Conversation

Good analogy. I’m always exhausted by crackpots dumping evidence on me I’m not competent to evaluate and which looks like it will take me 6 months to even behind doing my “own research” with.
Quote Tweet
What the crank is doing is ultimately a lot more condescending—the equivalent of giving a child a fake cell phone so they can “make calls” just like mom & dad. They’re pretending not to ultimately rely on trust, and so they get trust.
Show this thread
3
64
Actually reading research even in a field you have competence in is harder than reading code written by someone else. My advisor’s standard for a phd was: collect and survey 100 papers, shallow read 20, deep read 5. Which is actually an ambitious target for the 3-5 years it takes
1
34
You’re not “doing your own research.” It’s some sort of academic tsundoku. At *best* you’re scanning for resonance with something you already believe.
2
31
Research is also harder than building in industry. Just because a lot of phd academic researchers who do it badly are dumber than people in tech doing simpler things doesn’t make the *task* easier. The smartest people don’t necessarily get selected to work on hardest problems.
1
22
Most “do your own research” discourse is at the level of: A: Hey, look at this infinite chocolate bar trick B (smugly): Ah, the Banach-Tarski theorem! Neither of them understands the theorem or how it relates to the chocolate bar trick (it doesn’t really)
1
17
This is increasingly becoming a real problem. I suspect it’s due to people having too few reading modes. I guess when even establishing a single kind of literacy is a challenge, expecting 2 or 3 is unrealistic.
1
15
I wonder if there’s a relation to Americans being mostly monolingual. Many Americans seem to genuinely believe that English spoken really slowly, with careful enunciation and exaggerated gesticulation, somehow equals entirely different languages.
1
15
Research reading isn’t just like reading tweets really slowly. It’s a distinct literacy. And unlike many literacies, like picking up on the tropes of a new pop fiction genre, where creators kinda work with your natural literacy acquisition, “research” is an unnatural literacy.
1
12
It is NOT a natural way to read or process anything. Breaking down claims, identifying necessary/sufficient conditions, following formal logic, examining how words are defined and used, tracing critical path… it’s all very unnatural.
1
17
And typically since every paper, especially in STEM, rests on others, you’ll typically only “understand” the 20% that’s new in the paper. The other 80% you’ll take on faith unless you’ve studied it before. Just as programmers take on faith that the chip underneath works.
1
14
Replying to
Not saying you must have a phd to have the literacy, or even have the exact same kind of literacy academia develops. But if autodidact, you need to have done a comparable amount of work acquiring an equivalent outsider literacy.
2
13