4 ms·

Not the OP, but I would weigh in with D) it's worth trying, and we should learn what we can, but the phenomena being studied are too complex and/or subjective t

Not the OP, but I would weigh in with D) it's worth trying, and we should learn what we can, but the phenomena being studied are too complex and/or subjective to yield the kinds of rigorous results that we expect from the harder sciences, and the opinions of experts are therefore necessarily more infused with personal opinion and bias. I think it is incumbent on all fields to be exceptionally clear about which of their results are rigorous, and which are outside the realm of rigorous knowledge. For example, as someone with expertise in CS, I can give you very reliable information about computability theory, and pretty reliable information about what is technically feasible to implement using current technology, but my opinion on fair moderation policies for social media are not really buttressed by my CS expertise. I wish public health officials (as just one example) were similarly clear about what they have expertise about (how disease spreads and what interventions will have what outcomes) and what is their personal opinion (cost/benefit analysis of different options, who should get vaccines first, etc).

deanCommie 4y ago
I love that response because I think it gets to the point and the problem. Q1: "What is the worst-case runtime complexity of quick sort" is a question that has a rigorous answer that can be proven with fundamental scientific concepts. Q2: "What is the programming language/framework we should use for this next project" is one that absolutely cannot. Any answer to Q2 will invariably involve some personal opinion and bias, AND YET serious professionals with decades of experience - ones perfectly capable of answering Q1 would also be expected to weigh in on Q2, incorporating their knowledge, context, the skills of the rest of the team, the existing architecture, the requirements, etc, etc. It would be absolutely arrogant to push back against the qualitative analysis of a senior software developer making a recommendation to Q2 with "That's just your own opinion and bias" - ESPECIALLY by someone outside the field who doesn't understand all the considerations being weighed. I sympathize with your desire for health officials, but my theory is that everything about epidemiology, public health, disease spread, etc are all mostly Q2-category questions. You still need a PhD and rigorous understanding of all the Q1 questions but shaping public policy in a pandemic is all Q2. Education is much the same way. Education of mathematics at scale is less about mathematics and more about people.
- haberman 4y ago
  I think your Q1 vs Q2 is a good start, but I would add: Q3: "Should the US regulate Bitcoin?" CS expertise will give a person much greater understanding about the details of how Bitcoin works. But any layperson can learn enough about how Bitcoin works to form an opinion on the question of whether the US should regulate it. I would never tell a non-CS person that they don't get to weigh in on this issue because they are not in the field. Would you? Ultimately what we are talking about here is policy, which affects everybody, and value judgments, which everyone is entitled to make.
  - deanCommie 4y ago
    OK, let's bring it back full circle: The context was maths education - not "Should the US teach math?" (to which every layperson can have an opinion), but "How should the US (California) teach math to high schoolers?" That's as complex of a question as "How should the US regulate Bitcoin (if it were to)". And while it's true that laypeople do have lots and lots of opinions on financial regulations, if there's one thing that HackerNews can agree on is that most lay opinions on financial regulations are not rigorous or serious, and come with unexpected side effects and consequences. (Whether it's taxing billionaires on stock grants or restricting crypto). So in that sense I do still this requires people with expertise. And gifted math nerds (which I were) that benefited from a dramatically accellerated program have as much knowledge about the subject as a stereotypical redneck saying "We don't need math out on the tobacco farm".
    - haberman 4y ago
      Yes, many policies have unexpected consequences. The question is whether the experts are doing better at predicting them. The most sweeping educational policy in my lifetime, No Child Left Behind, passed with large bipartisan support, only to be abandoned 15 years later for failing to achieve its goals. I cannot find any expert opinion from the time that accurately anticipated these unintended consequences. If experts are much better than the general public at predicting the effects of policy, I would expect to see education experts on the record predicting the ultimate effects of the policy. > And gifted math nerds (which I were) that benefited from a dramatically accellerated program have as much knowledge about the subject as a stereotypical redneck saying "We don't need math out on the tobacco farm". I think the "nerds" would know enough to understand that they benefitted from the accelerated program and would have not achieved as much if it were taken away.

deanCommie 4y ago

I love that response because I think it gets to the point and the problem. Q1: "What is the worst-case runtime complexity of quick sort" is a question that has a rigorous answer that can be proven with fundamental scientific concepts. Q2: "What is the programming language/framework we should use for this next project" is one that absolutely cannot. Any answer to Q2 will invariably involve some personal opinion and bias, AND YET serious professionals with decades of experience - ones perfectly capable of answering Q1 would also be expected to weigh in on Q2, incorporating their knowledge, context, the skills of the rest of the team, the existing architecture, the requirements, etc, etc. It would be absolutely arrogant to push back against the qualitative analysis of a senior software developer making a recommendation to Q2 with "That's just your own opinion and bias" - ESPECIALLY by someone outside the field who doesn't understand all the considerations being weighed. I sympathize with your desire for health officials, but my theory is that everything about epidemiology, public health, disease spread, etc are all mostly Q2-category questions. You still need a PhD and rigorous understanding of all the Q1 questions but shaping public policy in a pandemic is all Q2. Education is much the same way. Education of mathematics at scale is less about mathematics and more about people.

haberman 4y ago
I think your Q1 vs Q2 is a good start, but I would add: Q3: "Should the US regulate Bitcoin?" CS expertise will give a person much greater understanding about the details of how Bitcoin works. But any layperson can learn enough about how Bitcoin works to form an opinion on the question of whether the US should regulate it. I would never tell a non-CS person that they don't get to weigh in on this issue because they are not in the field. Would you? Ultimately what we are talking about here is policy, which affects everybody, and value judgments, which everyone is entitled to make.
- deanCommie 4y ago
  OK, let's bring it back full circle: The context was maths education - not "Should the US teach math?" (to which every layperson can have an opinion), but "How should the US (California) teach math to high schoolers?" That's as complex of a question as "How should the US regulate Bitcoin (if it were to)". And while it's true that laypeople do have lots and lots of opinions on financial regulations, if there's one thing that HackerNews can agree on is that most lay opinions on financial regulations are not rigorous or serious, and come with unexpected side effects and consequences. (Whether it's taxing billionaires on stock grants or restricting crypto). So in that sense I do still this requires people with expertise. And gifted math nerds (which I were) that benefited from a dramatically accellerated program have as much knowledge about the subject as a stereotypical redneck saying "We don't need math out on the tobacco farm".
  - haberman 4y ago
    Yes, many policies have unexpected consequences. The question is whether the experts are doing better at predicting them. The most sweeping educational policy in my lifetime, No Child Left Behind, passed with large bipartisan support, only to be abandoned 15 years later for failing to achieve its goals. I cannot find any expert opinion from the time that accurately anticipated these unintended consequences. If experts are much better than the general public at predicting the effects of policy, I would expect to see education experts on the record predicting the ultimate effects of the policy. > And gifted math nerds (which I were) that benefited from a dramatically accellerated program have as much knowledge about the subject as a stereotypical redneck saying "We don't need math out on the tobacco farm". I think the "nerds" would know enough to understand that they benefitted from the accelerated program and would have not achieved as much if it were taken away.