Empfehlenswert! Thuß hat recht!
Showing posts with label hubris. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hubris. Show all posts
Saturday, September 30, 2023
Monday, April 20, 2020
The Thin Façade of Authority By Victor Davis Hanson
Very recommendable article by Victor Davis Hanson! Great attack on the hubris and pretense of knowledge of the educated elite! "Warped Arguments Wrapped in Authority" Well said!
"One, and the most renowned [lessons], is a specialization in education that results in titled degrees and presumed authority. That ensuing prestige, in turn, dictates the decisions of most politicians, the media, and public officials—who for the most part share the values and confidence of the credentialed elite. ... It is no exaggeration to say that most models that the best and brightest offered the public, from the imported Imperial College in London to those from the University of Washington and many more besides, were not just inaccurate, but quite mistaken in two tragic ways: First, they were accepted as gospel by governments and thus their flawed assumptions became the basis for policies that in many cases may prove counterproductive. Second, the modelers themselves either did not promptly correct their warped inputs, or were not completely forthcoming about their data and methodologies, or blamed their flawed assumptions on others or circumstances beyond imagination, or claimed that their mistakes were in fact salutary—if not sorta, kinda planned ... Sometime in the late 19th century, the wide-scale growth of graduate education, professional schooling, and the formal granting of a M.D., Ph.D., or J.D. were necessary antidotes to quackery and the dangers of autodidactic expertise masquerading as the product of the scientific method. But in the last two centuries, that notion of argument from authority has metamorphosed into a religion, a faith-based discipline. ... Our modelers constantly downsize their bleak prognostications as “data changes” as if one should ever publish such Armageddon scenarios when they had insufficient information. More worrisome, are post facto claims that such mistakes might have been salutary. ... Degrees no longer necessarily reflect merit, at least as it once was calibrated by a university’s or a public agency’s own standards. Over 20 years ago, one could read any scholarly journal in the social sciences or humanities—and today even their scientific counterparts—and learn how social justice, identity politics, and political activism had warped science and data-driven analyses. The erosion infected everything from studies of global warming to illegal immigration to the role of the “Other” in ancient societies. It was as if letters behind one’s name allowed authors to massage data and argumentation for the higher purposes of egalitarianism and contemporary social justice.
Every young scholar is now faced with the dilemma of writing the truth as the evidence compels him to do, or venturing into weaponized speculation that is far more likely to win him peer approbation and career enhancement, even as it insidiously bankrupts his discipline. ... "
The Thin Façade of Authority - American Greatness: The virus will teach us many things, but one lesson has already been relearned by the American people: there are two, quite different, types of wisdom. One, and the most renowned, is a specialization in education that results in titled degrees and presumed authority. That ensuing prestige, in turn, dictates the decisions of most politicians, …
"One, and the most renowned [lessons], is a specialization in education that results in titled degrees and presumed authority. That ensuing prestige, in turn, dictates the decisions of most politicians, the media, and public officials—who for the most part share the values and confidence of the credentialed elite. ... It is no exaggeration to say that most models that the best and brightest offered the public, from the imported Imperial College in London to those from the University of Washington and many more besides, were not just inaccurate, but quite mistaken in two tragic ways: First, they were accepted as gospel by governments and thus their flawed assumptions became the basis for policies that in many cases may prove counterproductive. Second, the modelers themselves either did not promptly correct their warped inputs, or were not completely forthcoming about their data and methodologies, or blamed their flawed assumptions on others or circumstances beyond imagination, or claimed that their mistakes were in fact salutary—if not sorta, kinda planned ... Sometime in the late 19th century, the wide-scale growth of graduate education, professional schooling, and the formal granting of a M.D., Ph.D., or J.D. were necessary antidotes to quackery and the dangers of autodidactic expertise masquerading as the product of the scientific method. But in the last two centuries, that notion of argument from authority has metamorphosed into a religion, a faith-based discipline. ... Our modelers constantly downsize their bleak prognostications as “data changes” as if one should ever publish such Armageddon scenarios when they had insufficient information. More worrisome, are post facto claims that such mistakes might have been salutary. ... Degrees no longer necessarily reflect merit, at least as it once was calibrated by a university’s or a public agency’s own standards. Over 20 years ago, one could read any scholarly journal in the social sciences or humanities—and today even their scientific counterparts—and learn how social justice, identity politics, and political activism had warped science and data-driven analyses. The erosion infected everything from studies of global warming to illegal immigration to the role of the “Other” in ancient societies. It was as if letters behind one’s name allowed authors to massage data and argumentation for the higher purposes of egalitarianism and contemporary social justice.
Every young scholar is now faced with the dilemma of writing the truth as the evidence compels him to do, or venturing into weaponized speculation that is far more likely to win him peer approbation and career enhancement, even as it insidiously bankrupts his discipline. ... "
The Thin Façade of Authority - American Greatness: The virus will teach us many things, but one lesson has already been relearned by the American people: there are two, quite different, types of wisdom. One, and the most renowned, is a specialization in education that results in titled degrees and presumed authority. That ensuing prestige, in turn, dictates the decisions of most politicians, …
Saturday, July 14, 2018
Yann LeCun: One Of Mark Zuckerberg's Extremely Left Leaning Employees?
Posted: 7/14/2018 Updated: 4/14/2019, 7/15/2018
Update Of 4/14/2019
As of today, Yann LeCun decided to cut me off from commenting on his public posts on his Facebook page. Very fitting for an intolerant leftist full of hubris. He is also one of those hard and naive leftists who can not handle the truth or criticism!
It is his loss not mine! :-)
A Vice President & Chief Scientist At Facebook
Yann LeCun is the VP & Chief AI Scientist at Facebook according to his LinkedIn profile. Yann LeCun is actually one of the superstars of AI & machine learning.
I have recently liked his Facebook page, therefore about two posts by Yann LeCun appeared on my Facebook page in the past few days. Both of them were openly and kind of directly against President Trump. Not only that, he essentially and unreflectively (I hope) regurgitated typical leftist/progressive and absurd talking points like Trump has a mental issue (e.g. wordplay on paranoid and pronoid) or Peter Strzok’s “fiery” response during the Congressional Hearing about him (LeCun later also commented favorably about Strzok’s possibly fake outrage that Trump insulted a Veteran).
Yann LeCun Responded On His Facebook Posting
I had challenged Yann LeCun on both of his recent Facebook postings listed above. Today (7/15/2018) he responded to one of his two Facebook postings:
“You don't need to be "extreme left leaning" to see that Trump is a lying, incompetent racist who has no sense of basic human decency and no respect for democratic institutions. Anyone, conservative or progressive, who is in favor of democracy and human decency can see that. Are you? Can you?” (emphasis added)
My response to his response in return: “Mon dieu, you entertain a narrow, highly distorted and biased view of the current president. I suspect, it has to do with your upbringing in France (myself I am from Germany). I further suspect, you have a very poor and incomplete understanding of U.S. history and the Declaration of Independence as well as the U.S. Constitution/State constitutions. Recherchez vous si'l vous plait. Merci!”
Zuckerberg About An Extremely Left Leaning Place
About April 10, 2018, Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook, gave a testimony in the U.S. Congress where among other things, he had the courage to admit “I understand where that concern is coming from because Facebook and the tech industry are located in Silicon Valley, which is an extremely left-leaning place” (source; emphasis added). I guess, he knew what he was talking about.
I personally do not like these awful show trials of business leaders in the U.S. Congress at all. It is often not much more than grandstanding and chest beating of our elected politicians to drag a business leader before them and lash out at them. In the case of Mark Zuckerberg this was certainly the case!
The Bubble Of Silicon Valley
They think they are so smart, open minded, and sophisticated, working on cutting/bleeding edge technology to the benefit of all mankind. They are so proud of the wisdom of crowd sourcing etc.
Turns out, that they rather live in a serious bubble and they are mightily trapped/stuck in really narrow minded groupthink!
No Harm Intended
I don’t mean any harm to or to judge Yann LeCun’s political views. Everyone is entitled to their opinions! His professional work in AI is excellent/outstanding and greatly admired by many, including myself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)