That's Interesting (1971) [pdf]

I do find the first sentence of the abstract to be quite interesting: "How do theories which are generally considered interesting differ from theories which are generally considered non-interesting?"

Interesting opening lines in the "Summary" section:

> QUESTION: How do theories which are generally considered interesting differ from theories which are generally considered non-interesting ? ANSWER: Interesting theories are those which deny certain assumptions of their audience, while non-interesting theories are those which affirm certain assumptions of their audience.

I like how this paper can be applied to itself in a self-referential manner to explain how interesting this paper is to a reader! :-)

Incredibly interesting: article applying scientific methods to society gets little attention from those who apply it to silicon. It's not that the data is too noisy, or the subject too inconclusive, I believe. It's that the field is constantly telling us that negatives such as crime and deviance are caused by wealth inequality. We don't want to hear that when we're aspiring to be Jeff Bezos.