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

Should we stop believing Malcolm Gladwell?

ksj.mit.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 232 posts

Re: Should we stop believing Malcolm Gladwell?

#211

Post by wisty »

crntaylor wrote: post #21

I have heard the genre (which includes Malcolm Gladwell, Jonah Lehrer, the Freakonomics guys and Jared Diamond) described as "insight porn". The idea is to deliver small chunks of insight that is just counter-intuitive enough to be novel, but not so counter-intuitive that we can't take it at face value. It's a market that's developed in response to the fact that nerds are addicted to feeling like they're just a littl…

The Freakonomics guys and Jared Diamond are more or less scientists. Malcolm Gladwell is a journalist. There's a difference.

Both Steven Levitt and Jared Diamond devote a lot of ink over whether or not their theories are testable, while Malcolm Gladwell tends to just find anecdotes which seem to back his theories up.

Re: Should we stop believing Malcolm Gladwell?

#212

Post by malandrew »

d23 wrote: post #128
georgemcbay wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"IMO, this is what appeals to many about HN....the desire to find share-worthy things that will help cement their image as the smart person within their social group." Don't forget those of us who come to HN primarily to post comments about why the linked article is obviously stupid and wrong, or is right but just saying things that we've been aware of for a while now.

> Don't forget those of us who come to HN primarily to post comments about why the linked article is obviously stupid and wrong, or is right but just saying things that we've been aware of for a while now. This is why I hate being around a good deal of "smart" people (or atleast, people who have smartness attached to their identity, which seems to be rarely the same group). Every statement, every conversation, every…

I'd rather be around smart people putting someone down or puffing themselves over things they are right about than be around dumb people putting someone down or puffing themselves up over things they are wrong about. Internet arguing, Politics, Sports, Rap battles, etc. same shit, different group, different MO's

What you've described is normal human behavior irrespective of their level of intelligence.

Re: Should we stop believing Malcolm Gladwell?

#214

Post by aero142 »

pg wrote: post #175

"I haven't read the book" That could be a useful prelude to writing about it.

I think his last paragraph sums it up.

"I have long been an admirer of Gladwell's; I wish I could put stories together the way he does. But I'm now afraid to read him. My work, my intellectual life, and even my social and emotional experiences with my family are based on knowing what's really going on--not Gladwell's made-up ideas of how things should be. I don't want to base my reading, or my life, on Gladwell's currency: things that might or might not be true, but which make possible masterful storytelling."

I often have a hard time remembering where I learned something so it makes it hard to keep strait why I think something is true. As a result, I try very hard to avoid talented liars.

Re: Should we stop believing Malcolm Gladwell?

#217

Post by math »

math wrote: post #63
crntaylor wrote: post #21

I have heard the genre (which includes Malcolm Gladwell, Jonah Lehrer, the Freakonomics guys and Jared Diamond) described as "insight porn". The idea is to deliver small chunks of insight that is just counter-intuitive enough to be novel, but not so counter-intuitive that we can't take it at face value. It's a market that's developed in response to the fact that nerds are addicted to feeling like they're just a littl…

And if you combine insight porn with finance porn are people extra addicted? (we hope so: http://backrecord.com .. blatent plug)

I don't think this deserved to be down-voted - the website is relevant to the discussion and we've put countless hours into trying to make a useful tool and we've already taken the concept further than anyone else that I'm aware of. My comment is making fun at what we're doing, but what we're doing is not a joke. I would sharing what we've done as one of my more useful comments, yet it is the only one to be downvoted.

Re: Should we stop believing Malcolm Gladwell?

#220

Post by unclebucknasty »

natural219 wrote: post #14

As a personal data point, I grew up reading lots of "entertaining" books that claimed to have intellectual value, but in hindsight didn't really end up being that intelligent. My early thought heroes were John Stossel, Chuck Palahniuk, Ayn Rand, the Freakonomics guys, and Michael Crichton. While my views have grown more sophisticated over the years, those early adventures into "intellectual" topics eventually led me…

There seems to be something different about, say, Rand vs. Gladwell.

With Rand, you kind of know these are her opinions. They are ideology. Much like listening to the Right vs. the Left in ideological debates.

But, with Gladwell, he delivers his conclusions as fact, based on "scientific" research. He observes very specific phenomena and draws concrete conclusions, then generalizes to a broader point. But, he doesn't say "here's what I think". He says, "here's what the data says".

With Rand too, you also know that she has a personal belief system/agenda. Gladwell writes as an objective reporter, just delivering the "facts".

Post reply on HN