Prof. Brian Cox... Unlike the know-it-alls.
I'm smart enough to know that I'm dumb.
- Thread starter JeffKeryk
- Start date
Here, here. Brian is featured in “ Science’s Greatest Mysteries” on the BBC Earth channel. Although it has plain title it's pretty high tech. I just watched one about the dark side of the moon and it was excellent and of course very topical after the Artemis II mission. Kudos for Professor Cox.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is real, and it rests on a simple but important point - you generally have to know something about a subject to recognize how much you do not know. The actual research shows that people with little knowledge in a given area often overestimate their understanding. Rather than relying on facts or specialized knowledge, they tend to fall back on “common sense” and general life experience.
The problem is that science is often not common sense. If it were, there would be little need for science in the first place. We could simply observe the world, apply common sense, and arrive at reliable conclusions. But many things in nature do not behave the way human intuition expects them to behave. That is exactly why careful study, experimentation, and expertise matter.
I have an extensive general background in science, along with deeper expertise in a few specific areas. That background has shown me how much nuance exists within even the smallest specialized fields. While I have a strong overall scientific understanding, I also know enough to recognize that the people who think about these specialized areas every day are the ones who truly understand their complexity. I do not pretend to have that level of expertise in every scientific field.
For example, the fact that I understand transcription and translation does not make me an expert in molecular biology. I can give a solid general explanation, and compared with someone who knows very little about the topic, I would probably sound quite knowledgeable. But if you put me in a room with someone who has a PhD in molecular biology and has spent 20 years working in that field, they would run circles around me.
By contrast, I am an expert in pediatric dentistry because I am formally trained in it and have practiced it every day for 20 years. That distinction matters. It doesn't mean I'm automatically right about everything in pediatric dentistry, but it does mean my opinion holds more weight until it's proven incorrect compared to someone with no training in the field. This is not an appeal to authority. It is a recognition that expertise is earned. Experts are not automatically right about everything, but their opinions carry more weight than the opinions of people who lack training, experience, and deep familiarity with the subject.
Feynman was simply acknowledging that as brilliant as he was and as much expertise as he had in the multiple fields he studied, there were a whole bunch of things he still didn't know.
The problem is that science is often not common sense. If it were, there would be little need for science in the first place. We could simply observe the world, apply common sense, and arrive at reliable conclusions. But many things in nature do not behave the way human intuition expects them to behave. That is exactly why careful study, experimentation, and expertise matter.
I have an extensive general background in science, along with deeper expertise in a few specific areas. That background has shown me how much nuance exists within even the smallest specialized fields. While I have a strong overall scientific understanding, I also know enough to recognize that the people who think about these specialized areas every day are the ones who truly understand their complexity. I do not pretend to have that level of expertise in every scientific field.
For example, the fact that I understand transcription and translation does not make me an expert in molecular biology. I can give a solid general explanation, and compared with someone who knows very little about the topic, I would probably sound quite knowledgeable. But if you put me in a room with someone who has a PhD in molecular biology and has spent 20 years working in that field, they would run circles around me.
By contrast, I am an expert in pediatric dentistry because I am formally trained in it and have practiced it every day for 20 years. That distinction matters. It doesn't mean I'm automatically right about everything in pediatric dentistry, but it does mean my opinion holds more weight until it's proven incorrect compared to someone with no training in the field. This is not an appeal to authority. It is a recognition that expertise is earned. Experts are not automatically right about everything, but their opinions carry more weight than the opinions of people who lack training, experience, and deep familiarity with the subject.
Feynman was simply acknowledging that as brilliant as he was and as much expertise as he had in the multiple fields he studied, there were a whole bunch of things he still didn't know.
Here is a good example of the distinction I am talking about.
For decades, it has been known that people who have had a tonsillectomy are more likely to develop inflammatory bowel disease. That data tells us what is associated with what, but it does not automatically tell us why. That did not stop some non-experts from making the causal leap from “tonsillectomy is associated with IBD” to “tonsillectomy increases your risk of IBD.” That's what their "common sense" told them.
But careful research has shown that the relationship is more complicated. It is not the tonsillectomy itself that increases the risk of developing IBD. Rather, the underlying tonsillitis, which was often the reason for the tonsillectomy in the first place, is what primes the immune system in a way that increases the later risk of IBD.
That distinction matters enormously.
If you believe the tonsillectomy is the cause, then the public health policy would be to discourage tonsillectomies whenever possible. But if the real issue is repeated tonsillitis and immune-system priming, then the opposite conclusion follows. In that case, earlier tonsillectomy could theoretically reduce repeated inflammatory episodes and lower the risk of downstream immune dysregulation. You can also see how initial public policy can be wrong and be changed with better science. It took over 10 years to do the research to show it was the tonsillitis and not the tonsillectomy that was to blame here.
This is exactly why expertise matters. A non-expert may see an association and assume causation. An expert understands that the most important question is not just whether two things are linked, but what mechanism explains the link. Public health policy built on the wrong causal story can easily point in the wrong direction but then again, sometimes we still have to make decisions without a complete understanding, just to learn a more completely understanding later and change policy.
For decades, it has been known that people who have had a tonsillectomy are more likely to develop inflammatory bowel disease. That data tells us what is associated with what, but it does not automatically tell us why. That did not stop some non-experts from making the causal leap from “tonsillectomy is associated with IBD” to “tonsillectomy increases your risk of IBD.” That's what their "common sense" told them.
But careful research has shown that the relationship is more complicated. It is not the tonsillectomy itself that increases the risk of developing IBD. Rather, the underlying tonsillitis, which was often the reason for the tonsillectomy in the first place, is what primes the immune system in a way that increases the later risk of IBD.
That distinction matters enormously.
If you believe the tonsillectomy is the cause, then the public health policy would be to discourage tonsillectomies whenever possible. But if the real issue is repeated tonsillitis and immune-system priming, then the opposite conclusion follows. In that case, earlier tonsillectomy could theoretically reduce repeated inflammatory episodes and lower the risk of downstream immune dysregulation. You can also see how initial public policy can be wrong and be changed with better science. It took over 10 years to do the research to show it was the tonsillitis and not the tonsillectomy that was to blame here.
This is exactly why expertise matters. A non-expert may see an association and assume causation. An expert understands that the most important question is not just whether two things are linked, but what mechanism explains the link. Public health policy built on the wrong causal story can easily point in the wrong direction but then again, sometimes we still have to make decisions without a complete understanding, just to learn a more completely understanding later and change policy.
I am student of such nuances..........because when I'm led down such a path...........I keep asking (at least) 5 WHYS?
Richie Feynman would be proud!
I watch the ancient films of the guy. He is not without emotional spirit, but I remain completely humbled when he explains...........why.Richie Feynman would be proud!
I am the weird creature who believes in God and thinks mankind is OK in the pursuit of all knowledge (science) .
I’ve read every book/biography about the man. He’s a personal hero of mine and he was a fascinating character.
It starts to get interesting once you ponder the even more fundamental things, like the laws of logic, mathematics, which are the basis of all human achievement, you start realizing this world must be more than just random events and mutations.
How do dogs perceive time?
Past (5 seconds), present.... and present.
Last edited:
Read the book "An Immense World" one of the chapters talks about how we believe different living things perceive things like temperature, pain, time, etc. It's absolutely fascinating.
Ordered!
Hidden variables? Randomness?
what I dont know fills volumes
I'm ignorant enough to try to train dogs.
They train you...
I have read and watched ideas on how EVERYTHING (and I mean it ALL) started.
Nothing in the mind of man has any true idea. OK maybe one theory or another might be close, but.........we don't know.
Pablo, training dogs is quite doable.
First you need to know a thing or three about communicating with dogs.
True story...
My back fence was down for replacement.
My neighbors cat had a litter of kittens.
Daisy, my young dobie mix got past me and out the kitchen door.
Daisy is on the neighbors stoop, kitten in her mouth.
¨Daisy Leave It¨!
¨Daisy Come¨!
Daisy puts the kitten down and comes to my side.
I was never more proud of that dog, the bond and relationship that we shared and her level of obedience.
R.I.P. Daisy, papa misses you.
I am not a proffesional dog trainer.
Last edited:
Try herding cats...
Last edited:
