> people can learn without a deliberate intent to learn. As far as I am aware right now, deliberate intent has nothing to do with DK
I agree with this: DK's research wasn't about whether anyone is trying to learn anything; AFAIK they didn't even look at that.
However, in the GGP to this post (the post of yours I originally responded to in this subthread), you said:
"Dunning-Kruger is the relationship between confidence and competence as people learn about new subjects."
But DK didn't test for "non-deliberate learning" any more than they tested for deliberate learning. They didn't test anything over time at all. So their research can't tell us anything about what happens over time as people learn (whether they're doing so deliberately or not).
For what it's worth I'm embarrassed by my entire dialog with you. I was having a bad day, sleep deprived and coming on HN to escape. I wasn't thinking clearly or communicating clearly, and on top of that I was straight up wrong about some things that were independent of my state of mind.
On a couple occasions I typed out things that I didn't actually mean. I also was making logic errors, and was embarrassingly biased by a bunch of pop-psychology viral stuff I had seen years earlier.
While my interactions with you were frustrating for me in the moment, I appreciate them now because they triggered a bunch of corrective reflection (including unlearning some things, which is typically a lot less fun than learning). I also want to acknowledge that they were probably frustrating for you too, and I want to thank you for engaging and staying civil despite me acting irrationally.
Hopefully you see this despite the significant delay in response.
I agree with this: DK's research wasn't about whether anyone is trying to learn anything; AFAIK they didn't even look at that.
However, in the GGP to this post (the post of yours I originally responded to in this subthread), you said:
"Dunning-Kruger is the relationship between confidence and competence as people learn about new subjects."
But DK didn't test for "non-deliberate learning" any more than they tested for deliberate learning. They didn't test anything over time at all. So their research can't tell us anything about what happens over time as people learn (whether they're doing so deliberately or not).