Recent searches
Search options
@whknott @nyrath @futurebird Yes, Heinlein was an anti-democrat for that reason. He also had a vastly inflated opinion of his own infallibility (judging from his statements on technical subjects I actually know something about), so I never found his position on the desirability of rule by intellectual elites who resembled himself very convincing. And I say this as a fan of a lot of his writing.
It's an attitude that's very common in the science-fiction community, actually. I think it comes from the experience of being precocious kids who realized early on that they were smarter than a lot of the adults around them, which is something a lot of science-fiction fans have had. But it turns out this doesn't map very well to being fit to rule.
Realizing when you are a kid that you are smarter than some adults is one thing, but a more interesting thing is realizing (when you are a kid) that some of the people who some adults treat like they aren't very smart actually are (and kids can be in this group, you might be in it) is ANOTHER.
It's possible to find people who have only noticed the first concept relatable, but disappointing when you realize that never learned the rest of it.
Where does that "I know better than you CHILD" mindset come from? It's nice to notice it's nonsense... but if you don't know why it's there you'll just be doing the same thing again yourself when you decide that you now know better.
@futurebird @whknott @nyrath Related: when you're a kid, any kind of rebellion against adults feels like "punching up" regardless of any difference in social status. But then some people never lose that feeling as they age.
Not sure why this conversation turned into being about "smart", as it looks to me that it's not about intelligence, otherwise AI would be ultimately the solution.
> but if you don't know why it's there you'll just be doing the same thing
You will, unequivocally, unless you understand the first law of education:
"Do what I say, not what I do!"
@mattmcirvin @whknott @nyrath @futurebird It also comes from a problem identified in “Engineers of Jihad” by Diego Gambetta and Steffen Hertog. It’s an approach to the world where debates over political differences are seen as only an equation to be solved, and as not differences of values and different ways of viewing and parsing social issues. It treats questions of human values are settled and ‘objective’ so any steps needed to obtain their ideal society are logically justified, regardless of the suffering of others. https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691145174/engineers-of-jihad?srsltid=AfmBOoo5ZgHS5Wr4e9SMwOXEvSvkLHq6UbU2jpKbyFa63CXxhPv_jDNR
@mattmcirvin @whknott @nyrath @futurebird I think of this as the Eddington effect, though of course it wasn't unique to him. Observational confirmation of relativistic effects published in 1920, huge awards and accolades. But after that he went off down a numerological rabbit hole dressed up as science. I'm sure that some of that progress comes from remembering when everyone said you were wrong but you were right after all—and now everyone's saying you're wrong again (but unlike last time it's _not_ in an area on which you are a world-class expert).
@RogerBW @whknott @nyrath @futurebird In science, cosmologists seem particularly prone to this kind of poorly-justified late-career contrarianism, and most particularly *British* cosmologists for some reason I can't fathom.
Engineers and programmers meddling in physics, and physicists meddling outside of physics, are notorious for overestimating their own genius. As someone who was trained as a physicist and became a software guy I'm obviously susceptible and you'll notice I opine about all sorts of things. But I try to retain *some* degree of humility in the presence of actual experts.
@RogerBW @whknott @nyrath @futurebird And, of course, a lot of "hard SF" writers, definitely including Heinlein, had engineering backgrounds predisposing them to "Engineer Syndrome", the feeling that your mighty common sense honed by engineering has a power exceeding that of normal humans in all matters.
@mattmcirvin @RogerBW @whknott @nyrath @futurebird Fair enough. But there was variation here
@mattmcirvin @RogerBW @whknott @nyrath
Being right about things and correcting people is so much fun and kind of a high. To the extent that being a know-it-all can make other people feel bad it's worth it to work on remembering that and not becoming a junkie. Because eventually you'll say some stuff that isn't the answer to a math problem, something that *is* debatable and one won't have the skills needed to listen or learn from others since one has become addicted to being "right."
@futurebird @mattmcirvin @whknott @nyrath Or even that you're just a bit older and a bit less of a mental powerhouse than the first time you did something amazing.
@RogerBW @mattmcirvin @whknott @nyrath
It's really sad when someone who used to have a razor sharp mind goes a bit dull and sloppy ... but they don't know it. And it's so sad if they get mad at everyone for pointing it out. Especially if they used to really impress you and you looked up to them a little.
It's more graceful to just admit you're wrong, step back a bit. Nothing is lost by doing that.
@mattmcirvin @RogerBW @whknott @nyrath @futurebird Meanwhile I'm a hard SF author and a materials engineer but I recognize that knowing about steel grades and degradation of carbon-fiber composites does not enable me to write good sociology or politics so I defer to my friends who do know about such things when said topics become relevant.
@mattmcirvin @whknott @nyrath @futurebird
I found it convincing until I read Gould's _The Mismeasure of Man_ , in which is explained the numerous historical examples of how people bend and abuse statistics to create "measures of intelligence" which elevate white men in a horribly biased fashion, and how the multi-faceted nature of cognition, with its many incommensurate aspects, does not facilitate metrics.