Technology is trivial retrospectively, not prospectively

Technology is trivial retrospectively, not prospectively.
- We humans lack imagination. We can’t formulate what tomorrow’s important things will look like.
  - Ford wanted a faster horse.
  - Jobs believed the user doesn’t know what he wants.
- Use randomness to introduce discoveries into the equation. AF demands it.
  - Our activities are managed by small accidental changes, fluctuations in the environment.
  - We only wish to think that individuals are agents of free will, but we are not.
  - Discoveries of new concepts do not correlate with implementation. They are actually two different things.
    - True discovery requires the wisdom of the inventor to understand what he has at hand.
  - Heuristic of discovery.
    - The simpler and more obvious it is, the less likely we find it by [[У сложной проблемы не может быть простой простой причины|complicated methods]], and the opposite is true.
  - Two types of knowledge.
    - Apophatic. Something that we do by intuition; we can’t really express in clear and direct language.
      - Is it knowledge if we can’t express and explain it? According to Feynman, only what we can explain should be considered true personal knowledge.
    - Gradable school knowledge.
      - Codified, explainable, academizable, rationalizable, formalizable, provable on paper.
  - We believe in the next sequence.
    - Academia → Applied science and technology → Practice.
    - But there is a mistake. Taleb doesn’t agree with that and presents a sound argument, which in turn can also be questioned.
      - Taleb thinks that formal education can be harmful in certain contexts.
      - Dorofeev, during one of our discussions, expressed an opinion that higher education engages one part of the brain and employment engages another.
      - Another proof of the harmful theory of state education is in the speech of Sir Ken Robinson.
        
        [[why schools and modern education kill creativity#^e73109]]
  - What is the real sequence of any discovery?
    - Random tinkering (AF) → Heuristics (technology) → Practice and apprenticeship → Random tinkering (AF) → Heuristics (technology) → Practice and apprenticeship. ^65251c
    - What really happens, instead of heuristics, we usually get academic research and infinite theories instead of continuous tinkering and simplifications, aka heuristics.
    - Which in turn leads to the belief in knowledge economies, such as Finland’s.
      - We accidentally consider strong academia as the base for future wealth.
      - Which is actually the other way around. Research and wealth are byproducts of active tinkering and problem-solving.
    - Detected the flaw in the education system?
      - Does university education generate economic wealth?
      - But as Seneca put it, success is born of difficulties.
      - Not education → wealth and economic growth, but the other way around. Do you agree? A point of talk with Sergei Habarov.
    - Taleb puts forth another argument, that scholarship and organized education are not the same. Why?
  - Separate skill at doing from skill at talking. They are different leagues.
    - Less is more in academic action. Less talk leads to doing more.
      - The more studies, the less obvious, elementary but fundamental things become.
      - Activity, though, strips things to their simplest possible condition.
    - Thus, schools and formal education kill creativity and deprive us of optionality; we become blind to it.
      - Theory doesn’t take into account the difference between theory and practice, but practice does. It doesn’t happen according to the theory. Life is more complex than the most complex theory.
    - Knowledge gained from interaction with experienced peers, such as grandparents or craftsmen, is cheaper and vastly superior (empirically, hence scientifically) to what we get in formal classes in business schools.

Оставить комментарий Отменить ответ