Let me start this by saying this is not so much a thread to start a flame war, but a call to action.
There is another thread on here arguing about a subject where sweeping conclusions have been drawn from heresay and google searches. It's gotten pretty argumentative, and bringing it up here would miss the bigger point, which is this:
GOOGLE SEARCHES AND INTUITION DO NOT CUT IT FOR RESEARCH!!!!!!
Google anything and you will likely land on a page written by a paid content writer with no direct expertise. This person is being paid to fill up a website with information to generate revenue by landing on google searches. They usually get this information from an un-cited single source- or other google searches. This becomes painfully obvious when you research a specific subject and realize that the information you're coming across is repetitive right down to the same wording.
For example, last year I was interested in pulling in some extra income. So I googled "how to make extra money". Not only did I get the same type of top-10 list format on almost all of my searches, but their content and the total lack of experience behind them were identical. It boiled down to:
-Start a blog! (no one is going to read your blog unless you have actual expertise and an established name- this ain't 2005!)
-Do Freelance work on the side! (I got accounts on freelancer.com and flex jobs.com. The sites were not only spam traps for my email address, but the jobs they offered fell into two categories. The jobs were either so specific that only someone with a narrow range of experience could do them, or so general that hundreds of foreign outsourcers would bid them down to where you could not compete. Total waste of time.)
-Start a photography business! (I know a couple of photographers. There is a big upfront investment in equipment, software, etc before you even make a name for yourself to pay it back.)
-Get a paper route! (This was probably the least crazy option they offered because you actually see these advertised all the time. The catch is you have to BUY the papers and re-sell them to the subscribers, effectively absorbing their risk for them.)
The common thread in all of these is the total disregard for actual research or experience before typing it up and publishing it. This is lazy. This is intellectually corrupt. This is going on way too much.
One of the major advances of civilization came in the enlightenment with the idea that you base conclusions only on the evidence at hand- not who said it, not how popular the idea is and not who it's going to piss off. That idea is dying- not because people are actively rejecting it but because it is seen as inconvenient chore.
The solution? Unplug google and read a book! You will get so much more out of it, namely:
-The author is establishing their credibility. Their future and reputation rely on getting it right. They are not fly-by-night content writers.
-Books are peer reviewed. No publisher is going to risk their time and money on something shoddily thrown together.
-Because of their length, a great deal of research on specific subjects is needed to avoid being transparently repetitive. Steven Pinker's book "The Blank Slate" drew some very controversial conclusions about human nature. Fortunately, he came to the fight armed. Of the book's 600 pages, the last 100 are citations of his sources. Because of his research, we are effectively getting the input of hundreds of specific viewpoints on one subject.
-Books have the ability to change your mind. When you search for an article on google, you are likely searching for a predetermined conclusion rather than content. Books have many more opportunities to disprove themselves and have to be careful, specific and judicious in how they present information. This means that it is much harder to prod them into convenient conclusions. Example: I once did a term paper on the city of Brasilia. I found the concept of a pre-engineered city completely fascinating and wanted to write my paper extolling the virtues of this idea. My conclusion could not have been any more opposite. The process of funneling the design of a city into so few hands led to such a disregard to human needs that no one wanted to live in it. I feel lucky to have run from an idea with my tail between my legs- there are people out there with PhDs who have never had that experience!
This last point is the most important. When people like an idea too much to actually challenge it with actual research and original sources, the ideas can take on a life of their own. Thanks to this, we get garbage like:
- America is a Christian nation founded on Biblical principles
- Rape is a crime of power that has nothing to do with sex
- Alcoholism is a spiritual problem that requires participation in a 12 step program
Mind you- these were ideas that took root long before google. I cannot imagine how much worse things are about to get if things don't change. And I hope that third point hit you close to home as to how nefarious this sense of intellectual laziness really is. How much do we continue to suffer because people like feelings and conjecture more than evidence?
Be the change. Hold yourself to higher standards. Come to your arguments armed. This is especially important for us as we are fighting an uphill battle for baclofen to be accepted.
That is all.
There is another thread on here arguing about a subject where sweeping conclusions have been drawn from heresay and google searches. It's gotten pretty argumentative, and bringing it up here would miss the bigger point, which is this:
GOOGLE SEARCHES AND INTUITION DO NOT CUT IT FOR RESEARCH!!!!!!
Google anything and you will likely land on a page written by a paid content writer with no direct expertise. This person is being paid to fill up a website with information to generate revenue by landing on google searches. They usually get this information from an un-cited single source- or other google searches. This becomes painfully obvious when you research a specific subject and realize that the information you're coming across is repetitive right down to the same wording.
For example, last year I was interested in pulling in some extra income. So I googled "how to make extra money". Not only did I get the same type of top-10 list format on almost all of my searches, but their content and the total lack of experience behind them were identical. It boiled down to:
-Start a blog! (no one is going to read your blog unless you have actual expertise and an established name- this ain't 2005!)
-Do Freelance work on the side! (I got accounts on freelancer.com and flex jobs.com. The sites were not only spam traps for my email address, but the jobs they offered fell into two categories. The jobs were either so specific that only someone with a narrow range of experience could do them, or so general that hundreds of foreign outsourcers would bid them down to where you could not compete. Total waste of time.)
-Start a photography business! (I know a couple of photographers. There is a big upfront investment in equipment, software, etc before you even make a name for yourself to pay it back.)
-Get a paper route! (This was probably the least crazy option they offered because you actually see these advertised all the time. The catch is you have to BUY the papers and re-sell them to the subscribers, effectively absorbing their risk for them.)
The common thread in all of these is the total disregard for actual research or experience before typing it up and publishing it. This is lazy. This is intellectually corrupt. This is going on way too much.
One of the major advances of civilization came in the enlightenment with the idea that you base conclusions only on the evidence at hand- not who said it, not how popular the idea is and not who it's going to piss off. That idea is dying- not because people are actively rejecting it but because it is seen as inconvenient chore.
The solution? Unplug google and read a book! You will get so much more out of it, namely:
-The author is establishing their credibility. Their future and reputation rely on getting it right. They are not fly-by-night content writers.
-Books are peer reviewed. No publisher is going to risk their time and money on something shoddily thrown together.
-Because of their length, a great deal of research on specific subjects is needed to avoid being transparently repetitive. Steven Pinker's book "The Blank Slate" drew some very controversial conclusions about human nature. Fortunately, he came to the fight armed. Of the book's 600 pages, the last 100 are citations of his sources. Because of his research, we are effectively getting the input of hundreds of specific viewpoints on one subject.
-Books have the ability to change your mind. When you search for an article on google, you are likely searching for a predetermined conclusion rather than content. Books have many more opportunities to disprove themselves and have to be careful, specific and judicious in how they present information. This means that it is much harder to prod them into convenient conclusions. Example: I once did a term paper on the city of Brasilia. I found the concept of a pre-engineered city completely fascinating and wanted to write my paper extolling the virtues of this idea. My conclusion could not have been any more opposite. The process of funneling the design of a city into so few hands led to such a disregard to human needs that no one wanted to live in it. I feel lucky to have run from an idea with my tail between my legs- there are people out there with PhDs who have never had that experience!
This last point is the most important. When people like an idea too much to actually challenge it with actual research and original sources, the ideas can take on a life of their own. Thanks to this, we get garbage like:
- America is a Christian nation founded on Biblical principles
- Rape is a crime of power that has nothing to do with sex
- Alcoholism is a spiritual problem that requires participation in a 12 step program
Mind you- these were ideas that took root long before google. I cannot imagine how much worse things are about to get if things don't change. And I hope that third point hit you close to home as to how nefarious this sense of intellectual laziness really is. How much do we continue to suffer because people like feelings and conjecture more than evidence?
Be the change. Hold yourself to higher standards. Come to your arguments armed. This is especially important for us as we are fighting an uphill battle for baclofen to be accepted.
That is all.
Comment