8 ms·

It's easy for those who live in ivory towers to write books justifying how they deserve to live in ivory tower. I would be much more intruiged in somebody writi

It's easy for those who live in ivory towers to write books justifying how they deserve to live in ivory tower. I would be much more intruiged in somebody writing a book explaining how he should actually be a plumber. One of my college professors always starts a new session by telling the story of how he bacame a professor. He started off by learning how to be an electrician, because that's all everyone around him was doing. This is in a 3-tier schooling system. After doing that for a while, an instructor encouraged him to go for a somewhat higher learning to become a technician. He did, and there again, he decided on a whim to try out for the university. He got in, and was encouraged to get a PHD. He got it, and some years later, was made a professor. It would have been real easy for him to have stayed an electrician. Maybe he could have met a girl and needed to pay bills. Maybe he would have felt he was too old. He had the intellectual ability, but the tiered system could have forced him into a path where he would never have been able to contribute what he has to everyone who passed through him.

cperciva 18y ago
I would be much more intruiged in somebody writing a book explaining how he should actually be a plumber. You'll never find a well-written book which honestly claims that its author should be a plumber. Why? For the same reason as you'll never find a well-written book which honestly claims that its author is illiterate: If you're able to write well, you're overqualified to be a plumber.
- marvin 18y ago
  That argument only proves half of the statement; you can still not be sure that anyone wants to write a book about how they should be a plumber
  - hugh 18y ago
    An adopted relative of mine is a plumber -- he works hard, runs his own business, does useful things, and probably makes a lot more money than I do with my PhD. Ask him why he "deserves" to be a plumber and he'll give you a confused look: he deserves to be a plumber because he worked hard during his apprenticeship and learned how to fix drains well. Being a plumber is a pretty good life: given the choice between being a plumber with his own business and a mid-level Bachelor's-wielding drone in some random company, I'd choose plumber any day. Sure, a plumber has to deal with some pretty unpleasant substances, but then again so does a surgeon.
- markessien 18y ago
  What about a labourer arguing for the case that there should be an influx of labourers from Mexico? It's the same pattern everywhere. When people argue for high IQ being superior, they have high IQs. When they argue for immigration, it's because they are not affected, when they argue for more police on the streets, it's because they are not criminals. I would be a lot more impressed by people who make arguments that are rationally correct, but that do not favour them. It's like people who argue for Eugenics - their version of Eugenics never involves them or their friends/family being cut out from the genetic pool.
  - cperciva 18y ago
    I would be a lot more impressed by people who make arguments that are rationally correct, but that do not favour them. I've been arguing for a long time that universities should take fewer students and technical training schools should be expanded. Given that I hope to end up with a faculty position at a university, I'd say that this isn't a position which particularly favours me. It's like people who argue for Eugenics - their version of Eugenics never involves them or their friends/family being cut out from the genetic pool. I wouldn't argue for cutting myself out of the gene pool, since I think the genes I have which are responsible for my intellect are worth keeping (both of my parents have doctorates, so I think it's safe to say that there's a strong genetic component in my case); but there is strong evidence that I have genes which predispose for autoimmune conditions, and if I'm ever in a position to have children I'd strongly support using genetic testing to eliminate zygotes with those genes.
    - markessien 18y ago
      Actually, the first argument favours you because then you would be one of a smaller elite. The second argument also favours you, because you don't want to be responsible for the caretaking of a sick child, and you don't want your offspring to have problems.
      - cperciva 18y ago
        I guess if you look at things closely enough, anything I could ever argue for would favour me somehow. If I want to see more students in university, it favours me because I want to be hired to teach them; if I want fewer students, it favours me because I remain part of a smaller elite. If I think computer scientists should be paid more, it benefits me because I would earn more; if I think computer scientists should be paid less, it benefits me because it means that fewer people would enter the field and I'd have less competition. Somehow I get the feeling that we'd get more done if we stuck to arguing about policies rather than spending time dissecting the possible motives of their proponents.
- petercooper 18y ago
  If you're able to write well, you're overqualified to be a plumber. What a ridiculous stereotype. That's like saying if someone's able to program well, they're too geeky to get a girlfriend.
  - ksvs 18y ago
    No; programming and getting a girlfriend are not positions on a single scale, as cperciva's statement implies, whereas programming and plumbing are. He's saying a large number can't be a small one, and you're saying that's like saying a large number can't be prime.
    - hugh 18y ago
      I'm not sure that programming and plumbing are all that far apart.
  - cperciva 18y ago
    Not at all. I didn't say that a writer wasn't able to do plumbing; only that he was overqualified to do so. There are some fields, such as writing or computer programming, where the gap between "average" and "good" is huge; and other fields, such as plumbing, where the gap is relatively modest. A fantastic plumber might be twice as good as an average plumber, but he isn't a hundred times better. If you're a good writer or computer programmer, you can make a far larger contribution to society by working in those fields than by working as a plumber, no matter how fantastic a plumber you might happen to be. That's what I mean by being overqualified.
    - nostrademons 18y ago
      > A fantastic plumber might be twice as good as an average plumber, but he isn't a hundred times better. Have you ever had a bad or fantastic plumber do work for you? Trust me, there's a difference, and it's way more than 2X. Bad plumbers have to keep coming back to the same job to fix their mistakes (job security, I guess). Fantastic plumbers will point out other issues that will likely become a problem in the future, and fix them in 5 minutes before you need to call a plumber again. In that regard, they're not all that different from programmers.
- imgabe 18y ago
  That doesn't make much sense. The skill of writing is orthogonal to being a plumber. That's like saying that if you're able to ride horses really well, you're overqualified to be a tugboat captain. The two have nothing to do with each other. A person could write beautifully and still be unable to comprehend plumbing.
hs 18y ago
this reminds me of a professor in probability who didn't have formal education iirc, he was a 'magician' with cards or something ... who plays a lot with probability he impressed a prof from ivy league uni, then got into grad school without having to do undergrad. it happened around 1950, should be less possible now actually around 2003 i had a friend doing master in EE, having background as chinese language teacher. An old chinese professor of her let her into the EE grad program :D she was really struggling :(
- antiform 18y ago
  I believe you're talking about Persi Diaconis, who's now a Stats professor at Stanford. He's not that old (born in 1945), and while he didn't complete high school, he did have an undergraduate education, but it was taking evening classes at City College of New York.
albertcardona 18y ago
Good plumbers make more money than university professors. Beware of appearances and topics.
bd 18y ago
And this is exactly what Murray is saying in The Bell Curve: over the time (20th century), the system became better at "bubbling up" smart kids, no matter what socio-economic background they came from.

cperciva 18y ago

I would be much more intruiged in somebody writing a book explaining how he should actually be a plumber. You'll never find a well-written book which honestly claims that its author should be a plumber. Why? For the same reason as you'll never find a well-written book which honestly claims that its author is illiterate: If you're able to write well, you're overqualified to be a plumber.

marvin 18y ago
That argument only proves half of the statement; you can still not be sure that anyone wants to write a book about how they should be a plumber
- hugh 18y ago
  An adopted relative of mine is a plumber -- he works hard, runs his own business, does useful things, and probably makes a lot more money than I do with my PhD. Ask him why he "deserves" to be a plumber and he'll give you a confused look: he deserves to be a plumber because he worked hard during his apprenticeship and learned how to fix drains well. Being a plumber is a pretty good life: given the choice between being a plumber with his own business and a mid-level Bachelor's-wielding drone in some random company, I'd choose plumber any day. Sure, a plumber has to deal with some pretty unpleasant substances, but then again so does a surgeon.
markessien 18y ago
What about a labourer arguing for the case that there should be an influx of labourers from Mexico? It's the same pattern everywhere. When people argue for high IQ being superior, they have high IQs. When they argue for immigration, it's because they are not affected, when they argue for more police on the streets, it's because they are not criminals. I would be a lot more impressed by people who make arguments that are rationally correct, but that do not favour them. It's like people who argue for Eugenics - their version of Eugenics never involves them or their friends/family being cut out from the genetic pool.
- cperciva 18y ago
  I would be a lot more impressed by people who make arguments that are rationally correct, but that do not favour them. I've been arguing for a long time that universities should take fewer students and technical training schools should be expanded. Given that I hope to end up with a faculty position at a university, I'd say that this isn't a position which particularly favours me. It's like people who argue for Eugenics - their version of Eugenics never involves them or their friends/family being cut out from the genetic pool. I wouldn't argue for cutting myself out of the gene pool, since I think the genes I have which are responsible for my intellect are worth keeping (both of my parents have doctorates, so I think it's safe to say that there's a strong genetic component in my case); but there is strong evidence that I have genes which predispose for autoimmune conditions, and if I'm ever in a position to have children I'd strongly support using genetic testing to eliminate zygotes with those genes.
  - markessien 18y ago
    Actually, the first argument favours you because then you would be one of a smaller elite. The second argument also favours you, because you don't want to be responsible for the caretaking of a sick child, and you don't want your offspring to have problems.
    - cperciva 18y ago
      I guess if you look at things closely enough, anything I could ever argue for would favour me somehow. If I want to see more students in university, it favours me because I want to be hired to teach them; if I want fewer students, it favours me because I remain part of a smaller elite. If I think computer scientists should be paid more, it benefits me because I would earn more; if I think computer scientists should be paid less, it benefits me because it means that fewer people would enter the field and I'd have less competition. Somehow I get the feeling that we'd get more done if we stuck to arguing about policies rather than spending time dissecting the possible motives of their proponents.
petercooper 18y ago
If you're able to write well, you're overqualified to be a plumber. What a ridiculous stereotype. That's like saying if someone's able to program well, they're too geeky to get a girlfriend.
- ksvs 18y ago
  No; programming and getting a girlfriend are not positions on a single scale, as cperciva's statement implies, whereas programming and plumbing are. He's saying a large number can't be a small one, and you're saying that's like saying a large number can't be prime.
  - hugh 18y ago
    I'm not sure that programming and plumbing are all that far apart.
- cperciva 18y ago
  Not at all. I didn't say that a writer wasn't able to do plumbing; only that he was overqualified to do so. There are some fields, such as writing or computer programming, where the gap between "average" and "good" is huge; and other fields, such as plumbing, where the gap is relatively modest. A fantastic plumber might be twice as good as an average plumber, but he isn't a hundred times better. If you're a good writer or computer programmer, you can make a far larger contribution to society by working in those fields than by working as a plumber, no matter how fantastic a plumber you might happen to be. That's what I mean by being overqualified.
  - nostrademons 18y ago
    > A fantastic plumber might be twice as good as an average plumber, but he isn't a hundred times better. Have you ever had a bad or fantastic plumber do work for you? Trust me, there's a difference, and it's way more than 2X. Bad plumbers have to keep coming back to the same job to fix their mistakes (job security, I guess). Fantastic plumbers will point out other issues that will likely become a problem in the future, and fix them in 5 minutes before you need to call a plumber again. In that regard, they're not all that different from programmers.
imgabe 18y ago
That doesn't make much sense. The skill of writing is orthogonal to being a plumber. That's like saying that if you're able to ride horses really well, you're overqualified to be a tugboat captain. The two have nothing to do with each other. A person could write beautifully and still be unable to comprehend plumbing.

hs 18y ago

this reminds me of a professor in probability who didn't have formal education iirc, he was a 'magician' with cards or something ... who plays a lot with probability he impressed a prof from ivy league uni, then got into grad school without having to do undergrad. it happened around 1950, should be less possible now actually around 2003 i had a friend doing master in EE, having background as chinese language teacher. An old chinese professor of her let her into the EE grad program :D she was really struggling :(

antiform 18y ago
I believe you're talking about Persi Diaconis, who's now a Stats professor at Stanford. He's not that old (born in 1945), and while he didn't complete high school, he did have an undergraduate education, but it was taking evening classes at City College of New York.

albertcardona 18y ago

Good plumbers make more money than university professors. Beware of appearances and topics.

bd 18y ago

And this is exactly what Murray is saying in The Bell Curve: over the time (20th century), the system became better at "bubbling up" smart kids, no matter what socio-economic background they came from.