4 ms·

I’ll ask a question that I’ve asked a lot and never gotten a satisfactory answer: At what point of accomplishment or perhaps via what factors in accomplishing

I’ll ask a question that I’ve asked a lot and never gotten a satisfactory answer: At what point of accomplishment or perhaps via what factors in accomplishing something measurable and tangible, can someone recognize or state it in a way that doesn’t come off as arrogant/brag etc…? Like if Michalangelo stood in the Sistine and been like “look how amazing what I did was” while people came though, I genuinely have no idea why anyone would have a problem with that. It is amazing, and him saying is valid because he (and almost no others) could demonstrate that he has the ability and skill to evaluate it. If you’re the top of your game, there’s nobody who is even good enough to check your work, if you’re in uncharted territory. Peer review and replication is what actually makes things last, but in the beginning of something breakthrough you have no peers. This phenomena of “humble” exists to the extent that, in many cases, or in specific cultures simply acknowledging your own positive impact is often grounds for “losing face.” This is challenging to me because in practice, the people who self-promote are rarely actually the ones with the talent, and talented people rarely self promote. I’d argue that the people making actual breakthroughs are so focused on the problem they have no energy or desire to self promote. I have studied humans and our thinking for decades and I think it’s some embedded social thing that is vestigial - but has deep roots in some kind of social masking behavior for hiding capabilities in complex power games. So pretending you’re humble - or I suppose behaving humbly - is an advantage because you’re withholding information about how the results were achieved, while also subtly acknowledging your power position. Baffling as someone on the spectrum just trying to live authentically

labster 2y ago
> Like if Michalangelo stood in the Sistine and been like “look how amazing what I did was” while people came though, I genuinely have no idea why anyone would have a problem with that. Um… that’s a building supposed to be dedicated to the glory of God, not for any man to try to glorify himself. It would be in extremely poor taste to brag inside the building, indulging in the sin of pride.
defrost 2y ago
The subject here and now is Wolfram and the irritation of many comes not from the work that Wolfram has achieved on his own but the utter lack of acknowledgement | recogonition of work done by others .. a substantial amount of work by others. His New Kind of Science both grossly overstates the importance of cellular autonoma being Turing complete and utterly ignores a vast community of others who had similar ideas to Wolfram, many before Wolfram, and some whose work it has been said he lifted directly and claimed as his own. Like if Michalangelo stood before the Mona Lisa and been like “look how amazing what I did was”. See: (for example) A Rare Blend of Monster Raving Egomania and Utter Batshit Insanity http://bactra.org/reviews/wolfram/ http://bactra.org/reviews/wolfram/
- romwell 2y ago
  >The subject here and now is Wolfram and the irritation of many comes not from the work that Wolfram has achieved on his own but the utter lack of acknowledgement | recogonition of work done by others .. a substantial amount of work by others. He wrote many essays on history of mathematics and science that IMO not just give credit where credit is due, but help immortalize these achievements. We would be also be better off if the people who do interesting things that he wrote about bragged about them - so we'd get more exposure to the interesting things. Ignoring bragging is easy. Finding out what Ramanujan's thought process was when he was coming up with his brilliant mathematics, in the absence of his own detailed notes, is pretty damn hard. [1] https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/category/historical-perspectives/ https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/category/historical-pers...
aaronbrethorst 2y ago
This is why you need to be successful enough to hire your brother to be your full time PR person/hype man. RT: ‘Wow, look how amazing Andrew is…and how humble. He’s not even bragging about the amazing things he does’
ShroudedNight 2y ago
In my experience, great accomplishment emerges from both a significant quantity of effort and vision, and a critical injection of serendipity where the universe conspires to feed the craftsman critical nudges that elevate the work beyond the original intent. I also find that those that have accomplished "greatness" without having drowned in their own kool-aid will speak candidly about the ambiguities encountered, the stuff that "worked better than it had any right to", and the aspects where satisfaction continues to elude them. Assuming that Michalangelo was such a person, while I doubt there would be much left he found unsatisfactory in his work on the ceiling (or he wouldn't have allowed himself to be finished), I would expect a wealth of stories of his tribulations, and a number of unexpected avenues that provided sanity restoring inspiration for an outcome that _was_ satisfactory.
- AndrewKemendo 2y ago
  Hmm … That doesn’t really answer the question Nobody disagrees that a host of factors are at play with any major breakthroughs However, much like Engels stated when discussing his relationship with Marx, Marx in his view was a genius that didn’t need Engels and could have done it all himself. So there really are individuals that we can point to that did the work and have demonstrated their individual inputs were far and beyond the deciding factor in success or not. If anything the elucidation, of the “trials and tribulations” emphasize the difficulty and exceptional talent required to accomplish it
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

labster 2y ago

> Like if Michalangelo stood in the Sistine and been like “look how amazing what I did was” while people came though, I genuinely have no idea why anyone would have a problem with that. Um… that’s a building supposed to be dedicated to the glory of God, not for any man to try to glorify himself. It would be in extremely poor taste to brag inside the building, indulging in the sin of pride.

defrost 2y ago

The subject here and now is Wolfram and the irritation of many comes not from the work that Wolfram has achieved on his own but the utter lack of acknowledgement | recogonition of work done by others .. a substantial amount of work by others. His New Kind of Science both grossly overstates the importance of cellular autonoma being Turing complete and utterly ignores a vast community of others who had similar ideas to Wolfram, many before Wolfram, and some whose work it has been said he lifted directly and claimed as his own. Like if Michalangelo stood before the Mona Lisa and been like “look how amazing what I did was”. See: (for example) A Rare Blend of Monster Raving Egomania and Utter Batshit Insanity http://bactra.org/reviews/wolfram/ http://bactra.org/reviews/wolfram/

romwell 2y ago
>The subject here and now is Wolfram and the irritation of many comes not from the work that Wolfram has achieved on his own but the utter lack of acknowledgement | recogonition of work done by others .. a substantial amount of work by others. He wrote many essays on history of mathematics and science that IMO not just give credit where credit is due, but help immortalize these achievements. We would be also be better off if the people who do interesting things that he wrote about bragged about them - so we'd get more exposure to the interesting things. Ignoring bragging is easy. Finding out what Ramanujan's thought process was when he was coming up with his brilliant mathematics, in the absence of his own detailed notes, is pretty damn hard. [1] https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/category/historical-perspectives/ https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/category/historical-pers...

aaronbrethorst 2y ago

This is why you need to be successful enough to hire your brother to be your full time PR person/hype man. RT: ‘Wow, look how amazing Andrew is…and how humble. He’s not even bragging about the amazing things he does’

ShroudedNight 2y ago

In my experience, great accomplishment emerges from both a significant quantity of effort and vision, and a critical injection of serendipity where the universe conspires to feed the craftsman critical nudges that elevate the work beyond the original intent. I also find that those that have accomplished "greatness" without having drowned in their own kool-aid will speak candidly about the ambiguities encountered, the stuff that "worked better than it had any right to", and the aspects where satisfaction continues to elude them. Assuming that Michalangelo was such a person, while I doubt there would be much left he found unsatisfactory in his work on the ceiling (or he wouldn't have allowed himself to be finished), I would expect a wealth of stories of his tribulations, and a number of unexpected avenues that provided sanity restoring inspiration for an outcome that _was_ satisfactory.

AndrewKemendo 2y ago
Hmm … That doesn’t really answer the question Nobody disagrees that a host of factors are at play with any major breakthroughs However, much like Engels stated when discussing his relationship with Marx, Marx in his view was a genius that didn’t need Engels and could have done it all himself. So there really are individuals that we can point to that did the work and have demonstrated their individual inputs were far and beyond the deciding factor in success or not. If anything the elucidation, of the “trials and tribulations” emphasize the difficulty and exceptional talent required to accomplish it

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]