Remove the law, and all that remains is a jungle, where the strong domineer the weak.
664 karma · joined September 25, 2020
One must remember that the word "scientist" was coined merely in 1834...the word isn't 100 year old even. Newton saw himself as a philosopher, he studied the ancients intently, etc. The same applies to many of his contemporaries as well.
My overall point is, one shouldn't judge a person too harshly for any particular piece, while ignoring their larger contributions and efforts.
Secondly, about burnout and turnover. Let's discuss from an empirical standpoint. The number one proximal cause of turnover is lack of "commitment". There are longitudinal empircal studies which demonstrate this. Job satisfaction is important as well; however commitment dominates every other factor.
Hence, it is important for managers to generate commitment, one way or another. I believe from these aspects, Rickover truly understood engineers and technical folks... In fact, he went against the US military books, and emphasised Individual initiative and judgement, regardless of what the rulebooks said. In a way, Rickover was able to work around the navy rules to create sufficient commitment to get complicated jobs done.
"Errors are not in the art but in the artificer"
Read about Admiral Rickover. He built the first practical nuclear submarine in the world, for the US navy, in record time of 3 years. He cleared bureaucratic hurdles, played the politics when needed, kept tight control, delved deep into the technicalities of the project, recruited and trained a large number of people into the program, and ultimately made the project successful.
Dig deeper into any other large scale projects, you'll find great engineering management. The Manhattan project is another example (It should be categorised mostly under engineering management & not scientific management, according to some of the members in the team).
Knowing who knows what, and who can help, and asking for help the right way is key to getting better at problem solving.
Perhaps it is the school system that discourages problem solving through social means, and people feel guilty about taking help.
However, consider this perspective. What if the ones who could put together people into functional groups could be considered great problem solvers? Consider any of the great American enterprises, there are people at the top who figured out how to put people together to get things done.
A book from Matthieu Ricard, an ex western scientist who later became a Buddhist monk and Dalai Lama's interpreter, wrote a book with a western quantum scientist [Quantum and the Lotus](https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Lotus-Journey-Frontiers-Buddh...). What is notable is how the exemplary practitioners are highly knowledgeable in scientific and philosophical subjects.
Moreover, you can see that both Dalai lama and the other top leaders of Tibetan Buddhism proactively collaborate with scientists on experiments and discussions to learn more.
Are there any good ways to convert those who comment/suggest into contributors? I feel like instead of simply dismissing suggestions with "you get what you paid for", there must be a better way to handle the situation. Or perhaps I'm too naive on the topic
The key idea is that we can "develop" various attributes to a degree which is orders of magnitude larger than the next animal. To me, doing that is meaningful.
Second thing that helps is, defining "huge" within the right context. Your project looks large from a self-centered point of view. Think about human flight - took 2000 years, multiple generations to figure out. Go into the history of various inventions, they all took lots and lots effort. Once this context is understood, you'll find that whatever you're doing is not necessarily such a "huge" task. Such perspective helps too.
Third, the characteristic of good goals is this:
Good goal = Difficult + Specific
The whole point of good goal is it helps you extract more effort from yourself. In a way, you set goals so that you can do more. If your goal demands more of you, it means the goal is doing its magic! So why'd you become discouraged when a goal demands more of yourself? By stretching yourself, you'll become more capable.
Prime example worth studying: Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore
I learned how to build a vocabulary for the problem domain first, and then use the vocabulary to solve the actual problem through this course. Norvig has great examples on bottom-up problem solving approach.
tolerable life > interesting life that ends in blow up
good enough > good
I feel "universal good" is too high a standard (pure fantasy even) for our species. I feel our species may disappear from the planet or with the planet at any arbitrary moment in the future; we seem not to recognise how fragile our existence truly is.
The men who established bureaucracies truly saved humanity from collapse, from utter chaos; by establishing laws and regulations, they restrained the animal within man, even without having any technology. I consider the establishers and enforcers of law the least appreciated in human history. It is a humongous task, to take up utter entropy and convert it into a semblance of civilisation, where the animal in man is kept within limits.
These things were invented long back, 2000+ years ago, and the formations have stood the test of time. They are still in use, the same ruthlessness is used to control human impulses. However, at a shallow level, our language and our "aspirations" have moved on. So we like to speak in more flowery language, hide the animal in man in public, and have forgotten why were the laws and regulations put in place by our ancestors.
I believe human regulation, through means other than bureaucracy is on the way. This alone can help humans get rid of the need to BS. With technology there is a way to combine both education/training & laws/reguations. In place education/training allows for "kind correction" while automated punishment will ensure "harsh correction". Both are needed for successful existence of human civilisation.
> Today, my Anki has 4415 cards and grows everyday. I have spent 186 hours studying, I have made around 35K card reviews.
Do you have any personal reflections on what sort of cards worked for you, and how you'd chunk the information or any other tips in using it?