The Mediocrity Principle • Hacker News Board

Re: The Mediocrity Principle

#31

Post by mhartl » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 6:24 PM UTC

Most of what happens in the world is just a consequence of natural, universal laws

Everything that happens in the world is the consequence of natural, universal laws. That's what makes them universal.

The mediocrity principle simply states that you aren't special.

The universal laws of nature have led to beings capable (among other things) of discovering them. That seems pretty special to me.

Re: The Mediocrity Principle

#32

Post by radley » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 6:27 PM UTC

chippy wrote: post #28

Question - how could we use The Mediocrity Principle in our technology works, in our hacks, designs and developments? There seems to be some fundamental opposition to the principle in the world we live and operate in: User centered design implies that the User is special. Business and marketing say that the Customer is always right. Solutions that seek to make things better, to improve the lot may go against the prin…

You essentially got it right. The Mediocrity Principle mean it's proper to put your users before yourself.

From a code standpoint, it means you strive for "it just works", even if it means a lot of redundant code that doesn't match common expectations of best practices or adds a lot of "useless" work for the devs.

Re: The Mediocrity Principle

#33

Post by scottlocklin » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 6:28 PM UTC

No surprises here: pretty much Meyers entire career has been confusing the word "metaphysics" with the word "science."

Re: The Mediocrity Principle

#34

Post by tiatia » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 6:30 PM UTC

He should dig deeper...

http://arxiv.org/pdf/0704.0646v2

http://arxiv.org/pdf/0707.2593v1

Re: The Mediocrity Principle

#35

Post by lesingerouge » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 7:05 PM UTC

toyg wrote: post #25

clusterfoo wrote: post #22

I don't really understand what is being argued. Two statements are made: > A: The mediocrity principle simply states that you aren't special. > B: Most of what happens in the world is just a consequence of natural, universal laws. The argument being that B implies A. First this is self-contradictory: B implies B and nothing more. What does he mean by "special". Are we talking about some mushy, subjective definition o…

> What does he mean by "special" I think he means that the universe does not gain meaning by our existence. The universe will (or will not) be there regardless of whether we happen to exist or not , because our existence is just a fortunate combination of physical laws. Given a slightly different combination (the Sun being slightly further away from this planet, for example), you/we wouldn't exist at all, but the uni…

This is debatable. The universe is not an observer of our existence IF the universe is not a simulation. If the universe happens to be a simulation than there is some external entity or rather the universe in itself, that is some kind of observer. As such, if he does fancy a stroll inside my particular life, I can suddenly become a graph of relationships and influences that have "special" meaning. If the universe is not an observer, there is still the possibility that a certain miserable existence (think elementary particle) can affect a larger system (think Big Bang). Was the elementary particle special or not? Difficult to say.

Re: The Mediocrity Principle

#36

Post by templeos2 » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 7:05 PM UTC

You dumb fuck nigger. God talks. The NIST is proof but you're a retaRD-NIGGER.

i GO TO A GOVERNMENT RANDOM NUMBER SITE. wHAT DO YOU SUPPOSE A GOVERNMENT RANDOM NUMBER SITE GIVES US? yOUY DUMB-FUCK NIGGER.

Re: The Mediocrity Principle

#37

Post by skywhopper » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 7:36 PM UTC

clusterfoo wrote: post #22

I don't really understand what is being argued. Two statements are made: > A: The mediocrity principle simply states that you aren't special. > B: Most of what happens in the world is just a consequence of natural, universal laws. The argument being that B implies A. First this is self-contradictory: B implies B and nothing more. What does he mean by "special". Are we talking about some mushy, subjective definition o…

I take "special" here to mean "deserving of privileges over and above other instances". In this sense, if you think you are "special" that means you think that you ought to be able to bend the rules more than other people, or that cashiers ought to be nicer to you than to the rest of the people in line, or that you deserve to get that last discount TV on the shelf on Black Friday, or that it's okay for you to zoom past traffic on the shoulder because you're in a hurry moreso than anyone else.

Possibly part of your trouble in interpreting the essay is that you're missing out on what the essay is in response to. The question was posed: "What scientific concept would improve everybody's cognitive toolkit?"

Whether the Mediocrity Principle is "correct" or not is not even the point. The point is that assuming the Mediocrity Principle to be true and acting as if you and your situation are not special is a productive stance to take in life, as it is in science.

It's another way of saying "the world does not revolve around you", "you are not the center of the universe", etc.

Re: The Mediocrity Principle

#38

Post by rwallace » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 8:15 PM UTC

clusterfoo wrote: post #22

I don't really understand what is being argued. Two statements are made: > A: The mediocrity principle simply states that you aren't special. > B: Most of what happens in the world is just a consequence of natural, universal laws. The argument being that B implies A. First this is self-contradictory: B implies B and nothing more. What does he mean by "special". Are we talking about some mushy, subjective definition o…

It's not really much of an argument. I mean, even your paraphrase is being highly charitable; the article itself is much more muddled. A colder, less charitable reading of it would be that he's blurring together the statements "improbable things are improbable" and "I never grew out of teenage angst, which makes me superior to you". There isn't really much to respond to.

Re: The Mediocrity Principle

#39

Post by gottebp » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 8:33 PM UTC

skywhopper wrote: post #37

clusterfoo wrote: post #22

I don't really understand what is being argued. Two statements are made: > A: The mediocrity principle simply states that you aren't special. > B: Most of what happens in the world is just a consequence of natural, universal laws. The argument being that B implies A. First this is self-contradictory: B implies B and nothing more. What does he mean by "special". Are we talking about some mushy, subjective definition o…

I take "special" here to mean "deserving of privileges over and above other instances". In this sense, if you think you are "special" that means you think that you ought to be able to bend the rules more than other people, or that cashiers ought to be nicer to you than to the rest of the people in line, or that you deserve to get that last discount TV on the shelf on Black Friday, or that it's okay for you to zoom pa…

It's a false dichotomy to say the only two choices are 1) Acceptance of the Mediocrity Principle or 2) Believing you are the center of the universe. I can easily posit a third option where some aspect of our Universe and existence is special without needing to be the center of it all.

Re: The Mediocrity Principle

#40

Post by bernardlunn » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 8:33 PM UTC

It was phrased as a scientific question, but I think of it more on philosophical, ethical and human behavior lines. If you accept that you are not special, you will tend to be nicer to other human beings. If you accept that your country is not special you might avoid the aggressive behaviors that lead to wars because "God is on your side".