3 ms·

This article argues that the 'American idea' of regarding sleep as weak/unecessary stems from the early industrial days with men like Thomas Edison. Hmmm ... it

This article argues that the 'American idea' of regarding sleep as weak/unecessary stems from the early industrial days with men like Thomas Edison. Hmmm ... it seems that the American industrial age and beyond has had a lot more productivity than at any other time in history. And you know who else didn't consider sleep of very high importance? Isaac Newton. Oh, but some guy writing a random article with nearly zero authority has accomplished SO MUCH MORE than any of those men right? I understand the importance of sleep and its effects on mentality and productivity. But, I really don't think we are going to properly understand the implications behind sleeping schedules for individual (types) with some random internet articles that we keep linking to on HN. EDIT: This may get downvoted, but since I assume HN is an intellectual discussion site, it would be appropriate to offer up your counter-arguments to my points rather than just give a "NAY!" gesture hiding anonymously under the guise of some sort of self-righteousness. Thanks.

atlantic 13y ago
The OP cites scientifically-established correlations between low productivity and sleep deprivation. You, on the other hand, point to a couple of heavyweight counter-examples (Edison and Newton), plus one historical period (early industrial) and leave it at that. Macho attitudes like yours are the exact reason why common-sense attitudes to sleeping hours have not taken hold in companies. There doesn't seem to be much to argue with in your comment.
- StandardFuture 13y ago
  This is an oversimplification of an already simpleminded discussion (in pursuit of being able to "justify" conclusions you have built on presumptions beforehand). I am not sure where this irrelevant accusation of "macho attitudes" came from but it certainly fell in line with using terminology similar to what the article use with words like "effeminate" and "male champions". And yet this article contradicts your argument by naming several (large) companies incorporating sleep-is-good attitudes. SO I highly doubt that my singular paragraph offering contradictory arguments for the sake of discussion and clarity is the reason why "common-sense attitudes ... have not taken hold in companies". Regardless of studies that have shown individualized scenarios of productivity loss due to sleep deprivation (also dependent on numerous external and internal parameters) there are still counter examples that cannot be scientifically ignored. Your (appeared) devotion to 'scientific-establishment' is just you using particular studies to justify held beliefs (and/or just to be in agreement with localized observations e.g. your personal dependency on sleep or those you work with).
tehwalrus 13y ago
Anecdata. You forgot Margaret Thatcher (4 hour nights). The article also pointed to a counterexample - Albert Einstein (10 hour nights). Anecdotes are not sufficient to prove either point, you should look at the research on this. And research shows[1] that animals that are sleep deprived perform significantly worse in cognitive tasks. Now, when humans start being "sleep deprived" will vary among individuals - but at least 6 hours is definitely required in most of us (of course, exceptions to every rule.) [1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2982737/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2982737/
- StandardFuture 13y ago
  Obviously, (as I am sure you are aware after careful consideration of my argument) my conclusions were towards the need for a better understanding of the subject itself and not towards "proving" a particular subjective viewpoint on the matter. I thought it fair though to offer up symmetrical counterpoints to the OP to show that this is all drawing global conclusions on a particular set of examples (or small sample sizes if you will).
  - tehwalrus 13y ago
    from the article: > An abundance of scientific findings, many from research sponsored by the military and NASA, has led many executives to abandon the quest to minimize sleep unreasonably. They aren't arguing entirely from anecdotes, they are using them to illustrate the point mostly. They are writing for a broad audience of non-scientists, which they've used as an excuse to exclude references from passages like the above, perhaps justifiably.
    - StandardFuture 13y ago
      Ah, but we would need to know the parameters and conclusions of these studies to know if the author was utulizing the data and findings correctly or if he is using it in a biased manner. Assuming, he references the generality of the studies appropriately (abandon the quest to minimize sleep unreasonably). Then the discussion should cater towards the differences between unreasonable sleep deprivation expectations brought on unwillingly and its toll on the mind vs. sleep deprivation willingly done due to a personal will to finish a project or continue a streak of creativity, etc.
zacinbusiness 13y ago
I agree here - there's no universally "good" sleep pattern. Some people thrive on pushing their minds and bodies to the limit, while others thrive on the downtime that allows their minds to reflect on their own thoughts. Personally, I get a much greater sense of accomplishment when I can look back at a marathon 27 hour work session and see that, through it all, I did good work. But, more often than not, my work is riddled with errors that I don't see until later. So, I take naps and rest when I can, and try to get work done on an even, if not boring, timeline.

atlantic 13y ago

The OP cites scientifically-established correlations between low productivity and sleep deprivation. You, on the other hand, point to a couple of heavyweight counter-examples (Edison and Newton), plus one historical period (early industrial) and leave it at that. Macho attitudes like yours are the exact reason why common-sense attitudes to sleeping hours have not taken hold in companies. There doesn't seem to be much to argue with in your comment.

StandardFuture 13y ago
This is an oversimplification of an already simpleminded discussion (in pursuit of being able to "justify" conclusions you have built on presumptions beforehand). I am not sure where this irrelevant accusation of "macho attitudes" came from but it certainly fell in line with using terminology similar to what the article use with words like "effeminate" and "male champions". And yet this article contradicts your argument by naming several (large) companies incorporating sleep-is-good attitudes. SO I highly doubt that my singular paragraph offering contradictory arguments for the sake of discussion and clarity is the reason why "common-sense attitudes ... have not taken hold in companies". Regardless of studies that have shown individualized scenarios of productivity loss due to sleep deprivation (also dependent on numerous external and internal parameters) there are still counter examples that cannot be scientifically ignored. Your (appeared) devotion to 'scientific-establishment' is just you using particular studies to justify held beliefs (and/or just to be in agreement with localized observations e.g. your personal dependency on sleep or those you work with).

tehwalrus 13y ago

Anecdata. You forgot Margaret Thatcher (4 hour nights). The article also pointed to a counterexample - Albert Einstein (10 hour nights). Anecdotes are not sufficient to prove either point, you should look at the research on this. And research shows[1] that animals that are sleep deprived perform significantly worse in cognitive tasks. Now, when humans start being "sleep deprived" will vary among individuals - but at least 6 hours is definitely required in most of us (of course, exceptions to every rule.) [1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2982737/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2982737/

StandardFuture 13y ago
Obviously, (as I am sure you are aware after careful consideration of my argument) my conclusions were towards the need for a better understanding of the subject itself and not towards "proving" a particular subjective viewpoint on the matter. I thought it fair though to offer up symmetrical counterpoints to the OP to show that this is all drawing global conclusions on a particular set of examples (or small sample sizes if you will).
- tehwalrus 13y ago
  from the article: > An abundance of scientific findings, many from research sponsored by the military and NASA, has led many executives to abandon the quest to minimize sleep unreasonably. They aren't arguing entirely from anecdotes, they are using them to illustrate the point mostly. They are writing for a broad audience of non-scientists, which they've used as an excuse to exclude references from passages like the above, perhaps justifiably.
  - StandardFuture 13y ago
    Ah, but we would need to know the parameters and conclusions of these studies to know if the author was utulizing the data and findings correctly or if he is using it in a biased manner. Assuming, he references the generality of the studies appropriately (abandon the quest to minimize sleep unreasonably). Then the discussion should cater towards the differences between unreasonable sleep deprivation expectations brought on unwillingly and its toll on the mind vs. sleep deprivation willingly done due to a personal will to finish a project or continue a streak of creativity, etc.

zacinbusiness 13y ago

I agree here - there's no universally "good" sleep pattern. Some people thrive on pushing their minds and bodies to the limit, while others thrive on the downtime that allows their minds to reflect on their own thoughts. Personally, I get a much greater sense of accomplishment when I can look back at a marathon 27 hour work session and see that, through it all, I did good work. But, more often than not, my work is riddled with errors that I don't see until later. So, I take naps and rest when I can, and try to get work done on an even, if not boring, timeline.