was around by the time you chimed in one month later?

For your information, I learned my first Chopin etude over 35 years ago, and have worked on over half of the 27 off and on since then.  You know nothing about me.  I don't share your need to boast about lofty qualifications, and you have no reason to think that I know less than you or play less well than you—yet everything you say is predicated on that assumption.  Neither you nor anyone else had any reason whatsoever to doubt my credibility or the basis for my opinions—yet I wasn't afforded the same respect to which you feel automatically entitled.

And now you can't even address me directly?

No story would be a story without some kind of adversity and antagonist.  The thing is, these things are formulaic, and all part of a pattern -- they are mere devices which don't necessarily achieve what the author may think they are achieving.  That's the problem with uncontrolled "experiments," and when we are talking about individual beings, it's nearly impossible to truly know what's actually happening inside of them unless everybody is seeing their relation with each other in something bigger than oneself.  Many teachers use the same devices in teaching, based on perhaps some yogic philosophy or psychology or some mixture of both.  Personally, I can 'get' the "value" in it, and I think it may be generally one of the highest forms known to mankind so far, but something about it just doesn't sit right with me, some part of me believes there can be so, so much more.  I guess it's just a matter of finding the right match.

More pompous bloviation addressed ... to whom?  It is so passive-aggressive and beyond egotistical to think that your existential musings need have no plainly obvious reference and to direct your barbs veiled in preachy, patronizing palaver at an oblique target instead of stating what you mean directly.

I guess it's more fun that way?  I suspect that's what this is all about anyway:  having some sport at the expense of the newcomer who seems to think he knows a lot.  And he actually may!  Yipes, a barbarian at the gates.  We must draw our wagons into a circle and defend ourselves against this intruder!  Let's express our fear and loathing by doing all we can to try to discredit him and kick him around a bit.  He thinks he knows everything, but all he can do is quote Wikipedia!  I think I'll tell people he spelled "Kruger" wrong!  Who does he think he is?  And now this ignoramus upstart acts all offended?  Com'on!

Dang, how easily the status quo of an entrenched social clique is upset and the fragile egos of insecure individuals are challenged.  Man the barricades, the danger must be neutralized!  Who knew that the lone newcomer could have such power?  And yet this kind of pushback was exactly what I expected.  So have at it!  Keep having your fun.  I'll stand my ground, thanks.

[vviola]

What does that stand for.

"Quoted for truth" IIRC.

[m19834]

More pompous bloviation addressed ... to whom?  It is so passive-aggressive and beyond egotistical to think that your existential musings need have no plainly obvious reference and to direct your barbs veiled in preachy, patronizing palaver at an oblique target instead of stating what you mean directly.

Stevebob, I am actually being as direct as I can be.  I am describing my general perception of what I experience through reading you, and I feel it is my every right to do so and to do so in the ways that best fit my needs.  Though how you describe your opinions of my thoughts is not an accurate assessment of how I intend them, imo, in some ways I am just unconcerned about that without meaning to offend you.

What matters most right now is that I have repertoire to attend to and lots of work to get done with that.

[john11inc]

Stevebob, I am actually being as direct as I can be.

I must disagree:

One does not need to know everything within the world to be known, but to know just enough, to be capable of recognizing when words clearly reflect the untrue and unknown.  

and

That's the problem with uncontrolled "experiments," and when we are talking about individual beings, it's nearly impossible to truly know what's actually happening inside of them unless everybody is seeing their relation with each other in something bigger than oneself.

Not that I'm taking side(s); the only side I ever take is that of truth.  Nor should this mean the fact that Steve apparently quoted my first reply due to its truth, and subsequently continued in this line of behavior, isn't equally troublesome.

That's true, and I never pretended to be one. Moreover, a few times on this board I stated I left stage long ago and was not practicing for many years. Last few years I started coming back to shape (still in the process) and sometimes play concerts for my own leisure... just for heck of it and to see if that's something what I still want to do.

I didn't say you were.  Just noting that Karli's assumption that everyone should magically assume you are merely by your presence on the internet is asking a lot from what I suspect to be an otherwise non-psychic membership.

I actually thought that people would be much more interested not even in my opinion, but out of curiosity ask how Gavrilov was playing them in class to show off when relaxed, or what real pianists had to say about those etudes. Was I wrong!

I don't think the wording lent itself well to this interpretation.  It comes off much more as, "I'm right because [insert famous people I know] say so."

I am still amused, somebody who supports half of the messages with quotes from Wikipedia and doesn't have a first hand experience (or just one single insight) even with such a common repertoire piece as Chopin Op.25/12, starts ranking Chopin Etudes difficulties, to start with... and then gets offended  ? Com'on...

I'm not saying his opinions on the matter are correct.  I posted a list; you can see I disagree with them just as much as you do.  But we're not talking about who is right or wrong in regard to Chopin, we're talking about how people acted.  I'm also not saying your opinion isn't more valid than his, which it almost certainly is.

I am sure you realize yourself what you write here is rather a twisted way of what I posted, your interpretation to rather suit your own agenda, but it really doesn't matter...

Actually, I don't really think so.  I wouldn't have written it if I felt it was a misrepresentation of your arguments.  Maybe you are instead saying that the correlation between your contradictory statements doesn't "run as deep" as I am implying?

Anyway, my main reason to answer you is actually, I wanted to thank you for uploaded on Youtube stuff of Babbitt, Finnissy, Xenakis (esp. Mists and Evryali), and Concord Sonata. Looking forward to more stuff. Particularly, I am interested in a good recording of Penderecki Piano Concerto.

Thanks.  Although I don't have the Penderecki Piano Concerto.  I had a lot of interest in it until I heard it; in case you haven't, I can pretty much guarantee it will disappoint you.  It's really not that great IMO.

[pianowolfi]

Marik is obviously a very impressive pianist. He doesn't have to be famous. Just listen to his Ballade no.4 by Chopin, Scriabin sonata no 10 or Feinberg piano sonata 6.

Yes especially the Feinberg is very much worth to listen to. I must say that I often prefer listening to pianists who are not very famous, don't play like 120 concerts per year and aren't worn out by the eminently stressful travelling life of a concert pianist. If you have more time, music can grow and develop and come to life.

When that is said, this thread shouldn't be about him or stevebob, it's about the Dunning-Kruger effect!

Yes, stevebob has brought that up and it's a quite interesting subject. It reminds me of many encounters with people, also some of my students, who have not the slightest clue about "classical" music but think they have the knowledge to call it all trash, so to say. They are not open to suggestions. It's trash and that's it. Sometimes you can convince somebody if you play a piece without telling them that it's "classical" But really, to teach 13-14 year olds who think they know everything better can be nerve-wracking sometimes. Fortunately it's often only a phase. But some people keep stuck in it for life...

[synthex]

?

[stevebob]

Good on ya then, synthex!  Butt remember what they say about opinions, and why:  Everybody has one ... and everybody thinks somebody else's stinks.

If your motive really weren't to ridicule me (which, despite your protests, you continue to do), I think you'd take it to a private message.  Actually, no one has expressed any of their haughty consternation to me privately—because what's the joy in that?  The public punishment of the pillory is so much more fun!

Personally I think that theories like Dunning-Kruger are at best little more that the so called geniuses affirming their own ability above those that are less capable and skilled.  There are better ways of delivering advice.

In my opinion, one of Ayn Rand's more interesting dicta was when Ellsworth Toohey said, "A man abler than his brothers insults them by implication."

Yea.  Dam right!  Who did them Kunning and Druger guys think they was, anyways?  They think there so smart?  Their NUTHIN!!!

 

[synthex]

?

[Bob]

It kind of sounds like an argument for standards -- How else can we be objective about things?

And it reminds me of these sayings...
Ignorance is bliss.
The more I know, the more I realize the less I know.

What do you really do about it though?  Haha... Tell everyone you're incompetent so they'll think you're an expert?  We might have people start arguing over who's more incompetent. 

It does remind me a lot of situations.  A few times somebody gets a job because they are convinced they're good at something.  Students a lot have that, or the ones I've seen.  At the college level, I've been amused by people who take Piano 101 and say they're good at piano.  Hey, they got an A in Piano 101.  Theory and ear training classes too. 

[prongated]

It is - Australian idol is a variant... the sad part is that we don't just have painful singers auditioning - we get painful singers lacking in any talent whatsoever, believing they're full of it through the *** show all the way to the bloody finale - it's pathetic.

...but it is a regional variant in that at least the talentless ones are generally well-behaved, whereas a few of those in American Idol...

[I've been trying to look for this clip of this girl that auditioned last year who was absolutely rubbish but thinks she's something like the next Mariah Carey and threw out a massive tantrum like a spoiled brat when the judges told her she doesn't have it]

[prongated]

Fifth: Just my opinion, but Stevebob's posts in that thread were far more civil than Marik's, and probably more respectful.

Maybe it is so. I think Marik's posts may come across as arrogant simply because in general he speaks of an extremely high level of knowledge in music. (Personally, at the very least, I think he very much comes across as very humble, but either way I don't really care frankly!)

In any case, he did disagree with stevebob, but provided reasons why. Stevebob indeed posted his opinion and he's entitled to that, but since it's up in a public forum, what's wrong with discussing it? Heck, why even post if these opinions are to be beyond scrutiny or a healthy discussion?

And finally...sure, be respectful to everyone, but also respect where it's due, methinks!

[m]

.

[stevebob]

[synthex]

?

[stevebob]

Yours and his?  

[pianowolfi]

Yes, now you're running out of arguments...

[stevebob]

Yes, now you're running out of arguments...  

No. that's not it.  As you missed the point of the smiley, it symbolized my reaction to one of the most delusional, vicious and sanctimonious pieces of claptrap that I've ever encountered in a discussion forum.  Words failed me, but the smiley illustrated how I felt.  That's what they're for!

[peterjmathis]

I'm not going to comment on the rest of the thread, but the Dunning-Kruger effect has made me incredibly paranoid about my skills in every area since I heard about it.

[synthex]

?

[stevebob]

That would be a start.

That's a real crowd-pleaser there, synthex.

I apologise fully and publicly in the hope that at least we can end our little dispute, and get back to the important stuff, like playing the bloody piano.

Actions speak louder than words. 

[synthex]

?

[stevebob]

Why thank you

Meh.

[synthex]

?

[thalbergmad]

Would someone please enlighten me as to where all those lovely emoticons come from.

Thal

[Bob]

*Bob checks to make sure that was aspirin he took*

This has got to be one of the most bizarre threads I have ever seen on here.

[stevebob]

Would someone please enlighten me as to where all those lovely emoticons come from.

Thal

There are numerous sources for them.  If you see any you're curious about, pretend you wish to reply to the message and use the "Quote"  or "Insert Quote" feature.  It will reveal the URL of the website that the smiley(s) came from.

[Bob]

Cool.

https://www.smileyvault.com/albums/userpics/10404/paladin.gif

[Derek]

This thread literally changed my life when I had read it some 7 years ago. I think I was at an extreme end of the Dunning Kruger effect.

Then it dawned on me: I can't even get Super Mario Bros 2 right, much less anything in the advanced standard piano repertoire. I *still* have trouble with that piece when I practice it.

I did start somewhat late (18) and I never worked that hard at technique. Plus my hands are smaller than average I believe.

Fast forward to now, I've become much more honest in assessing where I'm at in technique and so forth and I'm focusing nearly 100% on (intermediate or easy) baroque and classical pieces, which seem to be within my reach. I'm having just as much fun as before, just much more honest with myself about my abilities.

So thank you to stevebob for helping increment my wisdom.