How to Think for Yourself • Hacker News Board

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#251

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Nov 27, 2020, 4:06 PM UTC

eat_veggies wrote: post #190

bob33212 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a large socialist/anti-capitalist/woke movement on Twitter and a somewhat in the real world as well. I assume PG would like to call all those people out directly. But he cannot because in the current media and social climate the news summary will read: "Older White SV Billionaire living in England tells poor American minorities to stop complaining because their politics would lead to an economy with less inn…

What are those unintended consequences of progressive goals that he can't say out loud? I assume you're an independent thinker who can spell them out for us.

[deleted]

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#252

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Nov 27, 2020, 4:06 PM UTC

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #196

bob33212 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a large socialist/anti-capitalist/woke movement on Twitter and a somewhat in the real world as well. I assume PG would like to call all those people out directly. But he cannot because in the current media and social climate the news summary will read: "Older White SV Billionaire living in England tells poor American minorities to stop complaining because their politics would lead to an economy with less inn…

If it only exists on Twitter, but not in the real world, then why is it worth addressing or expending emotional energy or essays on?

[deleted]

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#253

Post by mewpmewp2 » Fri, Nov 27, 2020, 4:06 PM UTC

darkerside wrote: post #124

peterlk wrote: post #8

Excellent article > When you hear someone say something, stop and ask yourself "Is that true?" This is one of my favorite things to do, though the list of people who will talk to me again after I do it is very short. (Edit: To be extra clear... While this is a bitter pill - I do not like it when others do it to me - I do find it to be very effective for reinforcing good faith in close, trusting relationships. I also…

While this activity can be useful, I think it is simultaneously at the root of many of our social problems today. You cannot ask this question about literally everything. Well, you can, but you'll end up questioning things that are universally accepted (Which way is North? Is gasoline flammable?). So naturally you dial it back, and you ask questions only about things that seem wrong, or that you particularly care abo…

You ask when it actually matters and let the instinct go in most other situations.

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#254

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Nov 27, 2020, 4:07 PM UTC

fvdessen wrote: post #3

The decrease of independent minded as an organisation grows seems an almost universal phenomenon. It happens to startups yes, but also to forums, bands, fashions, the internet, games, religions, politics, etc. Basically anything new will target independent minded people, and anything successful will target conventional people. It's sad for the independent minded, but is there anything that can be done about this ?

[deleted]

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#255

Post by enriquec » Fri, Nov 27, 2020, 4:09 PM UTC

fractionalhare wrote: post #241

sundarurfriend wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> PG sure has been on a kick about how brilliant of an independent thinker he is in a sea of conformity. If your first reaction reading this essay is "PG is trying to big himself up as an independent thinker", that tells me more about your attitude and mental state than about PG. Forgive the cliche, but "great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people" is a decent heuristic, with g…

The problem with a comment like this is that there's no detailed rebuttal. What you've given here is more of an aloof dismissal which is implicitly judgmental. If you're willing to bucket peoples' minds into greatness or smallness based on a single observation of their message board activity, how is your response substantively different from the thing it's criticizing? This is to say that I reject the premise; your c…

its ad hominem. its not discussing the content. all of what you said could be aimed at the gp parent regarding his characterization of PG's post

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#256

Post by lisper » Fri, Nov 27, 2020, 4:09 PM UTC

> There are some kinds of work that you can't do well without thinking differently from your peers. To be a successful scientist, for example, it's not enough just to be correct. Your ideas have to be both correct and novel.

As someone who once made their living as a scientist, I can tell you from firsthand experience that while this is technically correct, the conclusion PG wishes to draw from this:

> One of the most effective techniques is one practiced unintentionally by most nerds: simply to be less aware what conventional beliefs are.

is very wrong, at least in the domain of scientific research (and probably others as well, but scientific research is the area in which I can speak with some authority). In order to make scientific progress, you have to understand the conventional wisdom. The reason for this is that the conventional wisdom in science is the product of about 350 years (and counting) of hard work by an awful lot of smart people. Those people explored a lot of wrong ideas on the way towards discovering the right ones, and if you are unaware of this history and just strike out on your own thinking that you are so much more brilliant than any other human who has ever walked the planet before you, you are much more likely to go down a well-known dead-end than you are to discover something new. I wasted about ten years of my life learning this lesson the hard way.

Being skeptical of the conventional wisdom can be useful, but keeping yourself intentionally ignorant of it is generally a bad plan.

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#257

Post by zeroxfe » Fri, Nov 27, 2020, 4:12 PM UTC

baron_harkonnen wrote: post #131

PG sure has been on a kick about how brilliant of an independent thinker he is in a sea of conformity. It's clear in all of his writing that he's perpetually beating around the bush about some current itch he has, I wish he would just come out and say it with out pretending to be a deep thinker: > Do you want to do the kind of work where you can only win by thinking differently from everyone else? I mean, taken outsi…

I think PG writes well, thinks clearly, and occasionally has some very good essays.

But I do get the sense that he's trying really hard to show how deep a thinker he is. (I'm not sure if this has always been the case, or it's a new thing.) His tweets are particularly cringey, but I still follow him because of the occasional nugget.

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#258

Post by judofyr » Fri, Nov 27, 2020, 4:13 PM UTC

RickHull wrote: post #214

For those railing against this essay, who feel that PG is fluffing himself up and patting himself on the back like a nerdy middleschooler -- you've missed the big point, badly. PG writes unapologetically, directly, and simply, and this may pattern match to a naive middleschooler, but you are letting your base instincts cover up the fact that PG is wise, has earned his stripes, and is sharing his wisdom, unapologetica…

> He's writing to and for people like him, trying to help them put words and clear thought to vague understandings and apprehensions they've been wrestling with.

Ah, yes, he's writing an article about how to think for yourself to the people who already think like him. So if we don't think like him, but rather in an independent way, then it makes sense that we wouldn't agree with this article. Got it!

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#259

Post by read_if_gay_ » Fri, Nov 27, 2020, 4:13 PM UTC

killtimeatwork wrote: post #219

read_if_gay_ wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you should quit your comfy corporate job (and perhaps create a startup That's not what he's saying. That's just one possible interpretation of it. You could also keep the job and pick up an interesting hobby, or just change jobs. It's not like it's bad advice only given out to serve his own interests. It's actually obvious sounding advice. If you notice this often, maybe it's because in an essay that long, there wi…

> That's not what he's saying. That's just one possible interpretation of it. That why I put "perhaps" in my characterisation of what he's saying - even if 0.1% of people decide that the solution to them "not thinking for themselves" is to create a startup, pg comes out ahead.

But it is a weak characterisation because you can construe basically anything anyone has ever done to be a selfish action, and in this case the evidence isn't particularly strong. It's not like the whole essay is telling you to act in PGs interest. Basically you're assuming selfishness because in one possible interpretation of one sentence, it's possible for PG to derive any benefit at all. I don't think it's even possible to write an essay where that's not the case.

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#260

Post by neogodless » Fri, Nov 27, 2020, 4:14 PM UTC

lukeramsden wrote: post #193

fractionalhare wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This essay is an object lesson in how this leads to profoundly conventional thinking. This entire thing reads like it was torn from the journal of a clever middle-schooler who thinks he's so much more clever then the world. You've hit upon something that's always bothered me with this characterization of nerds. It's like if someone framed adult life by superimposing stereotypical high school nerd vs jock social dyn…

There really is an XKCD for every discussion. That's one I've somehow not seen before.

This thread kind of illustrates the point it was making.

The readers of Hacker News are a part of "nerd culture." The author of XKCD is part of "nerd culture" and makes comics out of themes that are common in "nerd culture." Popular themes are often a part of a post that becomes popular on Hacker News. Unsurprisingly, this theme was captured at some point by the nerd of XKCD, and now it is shared here.

It's like... we're all thinking alike (while reveling in how unique we are!)