3 ms·

I interpreted it as it merely being a side point, this aspect of obnoxiousness. What Feynman was impressed it was the fact that they didn't need to repeat the i

by vasco 5y ago

I interpreted it as it merely being a side point, this aspect of obnoxiousness. What Feynman was impressed it was the fact that they didn't need to repeat the ideas more than once. I think you're trying to see a deeper argument when this is the argument itself. Even in groups of smart people I've found that the group needs to write ideas down as it discusses them and repeat some of them to clarify to one person in the group that didn't get it the first time. If you don't do the writing down / repeating most people will lose track of most ideas, the same way most people can't play blind chess and remember all the pieces on the board. It's a comment on mental capacity moreso than manners.

WastingMyTime89 5y ago
As an aside, while I don’t do Feynman point regarding some of the exceptional meetings he has been to, as a chairperson my experience is you can significantly improve the meeting by systematically restating arguments, asking for clarification when a participant doesn’t agree with your restatement and providing a brief summary of propositions before a decision is made.
jodrellblank 5y ago
I don’t know anything about uranium separation, but is it possible the situation was not “Arthur Compton has the best idea, nobody needed to repeat it because they all remembered it on one hearing” and was more like “Arthur Compton started the meeting by setting out the main Uranium separation plan we all know well and have been leaning towards for weeks, and everyone lay out their previously hotly argued views and no dealbreakers with better alternatives arose so the committee agreed on the way”. Or perhaps that nobody had any stake in doing Uranium separation one way over another way for personal identity reasons? Perhaps the surprising bit was that they could all agree on the not-ideal method because they needed to move on and the meeting was a formality of agreement and alignment, not a brainstorming fight for your own idea session? We have another anecdote of Feynman being shown blueprints of a nuclear power plant and he doesn’t understand and eventually asks a stupid question about a part, “expecting” to be laughed at and told it’s a door, but it turns out to be a valve which could cause a problem if it fails. Nobody else had noticed, implying they were pretending their understanding, and they left thinking he was a great insightful man which he’s saying he isn’t (but is likely downplaying for comedy as well as humbleness)

by vasco 5y ago

WastingMyTime89 5y ago

As an aside, while I don’t do Feynman point regarding some of the exceptional meetings he has been to, as a chairperson my experience is you can significantly improve the meeting by systematically restating arguments, asking for clarification when a participant doesn’t agree with your restatement and providing a brief summary of propositions before a decision is made.

jodrellblank 5y ago

I don’t know anything about uranium separation, but is it possible the situation was not “Arthur Compton has the best idea, nobody needed to repeat it because they all remembered it on one hearing” and was more like “Arthur Compton started the meeting by setting out the main Uranium separation plan we all know well and have been leaning towards for weeks, and everyone lay out their previously hotly argued views and no dealbreakers with better alternatives arose so the committee agreed on the way”. Or perhaps that nobody had any stake in doing Uranium separation one way over another way for personal identity reasons? Perhaps the surprising bit was that they could all agree on the not-ideal method because they needed to move on and the meeting was a formality of agreement and alignment, not a brainstorming fight for your own idea session? We have another anecdote of Feynman being shown blueprints of a nuclear power plant and he doesn’t understand and eventually asks a stupid question about a part, “expecting” to be laughed at and told it’s a door, but it turns out to be a valve which could cause a problem if it fails. Nobody else had noticed, implying they were pretending their understanding, and they left thinking he was a great insightful man which he’s saying he isn’t (but is likely downplaying for comedy as well as humbleness)