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

How to Think for Yourself

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 874 posts

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#361

Post by DanBC »

Apocryphon wrote: post #360
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…

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand pg. The wisdom is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of theoretical business most of the insights will go over a typical reader’s head. There's also pg’s positivistic outlook, which is deftly woven into his characterisation- his personal philosophy draws heavily from Sam Altman literature, for instance.

> To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand pg

Emperor's new essays.

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#362

Post by [deleted] »

sundarurfriend wrote: post #217
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…

> 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…

[deleted]

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#363

Post by judofyr »

RickHull wrote: post #281
judofyr wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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!

Ha, you jest, but you bring up a subtle point. There are degrees and dimensions of similarity. For example, two people who uphold a principle of freedom of speech may nonetheless completely disagree on any particular issue. But they are very similar in an important way. Do you value independent thinking? If so, what part of the article did you most disagree with?

> Do you value independent thinking? If so, what part of the article did you most disagree with?

I wholeheartedly value being creative and coming up with fresh ideas, but I don't see how this is in any way connected to an innate property of being either "conventional-minded" or "independent-thinkers".

You could take his first four paragraphs (about scientists, investors, startup founders and essays) and continue as follows:

This is why it's important to be creative and be able to come up with new ideas — even in the most well-established places. In this essay I will share various techniques I use to stay creative.

But no, instead he divides the world into two categories ("independent-mindedness seems to be more a matter of nature than nurture"), says that you'll be most happy by doing your predestined work ("which means if you pick the wrong type of work, you're going to be unhappy"), and also outright says there are certain jobs that one of these groups can't do successfully.

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#364

Post by walleeee »

Hongwei wrote: post #352
walleeee wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think building a business is zero-sum in principle. Your point about a farmer creating value is well taken. Our present measures of economic value are notoriously short-sighted though (i.e., willing to ignore hard-to-quantify externalities); did the green revolution create value? It vastly improved yield, but if we don't make serious changes in the next 50 years, it will destroy the viability of agriculture.…

I agree with you that current market incentives do not capture externalities like environmental harm. (eg. soil erosion, in the case of a farmer who doesn't rest his fields) I hope to convince you to hate the game, not the players. So that we can focus our efforts at the root cause. And to take a measured approach: it's not all bad. I'd rather have our current quality of life (in Canada) than to live in a pre-industr…

Where have I implied I hate the players? I certainly don't, nor do I think everything is terrible. I'm sorry it came off as such.

> I choose to believe that human progress will continue to solve the problems we face, in time. Because historically we always have.

This is where we disagree, I think. I don't see good evidence for this. I hope I'm wrong and you're right.

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#365

Post by erikpukinskis »

nickelcitymario wrote: post #175

Are there only a few paths for independent thinkers? > Independent-mindedness seems to be more a matter of nature than nurture. Which means if you pick the wrong type of work, you're going to be unhappy. If you're naturally independent-minded, you're going to find it frustrating to be a middle manager. And if you're naturally conventional-minded, you're going to be sailing into a headwind if you try to do original re…

You can have a small independent business. Buy a backhoe and become and excavator. Learn how to build custom cabinets.

You will need to hire people from time to time, but you won’t have to work in concert with anyone 40 hours a week.

In software, the best examples I see of that are in video games. Lots of solo developers. Hard to succeed but if you want it enough, the path is clear.

There are solo web developers too. But you need to be able to do sales and support.

You’re right startups are out because they grow and you’ll find yourself surrounded soon enough.

I guess my advice is treat your jobs like daily networking events, try to find people, especially with complementary skill sets, who you like and who like you. Have a side project, a game or a web dev company or whatever, and wait for a large enough revenue opportunity that you can incorporate and hire one of those people you got along with.

Problem is, the networking at work thing is nearly impossible if you’re as independent as you are. I’d recommend counseling. A therapist and/or career coach. Ideally both.

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#366

Post by nobinstok »

galaxyLogic wrote: post #284
nobinstok wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reminds me of one of the more embarrassing episodes of my life. My friends and I (pretty nerdy types) were at a bar with an amateur MMA fighter. Guy was like 6'10", covered in huge muscles and tattoos. One of the nicest guys I've ever met, but you definitely wouldn't want to get on his bad side. Anyway we didn't know the guy too well, lots of getting-to-know you type stuff. The MMA fighter after a few hours ment…

It's not a moral thing. It's called inductive learning. We classify people and things based on our past experiences. The more experiences you have the better the inductive method works. It's good to learn about black swans, else you might make the incorrect logical conclusion that swans are ALWAYS white. And more importantly learn that "black swans" is not only about swans. There can be sports-types who also like int…

Yeah I wasn't really trying to cast it as a "moral" issue, so sorry if it came across that way. I guess my point is that in general, to the extent possible, I'd like to get to know people for who they are and not the pictures I have in my head. I feel like my thinking will be more accurate and my life experience more rich that way. I oversold a little bit how "embarrassing" it was. I wasn't deeply ashamed or anything, like I had done something unforgivable, it's just a little embarrassing to lose your mind with excitement about something that actually isn't all that rare. Rather than sharing an enthusiasm I kind of just exposed my own ignorance. I also think it created a tiny wall between me and the MMA guy because I'm sure on his side it's like "ok these guys don't get it / think I'm some kind of weird anomaly, maybe we should move on to something else." I still hung out with the guy a bunch of times after that so it's not like there were bad feelings, but I still feel like it would have helped the conversation and friendship if I had been a little less credulous towards my own assumptions.

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#367

Post by meheleventyone »

toyg wrote: post #318
nobinstok wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reminds me of one of the more embarrassing episodes of my life. My friends and I (pretty nerdy types) were at a bar with an amateur MMA fighter. Guy was like 6'10", covered in huge muscles and tattoos. One of the nicest guys I've ever met, but you definitely wouldn't want to get on his bad side. Anyway we didn't know the guy too well, lots of getting-to-know you type stuff. The MMA fighter after a few hours ment…

Yeah, stereotypes are a bitch. BUT - if one gets stereotyped enough, after a while s/he’s probably developed some coping mechanism to actually leverage it into an advantage (I know I do). So don’t feel too bad - it might well be that the guy uses that sort of conversation precisely to gauge his audience. (It makes a lot of sense that pro athletes are in gaming, btw: it’s competitive and it’s something that can be don…

With games its been ubiquitous culture for a couple of decades now. It frankly staggers me that stereotype is something people actually still think is a thing.

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#368

Post by panarky »

neogodless wrote: post #260
lukeramsden wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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... w…

Whoa

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#369

Post by Hongwei »

walleeee wrote: post #364
Hongwei wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you that current market incentives do not capture externalities like environmental harm. (eg. soil erosion, in the case of a farmer who doesn't rest his fields) I hope to convince you to hate the game, not the players. So that we can focus our efforts at the root cause. And to take a measured approach: it's not all bad. I'd rather have our current quality of life (in Canada) than to live in a pre-industr…

Where have I implied I hate the players? I certainly don't, nor do I think everything is terrible. I'm sorry it came off as such. > I choose to believe that human progress will continue to solve the problems we face, in time. Because historically we always have. This is where we disagree, I think. I don't see good evidence for this. I hope I'm wrong and you're right.

I hope so too :) And fair enough, thanks for the the kind discussion, I didn't mean to put words in your mouth.

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#370

Post by hodgesrm »

amadeuspagel wrote: post #50

Like many of pg's essays there's an unqualified glorification of being independent. For example the suggestion that hiring conformist people is something that just happens. It seems more likely that companies more or less consciously hire such people, because a company where everyone thinks independently would be one where everyone wants to do something different, and nothing would get done, no one could agree on any…

> Bryan Caplan in his book The Case Against Education suggests that employers value college degrees partly as a signal of conformism, and that that's the reason college is so hard to replace.

Some of the best recruiting advice I ever heard is that college degrees signal you can complete things. Most worthwhile objectives involve a fair amount of drudgery.

Post reply on HN