3 ms·

Although I appreciate Gladwell's argument that he combines anecdotal narrative and scientific observation (usually he provides the former, someone else the latt

Although I appreciate Gladwell's argument that he combines anecdotal narrative and scientific observation (usually he provides the former, someone else the latter), I don't think that the average reader of the books is clear on the limitations of this approach. I'm afraid many people come away that Gladwell has discovered some brand new, proven thing, and instead of taking the book as a series of illustrations of an idea Gladwell finds compelling and wants to share, they take it as settled science performed meticulously by the man. That's not a criticism that is limited to Gladwell, either - many 'pop science' books do the same, and are mistakenly understood as hard science. I try to point out problematic articles and books whenever I can, but it's not easy to convince someone that really wants to believe, for instance, that adversity (or borderline insanity) is the driver of creativity. And don't get me started on the misappropriation of neuroscience research.

helipad 13y ago
> I don't think that the average reader of the books is clear on the limitations of this approach The average reader may not, but at least they've been compelled to pick up a book, read it, synthesize it and draw their own conclusions - either agreeing or otherwise. That's better than nothing. An above-average reader (whatever that is) might read it and be annoyed. A below-average reader might read it and either not understand it and take it as gospel. What's the problem? Truly.
- debacle 13y ago
  We already have gospel that readers (good ones, not just below-average ones) don't have comprehension of but still believe as faith. Do we really need more?
- robotresearcher 13y ago
  "at least they've been compelled to pick up a book, read it, synthesize it and draw their own conclusions" I suspect it's much more common that readers believe they have received a reasonable review of the topic. Gladwell's critics are saying that he presents his work as such, but it is not. There's the problem.
- devindotcom 13y ago
  I wrote what I think the problem is: "instead of taking the book as a series of illustrations of an idea Gladwell finds compelling and wants to share, they take it as settled science performed meticulously by the man." I think people often aren't synthesizing and drawing their own conclusions (it is generous to apply this IMHO uncommon quality to the average departure-lounge-pick-up reader). They are reading Gladwell like a textbook.
  - helipad 13y ago
    If that's the case then Gladwell isn't at fault – the reader is.

helipad 13y ago

> I don't think that the average reader of the books is clear on the limitations of this approach The average reader may not, but at least they've been compelled to pick up a book, read it, synthesize it and draw their own conclusions - either agreeing or otherwise. That's better than nothing. An above-average reader (whatever that is) might read it and be annoyed. A below-average reader might read it and either not understand it and take it as gospel. What's the problem? Truly.

debacle 13y ago
We already have gospel that readers (good ones, not just below-average ones) don't have comprehension of but still believe as faith. Do we really need more?
robotresearcher 13y ago
"at least they've been compelled to pick up a book, read it, synthesize it and draw their own conclusions" I suspect it's much more common that readers believe they have received a reasonable review of the topic. Gladwell's critics are saying that he presents his work as such, but it is not. There's the problem.
devindotcom 13y ago
I wrote what I think the problem is: "instead of taking the book as a series of illustrations of an idea Gladwell finds compelling and wants to share, they take it as settled science performed meticulously by the man." I think people often aren't synthesizing and drawing their own conclusions (it is generous to apply this IMHO uncommon quality to the average departure-lounge-pick-up reader). They are reading Gladwell like a textbook.
- helipad 13y ago
  If that's the case then Gladwell isn't at fault – the reader is.