4 ms·

Do you believe it is possible for one person to understand multiple topics in different fields as well as the experts in those fields? That seems like a massive

by chc 3y ago

Do you believe it is possible for one person to understand multiple topics in different fields as well as the experts in those fields? That seems like a massive unspoken assumption in your point of view here. If not, it seems like some level of trust in experts is the only possible way to know much about the world beyond the rudiments.

pixl97 3y ago
Yea, I always hear the "learn everything yourself, don't trust experts", and it makes little sense to me. I research an insane amount of things and read massive volumes of books, and videos on how to do things.... After this immense amount of learning I still know that I just know a drop in the bucket of what there is to know. I would have to just spend all my time learning, and I'd never get shit done Maybe what these people are trying to say poorly is "Try to learn enough about a topic that you can pick an actual expert out, rather than a bullshit salesman", but after talking to enough of these 'rugged individualist', I think what they are mostly saying (silently) is "Get ready to screw me over because I am massively over confident in my abilities"
- singleshot_ 3y ago
  Learn everything yourself is such an insanely reductionist strategy. Through a limited dalliance with spaced repetition learning techniques, I came to believe research that suggests there a limit to how many discrete facts you can retain in your memory. Unfortunately the number of facts you’d need to retain to be an expert in hold to maturity securities, vaccines, the military capabilities of Ukraine, the intricacies of section 230, and Delaware corporate law and how it relates to broken acquisitions (just to name five examples of things that most people on this site think they know a lot about) would exhaust the most capable mind’s capacity.
  - LoganDark 3y ago
    > there a limit to how many discrete facts you can retain in your memory Yep. Once you've tried to train yourself on too much data, your brain begins to hallucinate facts (more) similarly to an LLM. You'll be able to reject (most of?) these hallucinations, but you won't really have all the facts anymore. I've tried to do this before and it doesn't end up with you being an expert in anything. It just ends up with you either being confused, or being confidently wrong. I hallucinate facts all the time.
- maxslch 3y ago
  Imagine if there is a government funded, independent company that does the in depth fact checking and analysis on the important, mass consumed information pieces. How much would that cost to operate for the government? A few mils per year? That's nothing for the gov and imagine how much value would this company bring to people/nation/world. Maybe soon later we'll have an AI in place that would be checking whatever you're about to post/share and warn you, show you what you're posting from perspective you're not aware of etc.
ravenstine 3y ago
No, that is not what I am saying at all. Nobody has to learn everything, and 99.9% of information being sold is not actionable for the average person. There's a world of difference between treating experts as priests and considering what experts have to say while not blindingly believing them. I'm saying that they neither need to know very much nor offload all their reasoning to someone else. Plenty of experts speak inappropriately on topics outside their realm of expertise. The culture should encourage people to recognize when this happens and choose whether to dismiss the expert. A perfect example is many doctors, in particular M.D.s, who profess often foolish or obsolete views on things like nutrition, something which is not within the expertise of an M.D. The same goes for scientists commenting on politics, or science outside their domain of research. Or 20-something journalists making predictions about fields in which they've never actually practiced in. A significant amount of misinformation would be inoculated against with the recognition of misplaced authority and abuse of power. It's called not being so gullible, and it doesn't take that much general knowledge that the average human brain can't grasp it. I'm sorry if it comes off as the expectation that individuals be the experts in many fields themselves, because if that's where our imagination keeps taking us, then maybe there really is no hope.
d0mine 3y ago
This sounds plausible but directly contradicts the actual evidence about the best forecasters (according to David Epstein "Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World").

by chc 3y ago

pixl97 3y ago

Yea, I always hear the "learn everything yourself, don't trust experts", and it makes little sense to me. I research an insane amount of things and read massive volumes of books, and videos on how to do things.... After this immense amount of learning I still know that I just know a drop in the bucket of what there is to know. I would have to just spend all my time learning, and I'd never get shit done Maybe what these people are trying to say poorly is "Try to learn enough about a topic that you can pick an actual expert out, rather than a bullshit salesman", but after talking to enough of these 'rugged individualist', I think what they are mostly saying (silently) is "Get ready to screw me over because I am massively over confident in my abilities"

singleshot_ 3y ago
Learn everything yourself is such an insanely reductionist strategy. Through a limited dalliance with spaced repetition learning techniques, I came to believe research that suggests there a limit to how many discrete facts you can retain in your memory. Unfortunately the number of facts you’d need to retain to be an expert in hold to maturity securities, vaccines, the military capabilities of Ukraine, the intricacies of section 230, and Delaware corporate law and how it relates to broken acquisitions (just to name five examples of things that most people on this site think they know a lot about) would exhaust the most capable mind’s capacity.
- LoganDark 3y ago
  > there a limit to how many discrete facts you can retain in your memory Yep. Once you've tried to train yourself on too much data, your brain begins to hallucinate facts (more) similarly to an LLM. You'll be able to reject (most of?) these hallucinations, but you won't really have all the facts anymore. I've tried to do this before and it doesn't end up with you being an expert in anything. It just ends up with you either being confused, or being confidently wrong. I hallucinate facts all the time.
maxslch 3y ago
Imagine if there is a government funded, independent company that does the in depth fact checking and analysis on the important, mass consumed information pieces. How much would that cost to operate for the government? A few mils per year? That's nothing for the gov and imagine how much value would this company bring to people/nation/world. Maybe soon later we'll have an AI in place that would be checking whatever you're about to post/share and warn you, show you what you're posting from perspective you're not aware of etc.

ravenstine 3y ago

No, that is not what I am saying at all. Nobody has to learn everything, and 99.9% of information being sold is not actionable for the average person. There's a world of difference between treating experts as priests and considering what experts have to say while not blindingly believing them. I'm saying that they neither need to know very much nor offload all their reasoning to someone else. Plenty of experts speak inappropriately on topics outside their realm of expertise. The culture should encourage people to recognize when this happens and choose whether to dismiss the expert. A perfect example is many doctors, in particular M.D.s, who profess often foolish or obsolete views on things like nutrition, something which is not within the expertise of an M.D. The same goes for scientists commenting on politics, or science outside their domain of research. Or 20-something journalists making predictions about fields in which they've never actually practiced in. A significant amount of misinformation would be inoculated against with the recognition of misplaced authority and abuse of power. It's called not being so gullible, and it doesn't take that much general knowledge that the average human brain can't grasp it. I'm sorry if it comes off as the expectation that individuals be the experts in many fields themselves, because if that's where our imagination keeps taking us, then maybe there really is no hope.

d0mine 3y ago

This sounds plausible but directly contradicts the actual evidence about the best forecasters (according to David Epstein "Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World").