Observation: The one who is incompetent at rational argument will never be persuaded of his incompetence by rational argument; nor will he be persuaded rationally of his position’s irrationality.
Update: corrections made at comments 2 and 3.
Corollary 1: If I am rationally incompetent I may irrationally persist in thinking that I am competent. (See also the Dunning-Kruger Effect.)
Corollary 2: If I believe I am rationally competent it is no sure sign that I am.
Corollary 3: If I believe my arguments are rational it is no sure sign that they are.
Corollary 4: If I am incompetent at rational argument I will likely regard contrary arguments as irrational, regardless of their rationality.
Corollary 5: If I think I am competent and my arguments are rational, that could mean that I am competent and I have assessed these things correctly, or I am incompetent and wrong.
Question: Is there a way I can tell which of these from Corollary 5 is the case? Can anyone judge their own rational competence?
I think there is a way to make this self-assessment. I’ll let you go first on the question, though.