there was a hint at knowing me awhile ago, possibly irl?
bruh
legitimate serious thanks for just quoting the words and not actually me because wow i find those PMs mildly annoying and wish I knew how to turn them off (which is a low-key hint to anyone who knows how to please tell me how to do that, that I have now transformed into an outright statement, whoops)
anyway
I got halfway through looking up what exactly you meant and then thought 'mm...nah, that's a bit too much effort'. Then Two-tal Warhammer took too long to boot up so I continued (which, thanks to the 'search' feature being a thing, was not, in fact, too much effort).
And then I discovered it was in the Pathfinder thing, which okay, fine, that is kinda weird, but
more importantly glancing at it reminded me we'd just gushed about Total Warhammer by virtue of saying you were interested in Warhammer. Overall: that's like 3 layers of meta.
Nonetheless this leads to perhaps the key question by which I can judge you for all eternity: how do you feel about Stormcast Eternals?
Studies have shown that we are drawn to believe those who carry themselves with confidence, which isn't a bad thing on its own, but does become one when we factor in that unintelligent people are often the most confident.
For those who aren't familiar with this topic, we're talking about the Dunning-Kruger effect, which is pretty neat to think about, and certainly fits with every problem I've ever experienced in college, where my perceived competence constantly far outstrips my actual competence because I'm a narcissist with delusions of intellectual godhood, except immediately after a midterm.
Putting my various failings aside, your assertion is mostly true, but a better way of expressing it is that people who are least knowledgeable
about a specific area are those who are most confident about their knowledge of said subject area. A pithy way of putting it might be 'not knowing how much they don't know, they think they know all there is to know' (with the corollary that 'those who do know how much that don't know assume that everyone knows what they know' because it seems so fucking obvious to them, since it's hard, if not impossible, to think about something without using knowledge that you already possess).
But where I differ with your interpretation is on the basis that while knowledge of a subject area is often
conflated with intelligence, it is not the same thing as intelligence. I could be the best physicist in the world (spoilers: I am not), but if I were confronted on the subject of, say, endocrinology, I'd be hopeless (spoilers: I am also hopeless at this in real life). I would probably be
marginally better than someone with less schooling (but with otherwise the same intelligence), but the difference probably would be minor at best. Intelligence is not 'how well you know things', but rather 'how good you are at learning things'. Admittedly, the relationship between the two is such that those who know more things are
likely to be better at learning things, but they're not the same thing.
tl;dr fuck i take too long writing these things there's always 5 posts after