4 ms·
That writing is the only way to do deep, clear, thinking simply isn't true. Stephen Hawking is the first example that comes to mind. He developed a remarkable
by mwidell 2y ago
That writing is the only way to do deep, clear, thinking simply isn't true.
Stephen Hawking is the first example that comes to mind.
He developed a remarkable ability to perform complex calculations and visualize intricate mathematical concepts entirely in his mind. He once mentioned that his ALS diagnosis, which limited his physical abilities, led him to focus intensely on theoretical physics, as it required more intellectual than physical effort.
But sure, writing (and drawing) is a great tool to aid in deep thinking. So are AI tools.
- dartharva 2y agoReading and writing are essential for the transfer and percolation of knowledge across society. Stephen Hawking's thinking and imagination wouldn't have meant much had he not finally penned them down for others to read, and neither would his ideas have been taken seriously had he chosen to make tiktoks or podcasts to explain them instead.
- ninalanyon 2y agoBut for most of the rest of us in practice I suspect that it is more true than false. Most of us have neither the intellect of Hawking nor his situation.
- leethomas 2y ago> That writing is the only way to do deep, clear, thinking simply isn't true. You're correct here. > Stephen Hawking is the first example that comes to mind. The post is obviously speaking of the general population or at best average professional, and in my opinion choosing one of the most brilliant exceptional scientific minds of our lifetimes is not a good counterargument for a piece that speaks of a potential problem with society at large.
- dgacmu 2y agoAs someone who teaches PhD students who are quite far beyond "average professional", I concur completely with PG on this one. Writing forces you to make very clear and concrete ideas that feel like they make sense but are still fuzzy. It's certainly not the only way, but it's the most common and easy way.
- wyager 2y agoTo use an overextended computer metaphor: serializing data structures to a wire format forces lazy evaluation, turning up any errors that were previously hidden by laziness.
- brabel 2y agoI don't disagree, just want to mention that as someone married to someone who supervises Phd students, they're not by any means "far beyond average professional"... but perhaps you're on a exceptionally highly regarded faculty where that may be the case.
- dgacmu 2y agoThat is probably the case.
- iterance 2y agoOne of the most exceptional scientific minds of the time, who, I might add, despite not picking up a pen, nevertheless wrote books! Strange example to pick as someone who did not write.
- baxtr 2y agoIt is weird he doesn’t think of AI as deep thinking tool at all. Sure some will thoughtlessly copy and paste but for many AI helps to structure their thoughts and they think clearer as a result.
- JonChesterfield 2y agoCan you expand on that? I can't see any sense in which an LLM improves the structure of the user's thought process
- Veen 2y agoIt's useful for ideation: suggesting ideas and concepts that you might not think of. A bit like a conceptual thesaurus. But it doesn't replace the hard work of thinking for yourself.
- Moru 2y agoIn the same way it can detour your thoughts to the mainstream and lead you away from a line of thought that might have ended up somewhere else.
- baxtr 2y agoHere are two examples: a) No / little data: Whenever you are starting to think about a subject, you can ask it to give you a structure / categories. b) Existing data: What I do very often is to give it a lot of "raw data" like unstructured thoughts or an unstructured article, then I ask him to find suitable top categories.
- moritzwarhier 2y agoa) Doesn't that mean to limit oneself to bias, mediocrity, and preconceived judgements instead of actually thinking?
- baxtr 2y ago
- songshu 2y agoBest-selling author Stephen Hawking?
- zabzonk 2y agoA Brief History Of Time?
- wazdra 2y agoI think you have understood "writing" in a very narrow sense. As mentioned in other replies, Stephen Hawking was a very prolific author. He did not write much, but he sure knew how to write. PG is obviously talking about the mental process of writing, i.e. of organizing a complex network of thoughts in a linear hierarchy that others can grasp, not the physical one.
- samatman 2y ago> That writing is the only way to do deep, clear, thinking simply isn't true. You have committed the Fallacy of the Inverse.