Ok I have now commented on both your TikTok and this essay but I don't care, I LOVE this essay. Partially because it is absolutely true but also because it is directly related to my research.
I am most of the way through a PhD in statistics with a focus on visualizing uncertainty and this problem you are describing is exactly what my thesis is about (so you might be interested in it). In my first year I focused on a literature review that ended up driving me insane. A lot of the papers compare two plots and ask which is the "best" rather than considering nuance where different plots may be better in different circumstances. The context and meaning behind the process of data visualisation were stripped away or ignored for the goal of an empirical comparison. This ultimately results in the research being unusable because a finding without context can't be shoved back into a complicated environment (i.e. it ignores the nuance of the motivations behind visualising data). The efforts to find a universal best and strip away complexity leave the field a barren wasteland devoid of meaningful progress. My thesis was originally supposed to be another paper that contributed to this heap of empirical evidence, but I ended up having to shift gears to detailing the required context for the empirical evidence to sit in. I am currently in the process of seeing if any of the current literature can be salvaged and given meaning within this context. A couple other students in my department have ended up having to do a similar thing in another area of statistics since this issue is widespread in the field.
This evidence issue you are discussing is even a meta problem within the "data driven" science itself. Obviously a greater problem is that this way of thinking about ideas has become embedded in general conversation and engagement with new concepts. A lot of people seem to think a debate is about getting a bigger pile of contextless evidence for your side rather than creating an overarching narrative that incorporates the other sides evidence instead of trying to discredit it.
Sorry this comment is a bit long but I love this essay and it made me think a lot about my work haha.
Okay obvs the content of your post is like 10/10 absolutely slay 💯🔥 like always. Obvs. But we can we talk about that FORM. Describing the point of Blinkist as to be a tampon is the most pointed but subtle call out of misogyny that is so prolific in the STEM-bro world. Oh and calling the scientific aesthetic occult— that is a literal act of aggression and I’m sooooo here for it. And the literal best part is that the STEM-bros are either forced to agree or prove your point. Legit perfect.
Wholeheartedly agree with this. The over-editing of works into acute “plot points” counteract against texts that are intentionally verbose or dense to submerge the reader into the muddled landscape of the narrator. I think about how Fernanda Melchor’s Paradais could likely be summarized on half a page but without the sprawling sentences and dizzy structure, the magic that makes the literature a masterpiece is missing. I do feel this tension persist as I shift from writing my own work to editing it, the central challenging being how do I streamline a train of thought without spoon feeding the reader. I guess it comes down to if we think reading should be labour or leisure. Perhaps, when done correctly it’s a collection of both.
Blinkist had been around for nearly a decade, and long past being a startup. The product is aimed at people who don't read, or who think they don't have time to read, and is focused on self development, which is seemingly a never ending growth area for publishing (the demand never ends).
Not all literary nonfiction is stylish, there's a lot of ill considered rubbish in that niche, just as there is bad fiction.
The dripping sexism is difficult to understand. A lot of women are scientists and economists, a lot of women work in evidence based and data driven fields, a few high profile men arguably invented the capsule wardrobe, subsequently packaged to women by savvy marketers with entirely different aims. Science and data might be rather barren without qualitative understanding, but given they're the basis of real laws and real policies that affect real people on a day to day basis, including women, merely sneering and dismissing it all as just a guy thing sidesteps rather than illuminates or even defines the problem.
I think it's cool that we agree on our preference of the aesthetics. I think sometimes astrology archetypes and symbolism act as those specific writing rules where the astrologer is trying to tie together a story someone might call truth. I think sometimes it works. Sometimes it's just a beautiful story I can tell myself to try to understand why things happen. It doesn't make me any closer specifically but boy is it amazing when your brain can find patterns to believe.
I think your mentioning of blinkist is interesting because a lot of their collection are just nothing books. Books that serve no real purpose or pass on real knowledge. So many self-help books are purely designed for sales and to make money for publishers. Their substance stripped like the mines in the capitalist periphery. Similarly our minds are being pillaged by websites that remove even our need to think critically about the very language we interact with. Why read and develope your own opinions when you could simply consume through the lense of another the nothingness of capitalist wisdom.
Ok I have now commented on both your TikTok and this essay but I don't care, I LOVE this essay. Partially because it is absolutely true but also because it is directly related to my research.
I am most of the way through a PhD in statistics with a focus on visualizing uncertainty and this problem you are describing is exactly what my thesis is about (so you might be interested in it). In my first year I focused on a literature review that ended up driving me insane. A lot of the papers compare two plots and ask which is the "best" rather than considering nuance where different plots may be better in different circumstances. The context and meaning behind the process of data visualisation were stripped away or ignored for the goal of an empirical comparison. This ultimately results in the research being unusable because a finding without context can't be shoved back into a complicated environment (i.e. it ignores the nuance of the motivations behind visualising data). The efforts to find a universal best and strip away complexity leave the field a barren wasteland devoid of meaningful progress. My thesis was originally supposed to be another paper that contributed to this heap of empirical evidence, but I ended up having to shift gears to detailing the required context for the empirical evidence to sit in. I am currently in the process of seeing if any of the current literature can be salvaged and given meaning within this context. A couple other students in my department have ended up having to do a similar thing in another area of statistics since this issue is widespread in the field.
This evidence issue you are discussing is even a meta problem within the "data driven" science itself. Obviously a greater problem is that this way of thinking about ideas has become embedded in general conversation and engagement with new concepts. A lot of people seem to think a debate is about getting a bigger pile of contextless evidence for your side rather than creating an overarching narrative that incorporates the other sides evidence instead of trying to discredit it.
Sorry this comment is a bit long but I love this essay and it made me think a lot about my work haha.
Okay obvs the content of your post is like 10/10 absolutely slay 💯🔥 like always. Obvs. But we can we talk about that FORM. Describing the point of Blinkist as to be a tampon is the most pointed but subtle call out of misogyny that is so prolific in the STEM-bro world. Oh and calling the scientific aesthetic occult— that is a literal act of aggression and I’m sooooo here for it. And the literal best part is that the STEM-bros are either forced to agree or prove your point. Legit perfect.
Wholeheartedly agree with this. The over-editing of works into acute “plot points” counteract against texts that are intentionally verbose or dense to submerge the reader into the muddled landscape of the narrator. I think about how Fernanda Melchor’s Paradais could likely be summarized on half a page but without the sprawling sentences and dizzy structure, the magic that makes the literature a masterpiece is missing. I do feel this tension persist as I shift from writing my own work to editing it, the central challenging being how do I streamline a train of thought without spoon feeding the reader. I guess it comes down to if we think reading should be labour or leisure. Perhaps, when done correctly it’s a collection of both.
Blinkist had been around for nearly a decade, and long past being a startup. The product is aimed at people who don't read, or who think they don't have time to read, and is focused on self development, which is seemingly a never ending growth area for publishing (the demand never ends).
Not all literary nonfiction is stylish, there's a lot of ill considered rubbish in that niche, just as there is bad fiction.
The dripping sexism is difficult to understand. A lot of women are scientists and economists, a lot of women work in evidence based and data driven fields, a few high profile men arguably invented the capsule wardrobe, subsequently packaged to women by savvy marketers with entirely different aims. Science and data might be rather barren without qualitative understanding, but given they're the basis of real laws and real policies that affect real people on a day to day basis, including women, merely sneering and dismissing it all as just a guy thing sidesteps rather than illuminates or even defines the problem.
I think it's cool that we agree on our preference of the aesthetics. I think sometimes astrology archetypes and symbolism act as those specific writing rules where the astrologer is trying to tie together a story someone might call truth. I think sometimes it works. Sometimes it's just a beautiful story I can tell myself to try to understand why things happen. It doesn't make me any closer specifically but boy is it amazing when your brain can find patterns to believe.
I think your mentioning of blinkist is interesting because a lot of their collection are just nothing books. Books that serve no real purpose or pass on real knowledge. So many self-help books are purely designed for sales and to make money for publishers. Their substance stripped like the mines in the capitalist periphery. Similarly our minds are being pillaged by websites that remove even our need to think critically about the very language we interact with. Why read and develope your own opinions when you could simply consume through the lense of another the nothingness of capitalist wisdom.