6 ms·

The medical field is an embarrassment of riches when it comes to talented essayists, journalists, and biographers. I've also read a few wonderful biographies wr

The medical field is an embarrassment of riches when it comes to talented essayists, journalists, and biographers. I've also read a few wonderful biographies written by restauranteurs. Our field unfortunately lags behind, I think partially because it's rather dry compared to other fields, and partially because SV ideology is pervasive, stifling, and indifferent to many swathes of the human experience.

jessriedel 9y ago
I don't necessarily disagree, but little of that falls under the heading of "philosophical discussion". Medicine is romantic and salient to laymen, so of course journalists are going to write more biographies and whatnot for them on that topic. I almost never find such pieces philosophically insightful, and they aren't competing with Paul Graham essays.
ak39 9y ago
This is interesting. Would you say that engineers and mathematicians also suffer the same embarrassment? If so, could all of this be a side-effect of being in the world of precision vs being in the world of creative trial and error (where every attempt at writing is judged on the interpretive aspect of it)? I am saying: I get nasty ineloquent on days I'm zoned into coding. Almost like I'd rather not say than say anything I judge to be imprecise. Like this post.
- stillsut 9y ago
  This is something I've noticed too. I tend (when I'm coding well) to write with many clauses, and also elaborate them with elaborate punctuation, [, ( ,- , etc... ak, I believe you may have just written something moderately insightful. Anyone else?
  - jessriedel 9y ago
    I've experienced this, and, per my other comment, I think it's a good example of the sort of thinking that is (analytical) philisophical, in contrast to the sorts of artistic prose m_fayer brought up.
  - fragmede 9y ago
    I've also experienced this, especially when working from home for extended periods of time. Thankfully the compiler's application of rules aren't capricious nor does the computer get annoyed when I repeatedly ask it tiny variations on the same question.
  - indiv0 9y ago
    I'm not sure if this is exactly the sort of insight you're looking for, but personally I find that long periods of coding and being "in the zone" tend to affect my speech in the same way. Essentially, I tend to try to be as precise as possible when speaking, often going out of the way on increasingly specific tangents or finding the most elaborate examples to demonstrate what I mean. These tangents and examples always come back to the main point (so I'm not just wandering off), but when considering conversations in retrospect I find that they tend to just muddy the point I was trying to make. Written language and code can afford the verbosity, because you can always review the earlier points to see how they tie in, but speech should be short and succinct, IMO. I believe this is similar to (but not exactly) what is meant by "circumstantial speech" [0]. That said, the wikipedia article seems to indicate that what I'm trying to describe is similar to circumstantial speech, but actually isn't: "Some individuals with autistic tendencies may prefer highly precise speech, and this may seem circumstantial, but in fact it is a choice that posits that more details are necessary to communicate a precise meaning, and preempt more disastrous ambiguous communication." Does anyone know of a more accurate term for this? [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_speech https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_speech
rexpop 9y ago
Examples of these riches, please?

jessriedel 9y ago

I don't necessarily disagree, but little of that falls under the heading of "philosophical discussion". Medicine is romantic and salient to laymen, so of course journalists are going to write more biographies and whatnot for them on that topic. I almost never find such pieces philosophically insightful, and they aren't competing with Paul Graham essays.

ak39 9y ago

This is interesting. Would you say that engineers and mathematicians also suffer the same embarrassment? If so, could all of this be a side-effect of being in the world of precision vs being in the world of creative trial and error (where every attempt at writing is judged on the interpretive aspect of it)? I am saying: I get nasty ineloquent on days I'm zoned into coding. Almost like I'd rather not say than say anything I judge to be imprecise. Like this post.

stillsut 9y ago
This is something I've noticed too. I tend (when I'm coding well) to write with many clauses, and also elaborate them with elaborate punctuation, [, ( ,- , etc... ak, I believe you may have just written something moderately insightful. Anyone else?
- jessriedel 9y ago
  I've experienced this, and, per my other comment, I think it's a good example of the sort of thinking that is (analytical) philisophical, in contrast to the sorts of artistic prose m_fayer brought up.
- fragmede 9y ago
  I've also experienced this, especially when working from home for extended periods of time. Thankfully the compiler's application of rules aren't capricious nor does the computer get annoyed when I repeatedly ask it tiny variations on the same question.
- indiv0 9y ago
  I'm not sure if this is exactly the sort of insight you're looking for, but personally I find that long periods of coding and being "in the zone" tend to affect my speech in the same way. Essentially, I tend to try to be as precise as possible when speaking, often going out of the way on increasingly specific tangents or finding the most elaborate examples to demonstrate what I mean. These tangents and examples always come back to the main point (so I'm not just wandering off), but when considering conversations in retrospect I find that they tend to just muddy the point I was trying to make. Written language and code can afford the verbosity, because you can always review the earlier points to see how they tie in, but speech should be short and succinct, IMO. I believe this is similar to (but not exactly) what is meant by "circumstantial speech" [0]. That said, the wikipedia article seems to indicate that what I'm trying to describe is similar to circumstantial speech, but actually isn't: "Some individuals with autistic tendencies may prefer highly precise speech, and this may seem circumstantial, but in fact it is a choice that posits that more details are necessary to communicate a precise meaning, and preempt more disastrous ambiguous communication." Does anyone know of a more accurate term for this? [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_speech https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_speech

rexpop 9y ago

Examples of these riches, please?