3 ms·
You don't know that--it's possible (and in my experience this is the more likely cause) that they are not thinking enough on the abstract to recognize patterns
by rTX5CMRXIfFG 4y ago
You don't know that--it's possible (and in my experience this is the more likely cause) that they are not thinking enough on the abstract to recognize patterns across situations, which is why they keep making the same mistakes.
The best professionals I've ever worked with don't even bother making this artificial distinction between professional practice and the academe, and instead continue to educate themselves even as they get farther in their careers. Professionals who are incapable of elevating their practice into theory are just as devoid of knowledge as academics who don't put their theory into practice. We need to stop glorifying this notion of "pure" professionals just as people are skeptical of "pure" academics--otherwise this is just letting anti-intellectualism creep in on HN.
- WastingMyTime89 4y agoThere is no ant—intellectualism here. Academics simply are not professionals. You can’t suddenly become good at something you don’t practice because you are a master at theory and being an academic doesn’t allow the time to practice.
- rTX5CMRXIfFG 4y ago
- wkearney99 4y agoThis. It's one thing to know the theory of digging trenches, it's another to successfully fight from them.
- CobrastanJorji 4y agoSorry if my joke came across as anti-intellectual. I think "law professor" and "lawyer" are really different jobs, though, in the same way a doctor does a different job from a PhD in medicine. Sure, those "head of research" MD-PhD folks running research labs are technically doctors, but you don't want them to be your doctor simply for the reason that they haven't actually seen any patients in a long time.