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

How to Seem (and Be) Deep

lesswrong.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–27 of 27 posts

Re: How to Seem (and Be) Deep

#21

Post by keeptrying »

jonnathanson wrote: post #16

I remember more than a few all-nighters, back in my college days, on big papers due the next day. Nevermind that I'd neglected to start them earlier; the problem at hand was coming up with a thesis that was provocative enough to be engaging on two fronts. First, it had to engage me in order to keep me writing. Second, the product of my writing had to engage my professor in order to stand out from the pack. Being "dee…

Another thing is that if this skill is called on too often it becomes a primary strength which is not where u want to be. Corporations are places which mould you to seem deep without necessaiting actuall deep thought.

Re: How to Seem (and Be) Deep

#22

Post by ugh »

namank wrote: post #18

What? This article should be titled how to sound sophisticated (possibly pretentious) but not "deep". You want to talk deep? Think things through. Go for the WHY of everything - from technical systems to relationships to art to everything else you can see, touch, feel, and comprehend. After some time, you will develop basic foundations of why and how systems (technical and people) work. Then you will want to generali…

You should really pay attention to the last two paragraphs.

Re: How to Seem (and Be) Deep

#23

Post by mmcconnell1618 »

klausa wrote: post #11

>Human brains only run at 100Hz and I responded in realtime, so most of the work must have been precomputed. Is the 100Hz some metaphor I'm not getting? Or is it something that's actually a fact? If it's the latter, does anyone have more informations about this, because it sounds really fascinating and I'd love to learn more about it.

I had to look this up to. Here is an interesting chunk:

EEG researchers are noticing extremely high brainwave frequencies above Gamma, at up to 100 Hz. Totally opposite speed brainwave frequencies - some at 100 Hz and others at less than 0.5 Hz - have exactly the same states of consciousness associated with them. These high-range brain frequency states are named HyperGamma. Later information showed new evidence of frequencies even higher than this, at almost 200 Hz.named: Lambda brainwave frequencies and states of consciousness.

http://www.bethcoleman.net/gamma.html

Re: How to Seem (and Be) Deep

#24

Post by JoshTriplett »

brackin wrote: post #17

If you want to seem deep attempt to learn to speak E-Prime fluently, you'll have to use a lot more vocabulary to get your point access. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Prime

Seconded. Take it with copious grains of salt, but I've found that it improved the quality of my writing significantly. I no longer reach for the laziest verbs. More importantly, I reduce the number of unsupported assertions, and I find myself writing better justifications and evidence.

Re: How to Seem (and Be) Deep

#25

Post by CeiII »

zyfo wrote: post #19
jonnathanson wrote: post #16

I remember more than a few all-nighters, back in my college days, on big papers due the next day. Nevermind that I'd neglected to start them earlier; the problem at hand was coming up with a thesis that was provocative enough to be engaging on two fronts. First, it had to engage me in order to keep me writing. Second, the product of my writing had to engage my professor in order to stand out from the pack. Being "dee…

The article didn't do much for me, but this comment did. What you write about rings very true in my experience of writing papers and having arguments without a clear goal. One of the better HN comments I've read for a while.

I agree, this was a good comment and a nice followup to the article.

The use of the 'disagreeing with a commonly agreed concept' pattern, whilst useful, can be overused leading to discussions that get railroaded by blockers that gain credibility through the perception of being deep, simply for sake questioning.

Climate change discussions jump to mind here. 'Skeptics' ride on their ability to question fundamental and long-agree d concepts from the ocean and atmospheric sciences. They seem 'deep' in that they have questioned base concepts but in the end their argument is always flawed. Others who perhaps haven't the background or understanding don't see any flawed argument, just a 'deep' questioning of these concepts and thus gain some level of credibility. This can cloud discussions and create mis-information in my opinion.

Re: How to Seem (and Be) Deep

#27

Post by namank »

ugh wrote: post #22
namank wrote: post #18

What? This article should be titled how to sound sophisticated (possibly pretentious) but not "deep". You want to talk deep? Think things through. Go for the WHY of everything - from technical systems to relationships to art to everything else you can see, touch, feel, and comprehend. After some time, you will develop basic foundations of why and how systems (technical and people) work. Then you will want to generali…

You should really pay attention to the last two paragraphs.

I did read the last paragraph. IMHO, Its too cyclic (link wise) and ambiguous to be of much use. But if it really was what the authors main agenda was, then props to them...except why in the very last paragraph? What is everything before it? What is this 'seem' business?

You shouldn't write down every answer in the book and hope the reader will pick the right one. Thats a multiple choice test, not an informed article.

Post reply on HN