3 ms·

This is beautifully articulated. And reinforces my general below-the-line (layperson) fear about the state of physics today (as reinforced ofc by the likes of

This is beautifully articulated. And reinforces my general below-the-line (layperson) fear about the state of physics today (as reinforced ofc by the likes of Sabine Hossenfelder & Eric Weinstein).

btilly 2y ago
Thank you for the compliment. I've been working on how to formulate that idea clearly for a while. It is a problem that goes well beyond physics. For example I believe that the same cognitive error is behind the fact that experts do significantly worse than chance in actually predicting the world, and the more certain the expert sounds, the less likely they are to be right. See https://www.amazon.com/Expert-Political-Judgment-Good-Know/dp/0691128715 https://www.amazon.com/Expert-Political-Judgment-Good-Know/d... for data demonstrating that fact. Depressingly, this means that we consistently put public policy in the hands of people who are demonstrably incompetent.
- phkahler 2y ago
  >> I've been working on how to formulate that idea clearly for a while. It is a problem that goes well beyond physics. It's a really fundamental thing in psychology. The solution is something like the destruction of the ego, and many people who push hard enough to be a PhD tend toward larger ego to start with. Meditation and practicing martial arts can help. Apparently psychedelics can as well. It's a real pain because if you try to tell someone their ego is preventing them from seeing things clearly... Well that's going to trigger the same problem. So yes, it's good to find ways to articulate the message so it can get through to those that suffer from it the most.
  - btilly 2y ago
    The problem is that we need an ego to be healthy. Attempts to destroy it can wind up compromising your mental health. The first part of the solution is to be careful what's in your ego. See https://paulgraham.com/identity.html https://paulgraham.com/identity.html on this topic. See https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-ten-commandments-of-egoless-programming/ https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-ten-commandments-of-egoles... for how careful choices in what we value in ourselves, can lead to thinking better. This of course still leaves us with an identity. For that I've found that gratitude can help us deal with pain. And so targeted gratitude can help us avoid cognitive dissonance when we otherwise would be overrun by it. Sadly, neither skill is widely taught in our society.
    - andsoitis 2y ago
      > The problem is that we need an ego to be healthy. Attempts to destroy it can wind up compromising your mental health. You only need to destroy it temporarily. When you do it using certain tools or techniques, it will reconstitute by itself once the effect of the tool or technique has passed. This temporary ego death can open your eyes without creating a permanent void where your ego used to be.
      - btilly 2y ago
        Anecdotally I've seen such claims, but have seen mixed results as well. I've also encountered people who clearly had an ego about how little ego they had. Yes, it was just as ridiculous as it sounds. I've never seen anything that looks like solid research on the topic.
- pmontra 2y ago
  Given infinite outcomes, experts in a field without a theory of the world that can be used to calculate the future will always perform worse than chance. Experts of engineering perform better than non experts. However the field of political behavior (or economy) is difficult. The only way to know what's going to happen is wait for it to happen. Sometimes you know more or less what's going to happen but not the details or the exact outcome. That's enough to make plans. Examples: at the beginning of 2024 we average persons knew that Putin would win the Russian elections no matter what. We average persons also knew that either Trump or Biden would win the American ones but we didn't know whom. We have to wait. Then surprise, it became either Trump or Harris. Maybe there are people around the world or even the USA that wonder why Obama don't run for president instead of Harris. They are not experts of the rules of the competition. So the question is, do the experts predictions are consistently worse than the predictions of any randomly picked person?
  - btilly 2y ago
    Experts who felt certain about their ideas did worse than chance, and worse than simplistic models. Experts who quantified uncertainty and tried multiple theories did better than both chance or simplistic models. Sadly, the experts who felt certain presented themselves with confidence and got higher paying jobs. Normal people were not in the data set reported. He's since done more research on good predictions. You can read Superforecasting by the same author for more.
- Enk1du 2y ago
  Some more reading on cognitive errors and expertise for you https://www.amazon.com/Blind-Spot-Solution-Right-Front/dp/0062097903 https://www.amazon.com/Blind-Spot-Solution-Right-Front/dp/00... >Depressingly, this means that we consistently put public policy in the hands of people who are demonstrably incompetent. You could depress yourself further by thinking that we get the government we deserve or you could re-assess your role in making good progress. "A community is like a ship, everyone should be prepared to take the helm." - Henrik Ibsen

This is beautifully articulated. And reinforces my general below-the-line (layperson) fear about the state of physics today (as reinforced ofc by the likes of Sabine Hossenfelder & Eric Weinstein).

btilly 2y ago

Thank you for the compliment. I've been working on how to formulate that idea clearly for a while. It is a problem that goes well beyond physics. For example I believe that the same cognitive error is behind the fact that experts do significantly worse than chance in actually predicting the world, and the more certain the expert sounds, the less likely they are to be right. See https://www.amazon.com/Expert-Political-Judgment-Good-Know/dp/0691128715 https://www.amazon.com/Expert-Political-Judgment-Good-Know/d... for data demonstrating that fact. Depressingly, this means that we consistently put public policy in the hands of people who are demonstrably incompetent.

phkahler 2y ago
>> I've been working on how to formulate that idea clearly for a while. It is a problem that goes well beyond physics. It's a really fundamental thing in psychology. The solution is something like the destruction of the ego, and many people who push hard enough to be a PhD tend toward larger ego to start with. Meditation and practicing martial arts can help. Apparently psychedelics can as well. It's a real pain because if you try to tell someone their ego is preventing them from seeing things clearly... Well that's going to trigger the same problem. So yes, it's good to find ways to articulate the message so it can get through to those that suffer from it the most.
- btilly 2y ago
  The problem is that we need an ego to be healthy. Attempts to destroy it can wind up compromising your mental health. The first part of the solution is to be careful what's in your ego. See https://paulgraham.com/identity.html https://paulgraham.com/identity.html on this topic. See https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-ten-commandments-of-egoless-programming/ https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-ten-commandments-of-egoles... for how careful choices in what we value in ourselves, can lead to thinking better. This of course still leaves us with an identity. For that I've found that gratitude can help us deal with pain. And so targeted gratitude can help us avoid cognitive dissonance when we otherwise would be overrun by it. Sadly, neither skill is widely taught in our society.
  - andsoitis 2y ago
    > The problem is that we need an ego to be healthy. Attempts to destroy it can wind up compromising your mental health. You only need to destroy it temporarily. When you do it using certain tools or techniques, it will reconstitute by itself once the effect of the tool or technique has passed. This temporary ego death can open your eyes without creating a permanent void where your ego used to be.
    - btilly 2y ago
      Anecdotally I've seen such claims, but have seen mixed results as well. I've also encountered people who clearly had an ego about how little ego they had. Yes, it was just as ridiculous as it sounds. I've never seen anything that looks like solid research on the topic.
pmontra 2y ago
Given infinite outcomes, experts in a field without a theory of the world that can be used to calculate the future will always perform worse than chance. Experts of engineering perform better than non experts. However the field of political behavior (or economy) is difficult. The only way to know what's going to happen is wait for it to happen. Sometimes you know more or less what's going to happen but not the details or the exact outcome. That's enough to make plans. Examples: at the beginning of 2024 we average persons knew that Putin would win the Russian elections no matter what. We average persons also knew that either Trump or Biden would win the American ones but we didn't know whom. We have to wait. Then surprise, it became either Trump or Harris. Maybe there are people around the world or even the USA that wonder why Obama don't run for president instead of Harris. They are not experts of the rules of the competition. So the question is, do the experts predictions are consistently worse than the predictions of any randomly picked person?
- btilly 2y ago
  Experts who felt certain about their ideas did worse than chance, and worse than simplistic models. Experts who quantified uncertainty and tried multiple theories did better than both chance or simplistic models. Sadly, the experts who felt certain presented themselves with confidence and got higher paying jobs. Normal people were not in the data set reported. He's since done more research on good predictions. You can read Superforecasting by the same author for more.
Enk1du 2y ago
Some more reading on cognitive errors and expertise for you https://www.amazon.com/Blind-Spot-Solution-Right-Front/dp/0062097903 https://www.amazon.com/Blind-Spot-Solution-Right-Front/dp/00... >Depressingly, this means that we consistently put public policy in the hands of people who are demonstrably incompetent. You could depress yourself further by thinking that we get the government we deserve or you could re-assess your role in making good progress. "A community is like a ship, everyone should be prepared to take the helm." - Henrik Ibsen