Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Richard Feynman: Do We Live in A Cargo Cult Society?

calteches.library.caltech.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 43 posts

Re: Richard Feynman: Do We Live in A Cargo Cult Society?

#11

Post by marilyn »

bertm wrote: post #5
stellar678 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is also the reason that fields like nutrition science aren't generally all that useful if what you want to do something like offer diet advice. There are just too many shifting pieces to offer a systematic explanation of what's going on, at least with the experimental limits we have right now. You can only track so many variables at once.

This presents an interesting paradox though because at the end of the day a decision is required. Do I eat thing X or thing Y? And in what proportion? So when a set of things is not well understood but a decision is required, many non science strategies enter. So what can be done about this?

I want to say cheesey things like "The only thing certain is uncertainty" and talk about the pangs of Hamlet, but instead I'll offer this bit of advice from Colin Powell I recall from previous HN threads:

Part I:"Use the formula P=40 to 70, in which P stands for the probability of success and the numbers indicate the percentage of information acquired."

Part II:"Once the information is in the 40 to 70 range, go with your gut."

From lesson #15 in this presentation about Colin Powell on Leadership (http://www.slideshare.net/guesta3e206/colin-powells-leadersh...)

Re: Richard Feynman: Do We Live in A Cargo Cult Society?

#12

Post by natep »

moultano wrote: post #3
andreyf wrote: post #2

Absolutely. The biggest offenders in software engineering are the things people integrate into their identity (i.e. "I'm an Agile manager", "I'm a Java architect", "I'm a Lisp hacker"). Another red flag is when there are no clear ways of testing a hypothesis (i.e. "NoSQL databases are better for this task", "This management methodology is best for our organization", "Outsourcing is great if you do so-and-so"). Most,…

We aren't doing physics here. If we can't observe the effects of something easily, it probably isn't that important.

Actually, that is similar to the position of a physicist, just without the words "easily" and "probably". For instance, what happened before the big bang has no effect on the current universe, which is why there's so much research into the first moments of the big bang, and not into any point in time before then.

But to address your comment specifically, I couldn't disagree more. Unless, of course you're just trolling by making a rediculous statement without any backing evidence in a discussion about pseudoscience, in which case, well done.

First, all of the parent's examples are hypotheses that are hard to test, not hard to observe. It's hard to test just how much better NoSQL/SQL is for a given task, but not hard to see that there are differences in performance if you were to, say, implement both systems. I'd like to see you change the management methodology for a company and not see a change. Same goes for his outsourcing example.

Second, I do not think there is a logical connection between your conclusion and your premise. Since you haven't given a single iota or proof for your claim, I don't think I need any proof to counter it.

Finally, even if we aren't doing "physics" (what ever your definition of that is), why does that mean pseudoscience is acceptable?

Re: Richard Feynman: Do We Live in A Cargo Cult Society?

#14

Post by rue »

nazgulnarsil wrote: post #10
bertm wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This presents an interesting paradox though because at the end of the day a decision is required. Do I eat thing X or thing Y? And in what proportion? So when a set of things is not well understood but a decision is required, many non science strategies enter. So what can be done about this?

you have to downgrade from induction to deduction. given the environment humans evolved in and what we know about primate digestive systems, what is unlikely to do me harm? answer: fruit, nuts, eggs. what is the biggest thing we do that monkeys don't? eat tons of processed grains. simple answer: decrease processed carb intake, replace with fruit (primate diets are often 50% fruit). since eating no grains isn't an opt…

And how long do monkeys live again?

That is not to say it is a bad idea, just that you do not present any evidence that grains are somehow bad. In fact, without considering all the other variables, one could just as well argue that grains are fantastically good for humans.

Re: Richard Feynman: Do We Live in A Cargo Cult Society?

#15

Post by thribbler »

stellar678 wrote: post #4
andreyf wrote: post #2

Absolutely. The biggest offenders in software engineering are the things people integrate into their identity (i.e. "I'm an Agile manager", "I'm a Java architect", "I'm a Lisp hacker"). Another red flag is when there are no clear ways of testing a hypothesis (i.e. "NoSQL databases are better for this task", "This management methodology is best for our organization", "Outsourcing is great if you do so-and-so"). Most,…

This is also the reason that fields like nutrition science aren't generally all that useful if what you want to do something like offer diet advice. There are just too many shifting pieces to offer a systematic explanation of what's going on, at least with the experimental limits we have right now. You can only track so many variables at once.

>systematic explanation

Yes. Too many scientists aren't trying to explain things; rather they wander around looking for new correlations. There's an abundant supply of correlations wherever one looks.

Re: Richard Feynman: Do We Live in A Cargo Cult Society?

#16

Post by Daniel_Newby »

rue wrote: post #14
nazgulnarsil wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you have to downgrade from induction to deduction. given the environment humans evolved in and what we know about primate digestive systems, what is unlikely to do me harm? answer: fruit, nuts, eggs. what is the biggest thing we do that monkeys don't? eat tons of processed grains. simple answer: decrease processed carb intake, replace with fruit (primate diets are often 50% fruit). since eating no grains isn't an opt…

And how long do monkeys live again? That is not to say it is a bad idea, just that you do not present any evidence that grains are somehow bad. In fact, without considering all the other variables, one could just as well argue that grains are fantastically good for humans.

The archaeological and medical evidence (celiac disease) suggests that humans are not especially well adapted to eating cereal grains. That does not mean they are entirely bad, just that their hidden costs are relatively more likely to be whimsical and unpleasant.

Re: Richard Feynman: Do We Live in A Cargo Cult Society?

#18

Post by Tichy »

natep wrote: post #12
moultano wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We aren't doing physics here. If we can't observe the effects of something easily, it probably isn't that important.

Actually, that is similar to the position of a physicist, just without the words "easily" and "probably". For instance, what happened before the big bang has no effect on the current universe, which is why there's so much research into the first moments of the big bang, and not into any point in time before then. But to address your comment specifically, I couldn't disagree more. Unless, of course you're just trollin…

Maybe there is no strict ordering for those technologies. Or maybe what works best depends on the individuals involved.

Also, there is the "no silver bullet" theory.

Re: Richard Feynman: Do We Live in A Cargo Cult Society?

#19

Post by scscsc »

stellar678 wrote: post #9
scscsc wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You listen to science and not to crackpots who pretend to do science. Note that most advice regarding nutrition appearing in newspapers/blogs is total crap (as opposed to science). If you can't distinguish science from crap (or can't be bothered to search for science) I would suggest you go with what seems reasonable to yourself.

That's the whole point though - science so far can't give much useful advice on what to eat, the topic is just too complex. Science can give hedged explanations of what's been observed in relation to a particular nutrient, but that's a far shot from dietary advice. What seems to end up happening is "we've observed a correlation between saturated fat consumption and heart disease" makes it out of the science world and…

It was known at the time that correlation is not causation. That is a classic example of taking dietary advice from the incompetent.

Re: Richard Feynman: Do We Live in A Cargo Cult Society?

#20

Post by rue »

Daniel_Newby wrote: post #16
rue wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how long do monkeys live again? That is not to say it is a bad idea, just that you do not present any evidence that grains are somehow bad. In fact, without considering all the other variables, one could just as well argue that grains are fantastically good for humans.

The archaeological and medical evidence (celiac disease) suggests that humans are not especially well adapted to eating cereal grains. That does not mean they are entirely bad, just that their hidden costs are relatively more likely to be whimsical and unpleasant.

And what do widely present allergies to pea- and other nuts, peas, carrots, tomatoes, citrus fruit, fish or shellfish (among others) tell us?
Post reply on HN