“For the working scientist, the most important problems unsolved are the ones right at the border of understanding; the ones that you have some grasp about how to approach, but haven't really solved. Those are the ones you work on.”
you wrote about measuring status as an objective, observer-independent thing. In this post you write about status circles, implying that status depends on the group doing the evaluating. So which is it?
By default I talk about status re the largest circles, but it also exists re smaller circles. An app would find it easier to first measure large circle status.
Even when I disagree with it, I think this is his best contribution. Especially just organizing all of our thinking with the concept of the Great Filter. His upload economy and prediction market stuff definitely deserves mentioning too and might end up more important.
_we respect differently in different circles_ — respect as in 'pay attention to' or 'are regarded'? Direct object seems to be in order. Or am I missing something deep and rhetorical? ;)
It is enough to dig a little into almost any historical fairy tale “for the simple”, which was hammered into our heads in schools and universities, and from these nice graves of historical truth a noticeable smell begins to emerge. The followers of one or another “national” historical science have been distorting the truth since the birth of our civilization. The consequences are the same for all nations, for whose “good” they are fed this or that lie about their sometimes not at all “glorious” past. Historical truth is the immune system of a nation. If the Jewish, Russian, Ukrainian, German, Polish and other nations of Europe and the whole world cannot find the strength to look at their real reflection in the merciless mirror of past events, if they do not have the strength and courage to see themselves as they are (or, more accurately, “were”), they are destined to repeat the same mistakes in the future. What is the way out? It is both simple and complex: we need to read more. Read books that reflect different (and even opposing) points of view. Analyze and question any dogma. In particular, be careful with those "sacred cows" that we are told "not to touch!" And do not pay attention to titles, positions, gray hair and respectable manner of speech: the majority of the most shameless liars of history turn out to be respectable-looking and weightily reasoning luminaries, academics, "members" and laureates. The biggest stupidities are pronounced with the smartest expression on their faces...
You are not “seeking status” in the common understanding of that term. You are just trying to make an important contribution to knowledge; you care about what your fellow intellectuals think of your contribution because their opinion is probably right.
Seeking status is seeking respect according to a community's shared way to judge respect. If we respect knowledge, and you want respect, you can get that via knowledge.
. . . provided the community’s judgment as to whether you have expressed (important) knowledge is correct. The ordinary status-seeker wants respect, whether or not he has earned it. You want *primarily* to earn it, even if you do not get it.
Ideally you would do something to deserve respect, and *everyone*—not just some narrow circle—would respect you for it. Unfortunately, that is practically impossible.
I suppose that we all would like to have high status in whatever circles we think think we can get it; but I think that in common parlance a “status-seeker” is someone who values status greatly (excessively?), regardless of whether he has earned it.
“I found that some apparent problems were really caused more by different underlying problems. And I found that new concepts and frameworks changed what I saw as the most pivotal questions and claims.” An example where this applies to my case is provided by my learning more economics, including public choice.
That’s super awesome and good luck. Feel free to contact me at dnbirnbaum@uchicago.edu if you wanna call to ask any questions about UChicago or just wanna talk about it (I know the process can be quite stressful)!
thanks!! your kindness made me smile, and seriously means a lot. UChicago has a good student and person in you.
i will not hesitate to reach out with any thoughts or questions i have; that said, what i’m feeling right now can be summed up pretty succinctly: tentatively excited (and VERY impatient…) for decisions to come out in about a week or so! though if i’m being completely honest/realistic, as perennial an optimist as i consider myself generally in life, i’m not too high on my chances. i think i’m a standout writer (hopefully that shines through in my essays — really need it to!!), and a passionate, insatiable learner, but my grades/ECs are (at least in my estimation) good, not GREAT, at best.
it would be wonderful if the aforementioned qualities were — assuming i did a good job evincing them in my application, of course — sufficient, but the sad truth is that i’m competing with people who effectively dedicate their entire high-school years to meticulously honing their college application, and i just always valued learning as more an end, and not a merely a means to going somewhere prestigious and elite. (plus, i’m humble enough to acknowledge that maybe i’m just not good enough, and that’s alright.)
(as you can see, i tend to digress a lot — sorry!! ill leave you with this. thanks again.)
That’s so fair. Not to bring the hopes up, but I was in a quite similar; position to you when applying. This stuff is just a crapshoot and you should not led the decision (acceptance or rejection) define you (obviously).
By the fact that you read Hanson (who somewhat recently spoke at UChicago for a Night Owls!), I’m sure you will do great wherever you go!
“For the working scientist, the most important problems unsolved are the ones right at the border of understanding; the ones that you have some grasp about how to approach, but haven't really solved. Those are the ones you work on.”
Source: Noam Chomsky, at 2:02 in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxZp6890hQk&t=2m2s
In previous posts like these:
- https://www.overcomingbias.com/p/status-app-concepthtml
- https://www.overcomingbias.com/p/no-meta-status-orgs
you wrote about measuring status as an objective, observer-independent thing. In this post you write about status circles, implying that status depends on the group doing the evaluating. So which is it?
By default I talk about status re the largest circles, but it also exists re smaller circles. An app would find it easier to first measure large circle status.
An interesting analysis of fertility and status: https://becomingnoble.substack.com/p/its-embarrassing-to-be-a-stay-at
So Robin, what do you consider to be your best contributions so far? I think of your work on prediction markets and also grabby aliens.
Even when I disagree with it, I think this is his best contribution. Especially just organizing all of our thinking with the concept of the Great Filter. His upload economy and prediction market stuff definitely deserves mentioning too and might end up more important.
_we respect differently in different circles_ — respect as in 'pay attention to' or 'are regarded'? Direct object seems to be in order. Or am I missing something deep and rhetorical? ;)
It is enough to dig a little into almost any historical fairy tale “for the simple”, which was hammered into our heads in schools and universities, and from these nice graves of historical truth a noticeable smell begins to emerge. The followers of one or another “national” historical science have been distorting the truth since the birth of our civilization. The consequences are the same for all nations, for whose “good” they are fed this or that lie about their sometimes not at all “glorious” past. Historical truth is the immune system of a nation. If the Jewish, Russian, Ukrainian, German, Polish and other nations of Europe and the whole world cannot find the strength to look at their real reflection in the merciless mirror of past events, if they do not have the strength and courage to see themselves as they are (or, more accurately, “were”), they are destined to repeat the same mistakes in the future. What is the way out? It is both simple and complex: we need to read more. Read books that reflect different (and even opposing) points of view. Analyze and question any dogma. In particular, be careful with those "sacred cows" that we are told "not to touch!" And do not pay attention to titles, positions, gray hair and respectable manner of speech: the majority of the most shameless liars of history turn out to be respectable-looking and weightily reasoning luminaries, academics, "members" and laureates. The biggest stupidities are pronounced with the smartest expression on their faces...
You are not “seeking status” in the common understanding of that term. You are just trying to make an important contribution to knowledge; you care about what your fellow intellectuals think of your contribution because their opinion is probably right.
Seeking status is seeking respect according to a community's shared way to judge respect. If we respect knowledge, and you want respect, you can get that via knowledge.
. . . provided the community’s judgment as to whether you have expressed (important) knowledge is correct. The ordinary status-seeker wants respect, whether or not he has earned it. You want *primarily* to earn it, even if you do not get it.
You want to be *deservedly* respected.
Ideally you would do something to deserve respect, and *everyone*—not just some narrow circle—would respect you for it. Unfortunately, that is practically impossible.
I suppose that we all would like to have high status in whatever circles we think think we can get it; but I think that in common parlance a “status-seeker” is someone who values status greatly (excessively?), regardless of whether he has earned it.
“I found that some apparent problems were really caused more by different underlying problems. And I found that new concepts and frameworks changed what I saw as the most pivotal questions and claims.” An example where this applies to my case is provided by my learning more economics, including public choice.
This is great! I might use this as an exercise + reading for my rationality reading group at UChicago.
no way!! i applied early decision 2 for this cycle! wish me luck — really hope to see you there one day!
That’s super awesome and good luck. Feel free to contact me at dnbirnbaum@uchicago.edu if you wanna call to ask any questions about UChicago or just wanna talk about it (I know the process can be quite stressful)!
thanks!! your kindness made me smile, and seriously means a lot. UChicago has a good student and person in you.
i will not hesitate to reach out with any thoughts or questions i have; that said, what i’m feeling right now can be summed up pretty succinctly: tentatively excited (and VERY impatient…) for decisions to come out in about a week or so! though if i’m being completely honest/realistic, as perennial an optimist as i consider myself generally in life, i’m not too high on my chances. i think i’m a standout writer (hopefully that shines through in my essays — really need it to!!), and a passionate, insatiable learner, but my grades/ECs are (at least in my estimation) good, not GREAT, at best.
it would be wonderful if the aforementioned qualities were — assuming i did a good job evincing them in my application, of course — sufficient, but the sad truth is that i’m competing with people who effectively dedicate their entire high-school years to meticulously honing their college application, and i just always valued learning as more an end, and not a merely a means to going somewhere prestigious and elite. (plus, i’m humble enough to acknowledge that maybe i’m just not good enough, and that’s alright.)
(as you can see, i tend to digress a lot — sorry!! ill leave you with this. thanks again.)
That’s so fair. Not to bring the hopes up, but I was in a quite similar; position to you when applying. This stuff is just a crapshoot and you should not led the decision (acceptance or rejection) define you (obviously).
By the fact that you read Hanson (who somewhat recently spoke at UChicago for a Night Owls!), I’m sure you will do great wherever you go!