Every PhD thesis should end with, "FIGHT ME!"
this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2025
613 points (99.0% liked)
Microblog Memes
6136 readers
3387 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I reality it is all about how you present yourself.
Sadly, most truths don't overcome presentation.
"Tell them a lie 1000 times and it will become truth"
Simulation theory is just Plato's cave...
"If a tree falls.." is Schrodinger's cat...
We're still talking about the same stuff, we're just focused on details and aware that we might not yet be working with complete data.
The absolute smartest brains in the planet readily admit they don't know what the fuck is going on. That's a good thing.
We shouldn't be listening to anyone that insists they have all the answers because no one does.
The absolute smartest brains in the planet readily admit they don't know what the fuck is going on.
And to our detriment, the idiots are quite certain that they know everything.
It’s Dunning-Kruger.
Smart people know enough about a topic to know that they don’t know everything. Whereas less smart people don’t know what they don’t know so they think they know it all.
That’s a lot pf knows.
I think the differentiating factor is bulk intelligence, the guy in the bath is a one or two per generation mind and PhD students are ten a penny. I was one, I know. I saw a mechanical engineering doctorate banging a screw into the wall with a hammer.
I did that once when I was a kid. I was testing the hypothesis that it would still spin, and therefore save time. My hypothesis was wrong, and it just punched the giant hole in the fence.
Like you said, the people that we read about today were generational talents, but they also had the advantage of living in a world where fairly simple observations could be considered new discoveries. We've discovered so much since then, and know so much about the world, that it takes something quite elaborate to be groundbreaking now.
there is however the bias of now knowing what is right and what is wrong about those old observations, and therefore trivializing them in our heads. to our ancestors they weren’t actually all too trivial, and they struggled a lot to try and figure out the world with what they had.
Oh gosh you are not helping my cynicism related to higher education.
I keep wondering if I (and a small group of my friends) are the smart ones and that scares the shit out of me because I think I’m the dumb one.
It's best not to worry too much about it. Embrace the chaos of a world driven by idiots.
both fuel each other
wild ideas of philosphers entice those who like concrete data to see if they hold useful value
i think it's like science fiction and science - sure one is often a collage of various wild ideas - but some of them could inspire a person in a fancy lab coat to say "huh, that's cool, i wonder if i could make that real" (that's how we got mobile phones!)
being a scientist can sometimes trap you into the world of concrete data that's very detail orientated, scientists need their philosopher friends who just say wild shower thoughts without thinking too much about specifics. Small picture and big picture are not opposing forces after all, they complete each other
edit: fixed a broken link
your link points to a site about increasing Website performance.
huh? how? why? i have never seen that article before in my life how did that happen? attempt two to post the right thing. huh this one worked i'm genuinely so deeply confused, i'll update the original too. thank you for telling me!
See, I knew philosophy was fiction.
What was the bottleneck that caused 3 centuries to pass between Gutenberg recreating the 4 century old movable type Chinese printing press, and the bulk of scientific discoveries? I know the basics of the industrial revolution were metallurgy, cyclical power safety with steam boiler pressure regulation (Watt), and the discovery that a lathe screw is capable of cutting a more accurate lathe screw. I don't know anything about the cultural evolution that made the age of discovery relevant, accessible, or most importantly made it stick.
Idk, but I recently learned that there was a 300 year gap in new inventions in Ireland after they invented whiskey. Then 300 years later they codified chemistry, probably to make better whiskey.
It took a slow runup like all things and it stuck because it worked. Science begat technology which improved living standards, not just in a rarified way but universally and was very evident. In turn technical advancement shone a light back onto science as its enabler. The new discoveries were not only intellectual like those in the arts they altered the practicalities and aspirations of common life within all classes of society. A thing science continues to do unlike any other pursuit of humanity and it is relevant and sticks for this reason.