2 ms·

These are both big motivations but not the only ones. But there's still play. There's still curiosity. And there's still the drive to understand something for

These are both big motivations but not the only ones. But there's still play. There's still curiosity. And there's still the drive to understand something for yourself.

lll-o-lll 22d ago
> But there's still play. There's still curiosity. And there's still the drive to understand something for yourself. Yes, but think about what that implies if those are the only motivations left. Gone are the professions. Gone are the ambitious. There is plenty of space for people to work on intellectual pleasure pursuits (as there is with art and music), but the death of all intellectual based industries is still something to avoid. Or to mourn.
- noslenwerdna 22d ago
  Good? Those people were in the field for the wrong reasons. No reason to mourn them leaving
  - lll-o-lll 22d ago
    > in the field for the wrong reasons It’s an interesting view-point. What are the “right reasons” to pursue an intellectual discipline? To selflessly further the total sum of knowledge? > No reason to mourn them leaving What field? Who’s leaving? The conclusion has to be that human involvement in these pursuits is facing existential crisis. “Teach me, oh Oracle, the mysteries of the Universe”. “For a fee”. Both the glory and joy of discovery now belongs to the machines (the owners of those machines). Perhaps that’s fine and well, but I read Anathem and feel the strong yearning to be the intellectual monk. And yes, to fight and debate and think; and obtain my place in history. The history of man.
    - int_19h 21d ago
      You don't have to ask the machine, if you value the process of obtaining the answer rather than the answer itself.
    - noslenwerdna 20d ago
      "To selflessly further the total sum of knowledge?" Yes. I think you are saying this sarcastically but I'm not sure... This is why you should get involved in research at the frontier. "What field? Who’s leaving?" Mathematics, and I'd extend it to other academic disciplines. Do you care more about the results and the knowledge or about who gets credit? The drive for "glory" has many negative effects in academia that do not get enough recognition. Just look at the replication crisis in psychology for an example. The fact p-hacking was rampant among psychology "researchers" was well known even in the 90s. I remember my professors in grad school for physics joking about it way before it became a mainstream-ish story. So why did this happen? Because there was no one with institutional power in psychology who both understood the problem and cared. No one who was interested in the furthering the "total sum of knowledge" rather they were interested in your "glory."
lbrito 22d ago
Play and curiosity usually make poor breadwinners.

These are both big motivations but not the only ones. But there's still play. There's still curiosity. And there's still the drive to understand something for yourself.

lll-o-lll 22d ago

> But there's still play. There's still curiosity. And there's still the drive to understand something for yourself. Yes, but think about what that implies if those are the only motivations left. Gone are the professions. Gone are the ambitious. There is plenty of space for people to work on intellectual pleasure pursuits (as there is with art and music), but the death of all intellectual based industries is still something to avoid. Or to mourn.

noslenwerdna 22d ago
Good? Those people were in the field for the wrong reasons. No reason to mourn them leaving
- lll-o-lll 22d ago
  > in the field for the wrong reasons It’s an interesting view-point. What are the “right reasons” to pursue an intellectual discipline? To selflessly further the total sum of knowledge? > No reason to mourn them leaving What field? Who’s leaving? The conclusion has to be that human involvement in these pursuits is facing existential crisis. “Teach me, oh Oracle, the mysteries of the Universe”. “For a fee”. Both the glory and joy of discovery now belongs to the machines (the owners of those machines). Perhaps that’s fine and well, but I read Anathem and feel the strong yearning to be the intellectual monk. And yes, to fight and debate and think; and obtain my place in history. The history of man.
  - int_19h 21d ago
    You don't have to ask the machine, if you value the process of obtaining the answer rather than the answer itself.
  - noslenwerdna 20d ago
    "To selflessly further the total sum of knowledge?" Yes. I think you are saying this sarcastically but I'm not sure... This is why you should get involved in research at the frontier. "What field? Who’s leaving?" Mathematics, and I'd extend it to other academic disciplines. Do you care more about the results and the knowledge or about who gets credit? The drive for "glory" has many negative effects in academia that do not get enough recognition. Just look at the replication crisis in psychology for an example. The fact p-hacking was rampant among psychology "researchers" was well known even in the 90s. I remember my professors in grad school for physics joking about it way before it became a mainstream-ish story. So why did this happen? Because there was no one with institutional power in psychology who both understood the problem and cared. No one who was interested in the furthering the "total sum of knowledge" rather they were interested in your "glory."

lbrito 22d ago

Play and curiosity usually make poor breadwinners.