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

Swedes were fooled by one of the biggest scientific bluffs of our time (2020)

soccermatics.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 291 posts

Re: Swedes were fooled by one of the biggest scientific bluffs of our time (2020)

#111

Post by didericis »

ahelwer wrote: post #58
hermannj314 wrote: post #29

I struggle often with this somewhat arbitrary desire for everything to be data-driven and backed by science. People hope, pray, follow best practices, listen to advice on the internet and yet, every now and then we are reminded that only fools do these things. Really intelligent people only listen to science and do things backed by science and lots of data. How does anyone accomplish anything if every step they take…

Well, someone like Taleb would say that human nature (if there is such a thing) has remained unchanged for at least as long as there has been writing. So we have writings thousands of years old on what people thought about how other people work. These have been subject to the best truth filter we know of: time. So you’ll learn more about how your fellow humans operate by reading the classics than whatever bullshit ps…

While things that are useful enough to exist throughout time are usually true/it’s generally a great filter, I think “efficacy” and “consistency with observations and experience across time” are better descriptors of what you’re getting at. If you aren’t paying attention to efficacy or consistency when propagating knowledge, time can just as easily solidify untruths and cause truths to decay and be forgotten.

Re: Swedes were fooled by one of the biggest scientific bluffs of our time (2020)

#112

Post by janto »

> He started by placing Freud and Jung as the grounders of modern psychology, a distinction that even a someone who has studied a four-week course in the area will know is incorrect. The subject has developed greatly since the time of Freud, Jung and comic book author, Marston.

The author's resistance against Freud and Jung's contributions is... myopic?

Re: Swedes were fooled by one of the biggest scientific bluffs of our time (2020)

#113

Post by gnarbarian »

alkonaut wrote: post #41

The interesting question here perhaps isn’t so much whether knowing if you are a particular color or 4-letter Myers-Briggs combination helps you or whether there is a solid foundation to the categorization at all. What’s interesting here is rather: what happens when you think of everyone as a pigeonholed category. Intuitively it seems it should be mostly negative especially if the categories don’t even offer any beha…

I believe there is a benefit. This book exists on a spectrum with things like tarot cards, the i-ching, astrology, Meyer Briggs etc.

When people are trying to make sense of a situation it often helps to place it into a pre-existing narrative for guidance.

In many ways the amount of scientific rigor behind the narrative doesn't matter much. It's far more important for the narrative to guide people towards the behaviors which will have a positive outcome. People will inscribe themselves onto a character and then map The narrative onto their lives, If it's a good narrative (maybe turn the other cheek for example) The person will proceed with an action That is statistically most likely to result in a positive outcome.

I suspect this is how most religions came about, The sets of rules, narratives, and beliefs which resulted in relatively better outcomes propagated and flourished.

Re: Swedes were fooled by one of the biggest scientific bluffs of our time (2020)

#114

Post by Retric »

retrac wrote: post #82
Retric wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s under 8% of the population buying the book or receiving it as a gift and some percentage of them reading it.

You say "under 8% of the population" having a copy of the book as if that doesn't make it almost as popular as the Bible.

There’s been roughly 1 copy of the Bible printed per person alive on the earth. Not all of them are still around, but it’s likely there is still at least 1 copy per 2 people.

Re: Swedes were fooled by one of the biggest scientific bluffs of our time (2020)

#115

Post by cjalmeida »

HPsquared wrote: post #76
alkonaut wrote: post #41

The interesting question here perhaps isn’t so much whether knowing if you are a particular color or 4-letter Myers-Briggs combination helps you or whether there is a solid foundation to the categorization at all. What’s interesting here is rather: what happens when you think of everyone as a pigeonholed category. Intuitively it seems it should be mostly negative especially if the categories don’t even offer any beha…

Arbitrarily dividing people into groups with defined roles is the basis of the "Noble Lie" in Plato's Republic. In that, people are defined as having souls made of gold, silver or iron/bronze. The idea of giving people a role that they can focus on, from an early age, has some advantages. Of course pigeonholing people has a wide range of disadvantages; everything is a trade-off. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato%…

Interesting that Popper denounce Plato's political theory as totalitarian. But if you look at it, that's basically how we divide society and government.

We cherish technocrats and "philosopher-king" to rule us in the Supreme Court and high ranking agencies and military. In turn they're not expected to have relevant property to avoid temptation.

Truth is people like being ruled and being told where they fit, if this leads to some sort of purpose and stability. That's why such millennia old ideas prosper

Re: Swedes were fooled by one of the biggest scientific bluffs of our time (2020)

#116

Post by Retric »

dijit wrote: post #89
Retric wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s under 8% of the population buying the book or receiving it as a gift and some percentage of them reading it.

8% of a population doing any singular thing is rather significant. For instance: in the 90's less than 10% (but more than 5%) of British people were going to university. But that has profound effects on the population.

Going to the university at any one moment. 1/4th of the UK workforce has a collage degree.

Aka more than 25% of 18-20 year where in collage in the UK.

Re: Swedes were fooled by one of the biggest scientific bluffs of our time (2020)

#117

Post by arbitrage »

janto wrote: post #112

> He started by placing Freud and Jung as the grounders of modern psychology, a distinction that even a someone who has studied a four-week course in the area will know is incorrect. The subject has developed greatly since the time of Freud, Jung and comic book author, Marston. The author's resistance against Freud and Jung's contributions is... myopic?

The importance of Freud and Jung to applicable psychology in the modern era is vastly overblown.

Re: Swedes were fooled by one of the biggest scientific bluffs of our time (2020)

#118

Post by dathinab »

hermannj314 wrote: post #29

I struggle often with this somewhat arbitrary desire for everything to be data-driven and backed by science. People hope, pray, follow best practices, listen to advice on the internet and yet, every now and then we are reminded that only fools do these things. Really intelligent people only listen to science and do things backed by science and lots of data. How does anyone accomplish anything if every step they take…

Then maybe it helps that the theory also fails the "common sense", "easily observable incorrectness" test.

What actually irritates me is how so many people ended up believing in it.

Just the idea that you can classify peoples personality in 4 categories, sounds _for me_ as obviously stupid.

Or the grouping of the attributes associated with the colors, just doesn't at all fit the reality I observe.

Like I know more introverted, less-verbal creative people then I know extroverted creative people.

Similar I have meet analytic, but not careful people.

Or dominate, considerate, nice people.

Heck I have meet people which where both patient and driven, depending on context.

...

Re: Swedes were fooled by one of the biggest scientific bluffs of our time (2020)

#119

Post by arbitrage »

andybak wrote: post #18
nradov wrote: post #10

And yet we still see fools in the US who actually believe that Myers-Briggs personality types like "INTJ" are somehow meaningful. It's hilarious.

I think there's something interesting in Myers-Briggs. It's crude, flawed and inaccurate in many ways but your sniggering rubbed me up the wrong way.

Typical INTJ behaviour.

Re: Swedes were fooled by one of the biggest scientific bluffs of our time (2020)

#120

Post by whimsicalism »

jonnycat wrote: post #69
hermannj314 wrote: post #29

I struggle often with this somewhat arbitrary desire for everything to be data-driven and backed by science. People hope, pray, follow best practices, listen to advice on the internet and yet, every now and then we are reminded that only fools do these things. Really intelligent people only listen to science and do things backed by science and lots of data. How does anyone accomplish anything if every step they take…

It only needs to be "data-driven and backed by science" if it's making scientific claims. It's totally okay to write a book of advice about workplace interactions based on anecdotes or your own experience (there are many such books) - but it's an entirely different thing to make scientific-sounding claims about how people are categorized.

Sure, but I'd argue that beliefs derived from these sorts of books of advice should be relatively loosely held.
Post reply on HN