Join 📚 Quinn's Highlights
A batch of the best highlights from what Quinn's read, .
The Danger of Incorrectly Mapping Between Scientific Measures and Truth
Transcript:
Speaker 1
And it's a problem when scientific culture tolerates too much ambiguity. There's always a caveat there, which is that at the early stage of theory development, sometimes you need ambiguity because you don't actually know really what you're talking about Yet. And so you need to allow for multiple interpretations to be possible until you can figure out what you mean. But a mature theory should be minimally ambiguous. This is at odds with things like metrics in terms of let's say how to evaluate something because people think, oh, well, it's scientific. Therefore, I want to use this to then therefore impose a value judge on something. It's better because it has a higher score on it. But that's not what science is actually able to do. Science can say, it has this score and it measures this thing because what it measures is this. If you say what it measures is this, and therefore it means this other thing, that's a problem because that's a false mapping. And it's not really about ambiguity versus precision. It's about, I think, the imprecision of the mapping between the measure and the term. So if you want to measure something like happiness or economic prosperity, you can say, well, we'll measure the genie coefficient, we'll measure GDP. But those are rigorous, clearly unambiguous measures. They have a meaning. This is what they are. This is how we measure them. We can compare things on this measure. And that's not problematic until you then say, and it is better to have a higher GDP full stop.
Paul Smaldino & C. Thi Nguyen on Problems With Value Metrics & Governance at Scale
COMPLEXITY: Physics of Life
Create a User Manual of Yourself for Others
Summary:
Creating a user manual for yourself, including strengths, weaknesses, triggers, blind spots, and insights for working effectively with you, enables others to understand and collaborate with you more easily.
By soliciting feedback from colleagues and using their input to enhance self-awareness, you can provide new team members with valuable insights about working with you, facilitating quicker and more effective collaboration.
Transcript:
Speaker 1
He said, you know, when i buy a new car, it comes with an owner's manual, so i know how to operate it. But when i work with a new person, whose way more complex than a car, i don't get anything. And so i'm kind of starting from square one, when fact, they have all these experiences that could teach me something from their past about how to work with them better in the present And the future. And so what he did, same as orschol nick, he sat down and he wrote up one pager on how to work with him effectively. What are his strength what are his weaknesses, what are the triggers that bring out the worst in him? What are the the moments that bring out in the best in him? And then he didn't stop therehe asked his team to write their user manual for him, so that he could gauge his own self awareness. And of course, he found the team's os is much more ecihtful and accurate than his own, because of the blind spot factor in part. But now every new person who works with him gets that one pager and gets to immediately start as if they'd known him for a month or two, and say, ok, you know, here are the things i might want To adapt if i want to be really affective with this nager. And so i've gone, i've gone and done that. I asked a bunch of people who worke with me to write my user manual. Andit is very simple. The questions are, what are my strengths? What brings those out? What are my weaknesses? What brings those out? What are my blind spots? And what do you know now about working with me that you wish you had known when we first started working?
#399 — Adam Grant — The Man Who Does Everything
The Tim Ferriss Show
The Expert Identification Problem and the Challenges of Democratic Decision-Making
Key takeaways:
• The expert identification problem is a major concern when it comes to trusting experts in a democracy.
• Democracies aim to harness the intellectual power of diversity for better solutions.
• The challenge lies in recognizing the best solutions when they require expertise that the democratic entity may not possess.
• There is no clear solution to this problem, and democracy remains the best way to organize society according to the speaker.
Transcript:
Speaker 2
So for a long time I would say that the problem I've been most obsessed with is something I call the expert identification problem it's like how does the non-expert figure out which expert To trust if they don't have the expertise and one of the worries about a democracy is that it runs straight into the expert identification problem right like if we're democratically Voting on what to do we are aggregate non-experts I mean I'm not talking here about like oh we are the experts and you all are not even if you are the world expert in X you're a non-expert In a million other fields right so as an aggregate we are non-expert so here's the real worry for me if you have the right solution how would that get democratically approved Helen Landemore Is this a political theorist I really like she's part of a movement who are epistemic democrats and they think that democracies are the best way to harness the intellectual power of Diversity and the basic model is something like diverse people will come up with a better set of solutions and when you put them together the best solutions will rise to the top and my Worry is how will the democratic entity recognize which are the best solutions because if the best solution requires expertise to recognize and the democratic entity as an aggregate Is not an expert how will they figure it out and that's a problem I'm not sure there's a solution to and I also can't think of a better way to organize the world than democratically
Paul Smaldino & C. Thi Nguyen on Problems With Value Metrics & Governance at Scale
COMPLEXITY: Physics of Life
...catch up on these, and many more highlights
Readwise