3 ms·

> The actual point of the article is to really just drop the -- quote -- "bogus" -- dogwhistle so all the other racists can identify them. Wow. That's beyond b

by eloff 6y ago

> The actual point of the article is to really just drop the -- quote -- "bogus" -- dogwhistle so all the other racists can identify them. Wow. That's beyond being uncharitable. Also, as I mentioned elsewhere down below at length, I think bogus is too kind a word for that kind of crap masquerading as an academic discipline. But to get back to the actual content, I think he's got a point. There is no substitute for genuine passion and interest - otherwise known as eagerness. Little surprise it should be a signal of success. But hey what would one of the world's most successful venture capitalists know about it - you're the real expert on the subject.

foxes 6y ago
There are plenty of people who have genuine passion and interest yet don't succeed. Sounds like survivor bias. Funny that you also appeal to authority -- PG cant possibly be wrong because he is rich and successful :). Also studying society/people is an academic discipline. There is plenty of hard science which is equally "bogus". What about bad neural network papers, or bad physics papers? Regardless, these things are not new ideas, or something people don't know about. Yes being eager/earnest can help. Yes bad papers exist. The issue is why choose that particular example? Why are all of PG's blog posts exactly the same -- none of them have anything particularly deep or offer new insight -- but there always seems to be controversial content mixed into the supposedly honest discussion. If they are not doing it deliberately and its somehow internalised then people should at least call them out.
- eloff 6y ago
  Remember if you took logic in college, appeal to authority is only a fallacy when the authority is not a domain expert. In this case it's quite valid. > What about bad neural network papers, or bad physics papers? That is a logical fallacy. It's called false equivalence. Just because there are some bad hard science papers does not mean gender studies is on the same level. If anyone needs to be called out here on their behavior it is the humanities in academia and the insanity they are harboring and encouraging. I find no fault with PGs reference.

by eloff 6y ago

foxes 6y ago

There are plenty of people who have genuine passion and interest yet don't succeed. Sounds like survivor bias. Funny that you also appeal to authority -- PG cant possibly be wrong because he is rich and successful :). Also studying society/people is an academic discipline. There is plenty of hard science which is equally "bogus". What about bad neural network papers, or bad physics papers? Regardless, these things are not new ideas, or something people don't know about. Yes being eager/earnest can help. Yes bad papers exist. The issue is why choose that particular example? Why are all of PG's blog posts exactly the same -- none of them have anything particularly deep or offer new insight -- but there always seems to be controversial content mixed into the supposedly honest discussion. If they are not doing it deliberately and its somehow internalised then people should at least call them out.

eloff 6y ago
Remember if you took logic in college, appeal to authority is only a fallacy when the authority is not a domain expert. In this case it's quite valid. > What about bad neural network papers, or bad physics papers? That is a logical fallacy. It's called false equivalence. Just because there are some bad hard science papers does not mean gender studies is on the same level. If anyone needs to be called out here on their behavior it is the humanities in academia and the insanity they are harboring and encouraging. I find no fault with PGs reference.