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

21–30 of 43 posts

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

#21

Post by phren0logy »

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…

Not to be rude, but did you read the fking article?

What your are describing is pseudoscience. It is entirely possible to use your random, naive, and quasi-accurate observations to generate a hypothesis. To come to your "simple answer" is the type of overly simplistic thinking that Feynman is criticizing.

"Science: It works, bitches." -- xkcd

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

#22

Post by elblanco »

rue wrote: post #20
Daniel_Newby wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Don't forget eggs, bananas, peaches (and relatives), onions, carrots, etc. (include most foods, yes I've known people with fantastically, life threatening, sensitive allergies to these foods).

One of my favorites is the genetic differences over perception of the herb coriander. Some percentage of people hate it because it tastes like soap. While the rest don't taste any soapy taste at all and find it to be a pleasant seasoning.

People often make the mistake of conflating "evolved diet=good for you" with "ready availability of foodstuffs". Chimps will also happily eat a pile of steak and a milkshake if you give it to them. Alaskan Salmon are fantastically good for us, but they don't exist at our evolutionary homestead. Some humans have consumed dairy for so long that they have developed lactose tolerance, and some eat such a high protein diet that large amounts of carbohydrates (refined or otherwise) leads to very high percentages of diabetes.

IOW, not every human has the same genetic lineage, Coeliac disease is interesting for some variety of humans, but doesn't exist at all in other populations -- and even in the populations it does exist in, it has a pretty low frequency (generally less than 1% population in any area no matter the genetic predisposition of the population). Egg allergies (one of the cited foods in this thread as "evolution safe" are fantastically more common by comparison. It's the second most common childhood allergy in the U.S.

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

#23

Post by tokenadult »

Previous submission:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=993150

A good book for background on how people in general think is What Intelligence Tests Miss by Keith Stanovich.

http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/book.asp?isbn=97803001238...

http://www.amazon.com/What-Intelligence-Tests-Miss-Psycholog...

As Feynman points out, "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself--and you are the easiest person to fool." Human cognitive illusions are part of the human condition, and every scientist has to guard against them ceaselessly.

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

#24

Post by natep »

Tichy wrote: post #18
natep wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You and I agree. Sorry if I didn't make that clear, but the way I read the post at the top of this thread, each claim could be backed with appropriate evidence for and against (as Feynman says every scientist's duty is). For a sufficiently well defined situation X, the claim that "Y is the most appropriate solution for X" can and should be tested appropriately.

The "appropriate" amount of testing would also depend on the situation X. The 'difficulty of observation' may be a factor here, but is not the only one. If the situation doesn't require 'hard' evidence (e.g. the consequences are minor) that's fine, but I wouldn't say any of the above examples fall under that category, and people making decisions based on 'soft' evidence should do so knowing that it is what it is.

Also, whether there is or isn't a strict ordering, dependence on the individuals, or a silver bullet would all be facts turned up by sufficient application of the scientific method. This relates to Feynman's points on how it's necessary to do experiments where you "don't learn anything new" and again, how every scientist is ethically bound to report results that contradict their theory.

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

#25

Post by natep »

There's one paragraph I don't get:

    "I tried to find a principle for discovering more of these kinds of things, and came up with the following system. Any time you find yourself in a conversation at a cocktail party in which you do not feel uncomfortable that the hostess might come around and say, "Why are you fellows talking shop?" or that your wife will come around and say "Why are you flirting again?"--then you can be sure you are talking about something about which nobody knows anything."
I've been trying figure out what he meant, so I can apply the same method.

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

#26

Post by natep »

Tichy wrote: post #17

How can I get a link to the scribd HTML5 reader?

I'm not sure. With the big announcement that was made about how they're switching and everybody here on HN celebrating, I was expecting all the [Scribd]'s to turn into HTML5 links. Is that because the HTML5 isn't ready yet, or because the HN code hasn't been updated?

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

#27

Post by fragmede »

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,…

I'd argue that code contests like Google Code Jam are the closest to 'controlled experiments' that we have in software engineering. There's a set of specs of what is to be implemented, and a limited time in which to do it. (With different contest structure/judging criteria to testing different things like, speed, adaptability/maintainability, etc.) By trying to entice as many programmer/programmer teams to enter, differences in individual programmer is hopefully lessened.

Even your question, "(What is) the effect of technology choices on programmer productivity?", tries to treat programmers as interchangeable when tech choice A is better for all programmers. Programmer productivity, like intelligence, is something that if you'd have a license to print money if you could accurately and precisely measure.

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

#28

Post by fragmede »

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,…

I'd argue that code contests like Google Code Jam are the closest to 'controlled experiments' that we have in software engineering. There's a set of specs of what is to be implemented, and a limited time in which to do it. (With different contest structure/judging criteria to testing different things like, speed, adaptability/maintainability, etc.) By trying to entice as many programmer/programmer teams to enter, differences in individual programmer is hopefully lessened.

Even your question, "(What is) the effect of technology choices on programmer productivity?", tries to treat programmers as interchangeable as if tech choice A is would make all programmers more productive. Programmer productivity, like intelligence, is something that if you'd have a license to print money if you could accurately and precisely measure.

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

#29

Post by thefool »

natep wrote: post #25

There's one paragraph I don't get: "I tried to find a principle for discovering more of these kinds of things, and came up with the following system. Any time you find yourself in a conversation at a cocktail party in which you do not feel uncomfortable that the hostess might come around and say, "Why are you fellows talking shop?" or that your wife will come around and say "Why are you flirting again?"--then you can…

He meant that if you ever catch yourself in a conversation where no one knows anything about the subject matter, you should end the conversation.

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

#30

Post by tensor »

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.

This is absolutely incorrect. We know way more about good diet and the effect of nutrition than we used to. We do not know everything, but claiming that nutrition science is not useful is horribly wrong and misleading.

If you are offering diet advice, you should absolutely make use of all that we do know: and that knowledge comes from nutrition science.

Post reply on HN