5 ms·
A small point only tangential to the main point of this post, but something I've noticed about Sam's writing before: Is anyone else offput by the phrase "best
by Tarrosion 6y ago
A small point only tangential to the main point of this post, but something I've noticed about Sam's writing before:
Is anyone else offput by the phrase "best people"? I get (or at least hope) it's a shorthand for "best at their respective job of researcher/founder," but it really seems to reduce people's innate worth and goodness to this single dimension in a somewhat unnerving way.
- netcan 6y agoIt's an expression, generally used to convey exactly what you said.
- arikr 6y agoNo. It seems clear to me he's talking about the best people in those groups from the perspective of their work output.
- jononor 6y agoWork output as in financial success/reward, prestige or impact, or something else?
- thrawnaway 6y agoSocial status is maybe the most important thing to people after their basic needs are met. Having someone publicly lower your social status is therefore extremely painful. And it's a one-dimensional quantity, to a first approximation.
- allenu 6y agoMy issue with it is that a hand-wavy qualification that communicates only what you want it to mean. How does one define "best" at all in this context? If you devote all your efforts to researching a problem no one is looking at and still come up with nothing, are you still considered one of the "best people"? What if you are researching a problem many others are investigating and then do find something new? It feels very much like hindsight bias to apply such a moniker.
- indymike 6y agoPeople are emotionally affected by exclusion. The phrase "the best people are ___" is exclusionary if you don't match the fill in the blank. I don't think Altman is trying to offend anyone. He's trying to contrast the behavior of top researchers/founders with everyone else...