I ask myself whether my thinking is constrained by stereotypes and cliches

[noname223]

Maybe I lack to consider important nuances and keep stuck in narratives which are way too simplistic.

I am pretty impressed by one of my college friends. This dude is extremely smart and analytical. He still is prone to biases but who is not? I think he tends to an overconfidence bias. His stances on mental illness were shallow and dumb. But he is quite young and not that experienced yet. He is kind of lazy. I would be pretty curious which his full potential would be in case he was as obsessed of studying as me. I think with intelligence you will always find someone who is more skilled or intelligent than you. I struggle a lot with the impostor syndrome. I hate myself a lot. My life quality is so poor and I am so sick of it.

I currently have a very complex course in quantitative methods and I suck at it. I hate it so much. Statistics bores the shit out of me and I lack the mathematical skills to understand it fully. Still I have severe OCD and perfectionism which forces me to spend myriads of hours to get a hunch for it.
I once elaborated (or claimed) that quantitative methods are in many instances superior to qualitative methods. I feel even more of a bullshitter because I don't like them. I am pretty good at sounding smart and good at pretending stuff. But I think people who are way smarter than me recognize this very pathetic trait of mine pretty quickly.

I think one reason why qualitative methods are flawed is that they are more influenced by human biases. It is easier (but still very difficult) to elimate such in statistics. I could imagine that I tend to believe in narratives. I should think more from case to case instead of generalizing about things. Though if one is that nuanced one barely can make any statements because one lacks the necessary information to give a clear opinion. Further I get a lot of my information from the media. I try to diversify my sources but scientific sources are way underrepresented.

I am not sure why this all matters to me. I am obsessed how other people perceive me. Though I have real problems and not all of this theoretical bullshit which keeps my mind ruminating and distracting me. I am so sick of it.

 

[Ultracheese]

I think everyone is prone to falling into narratives. I personally am skeptical of the idea of an objective reality because most situations can easily be skewed one way or another due to biases, or even just the fallibility of memory.

I tend to favor an underconfidence bias over an overconfidence one. I think one of the most important signs of intelligence is being able to admit when you're wrong and when you don't know something. You're right that there's always someone more intelligent and skilled than you, but it's important to keep in mind that the reverse replies as well. It's important to be able to learn from people who are smarter than you, and some people think this means you should just agree with whatever someone who's considered intelligent is saying, which is obviously not a good idea as it's falling into a herd mentality.

I think what you're doing right now is learning from your friend. You're able to analyze his traits and figure out what you like and dislike. You mention that you appreciate how analytical he is, but dislike his overconfidence and opinions on mental health. Even something as simple as being able to acknowledge the positive and negative about someone is a good step because it helps point you in the direction of what traits you like and dislike. This is good not only for helping one find potential friends or a partner but also to build personal character development. Whenever you see yourself leaning in a negative direction, you can think back to your experience and realize that you're emulating a trait you despise and work to do better.

I have OCD too so I can relate to your feelings of obsessiveness. I hate math, but love statistics, as odd as that sounds. I took a few courses on it when I was in community college. So take what I'm saying with a grain of salt based on my lack of experience. I think qualitative methods tend to be superior to quantitative methods. While a study's sample size is extremely important, I personally believe a few responses of thoughtful insight outweigh the more wide-reaching but simple aim of most quantitative formats. I think there's a time and place for both, but I tend to lean towards the opinion of valuing more detailed analysis at the cost of time than vice versa. I believe bias is inescapable, so why not embrace it instead of trying to avoid it? I think one should try to learn more about bias and the different ways they're used in our daily lives instead of trying (and failing) to be completely objective. Though this too is a bias and a simplistic way of viewing things. I've learned to appreciate quantitative methods a little more than I was a few years ago taking those classes. Learning is progress!

Do you feel like you're pressuring yourself to come to an opinion on an issue right away? I don't think you have to have an opinion on every issue. I'm biased as I prefer complexity (or the idea of it) over generalizations but I believe that it's ok to take years or even decades to make up your mind about something. Simply having an opinion and stating it well is one thing, but being able to have one well-thought-out opinion over a lot of general ones that lack an understanding of an issue.

Likewise, I think that if something is important to you, then it is important. It's understandable to be concerned about how people perceive you and to be obsessive, but try not to guilt yourself for not valuing your "real world" problems enough. Your self-awareness and ability to see issues from a lot of different angles will definitely be assets for you as you continue to work on your intelligence and sharpen your perception of the world.

Oh, and don't worry about only sounding smart. Clearly, that's what I've been doing, as I think I typed more here than you!

 

[noname223]

I think everyone is prone to falling into narratives. I personally am skeptical of the idea of an objective reality because most situations can easily be skewed one way or another due to biases, or even just the fallibility of memory.

I tend to favor an underconfidence bias over an overconfidence one. I think one of the most important signs of intelligence is being able to admit when you're wrong and when you don't know something. You're right that there's always someone more intelligent and skilled than you, but it's important to keep in mind that the reverse replies as well. It's important to be able to learn from people who are smarter than you, and some people think this means you should just agree with whatever someone who's considered intelligent is saying, which is obviously not a good idea as it's falling into a herd mentality.

I think what you're doing right now is learning from your friend. You're able to analyze his traits and figure out what you like and dislike. You mention that you appreciate how analytical he is, but dislike his overconfidence and opinions on mental health. Even something as simple as being able to acknowledge the positive and negative about someone is a good step because it helps point you in the direction of what traits you like and dislike. This is good not only for helping one find potential friends or a partner but also to build personal character development. Whenever you see yourself leaning in a negative direction, you can think back to your experience and realize that you're emulating a trait you despise and work to do better.

I have OCD too so I can relate to your feelings of obsessiveness. I hate math, but love statistics, as odd as that sounds. I took a few courses on it when I was in community college. So take what I'm saying with a grain of salt based on my lack of experience. I think qualitative methods tend to be superior to quantitative methods. While a study's sample size is extremely important, I personally believe a few responses of thoughtful insight outweigh the more wide-reaching but simple aim of most quantitative formats. I think there's a time and place for both, but I tend to lean towards the opinion of valuing more detailed analysis at the cost of time than vice versa. I believe bias is inescapable, so why not embrace it instead of trying to avoid it? I think one should try to learn more about bias and the different ways they're used in our daily lives instead of trying (and failing) to be completely objective. Though this too is a bias and a simplistic way of viewing things. I've learned to appreciate quantitative methods a little more than I was a few years ago taking those classes. Learning is progress!

Do you feel like you're pressuring yourself to come to an opinion on an issue right away? I don't think you have to have an opinion on every issue. I'm biased as I prefer complexity (or the idea of it) over generalizations but I believe that it's ok to take years or even decades to make up your mind about something. Simply having an opinion and stating it well is one thing, but being able to have one well-thought-out opinion over a lot of general ones that lack an understanding of an issue.

Likewise, I think that if something is important to you, then it is important. It's understandable to be concerned about how people perceive you and to be obsessive, but try not to guilt yourself for not valuing your "real world" problems enough. Your self-awareness and ability to see issues from a lot of different angles will definitely be assets for you as you continue to work on your intelligence and sharpen your perception of the world.

Oh, and don't worry about only sounding smart. Clearly, that's what I've been doing, as I think I typed more here than you!

Thanks for you in-depth and nuanced reply.

I don't think I pressure me to come to an opinion on any issue. But I do too much judging sub-consciously. I try to look behind the facade of many things. Though I try become more agnostic about topics I am not an expert for. Instead of giving an opinion that sounds intelligent and articulate I try to say I don't know enough about it. Some people called my thoughts nuanced and analytical. Though maybe for a real nuanced debate one has to read scientifical studies etc. on an issues otherwise one only repeates platitudes or cliches about a topic. I have not come to a conclusion but I try to keep an uncertainty about my stances and keep them reversible and I want to avoid being too conceited to admit I am wrong.