You’re right but I think what they meant is essentially a facet of Dunning-Kreuger.
Most people know enough to know that what they know is a fraction of the surface area of a subject.
But some people know a fraction of it and think they have godly expertise because they can’t see the breadth and depth of the field. This is often because they can’t even comprehend the complexity as they simply haven’t encountered it before.
Oh no, they feel the same way with less knowledge.
If anything, they feel more confident, unencumbered by experience or the truth.
It’s tough arguing with someone sitting on top of the Dunning-Kruger curve.
I mean, in some areas the same facts can lead to reasonable differences in opinion. But in other fields there are objective right/wrong answers
Booo! Everything must fit neatly in a box.
You’re right but I think what they meant is essentially a facet of Dunning-Kreuger.
Most people know enough to know that what they know is a fraction of the surface area of a subject.
But some people know a fraction of it and think they have godly expertise because they can’t see the breadth and depth of the field. This is often because they can’t even comprehend the complexity as they simply haven’t encountered it before.
Objectivity doesn’t exist.
Kant, and friends.
Or OP is actually the one with less knowledge.
It feels the ones who know the least tend to be the most arrogant
Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.