wedrifid comments on Self-Improvement or Shiny Distraction: Why Less Wrong is anti-Instrumental Rationality - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (251)
Whoever came up with this list of tenets is wrong. The development of expertise in skills is something I have taken a particular interest in, both as part of my qualification as a teacher and as an independent passion.
A prominent introductory reference to the field as it is studied academically is of course The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance (Cambridge Handbooks in Psychology) although it is a field in which research has begun to accelerate. While the findings of the studies are completely in line with your overall contention they contradict some of the 'tenets' that you put forward here. Specifically:
On a sidenote, are there any ways to get the Cambridge Handbook? My local libraries don't have it (closest holder in Worldcat is Yale), there are no ebooks floating around, Google Books has a quite limited preview, and the cheapest I can find it for is around $50 paperback used (!).
(I'm thinking of just interlibrary loaning it and scanning it. I mean, sheesh.)
A couple of months after the handbook was released I was trying to get access to it. At that time I didn't have university library access and even if I did there were only two copies in the entire city. I actually drove 45 minutes away to a university that had the book not checked out and spent a couple of days reading it and consolidating the information in the form of notes and supermemo entries.
To my great surprise, turned out my library had access to an e-copy of it. I took an hour and printed out all 47 entries to PDFs, and combined them to get this: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5317066/cambridge-expertise.pdf
(I would like to crop the margins, but
pdfcropresults in doubled file size; I'd also like to remove the headers & footers, but none of my PDF CLI tools seem to support that.)LW! Never say I have done nothing for you!
Wow. Nice work.
If I were the sort of person who did morally grey things like that I would totally have used TextAloud and selected an academic sounding voice (Graham) to read the text to mp3 files. Then right now I would have it on my ipod so that I could listen to it on my ipod while commuting and exercising. Actually, that isn't quite true. I would have the first chapter and expecting the rest to be spoken to file by tomorrow.
So while I appreciate feedback from someone who has actually read the material, and while the list I used was certainly abbreviated and lacking nuanced, the same author uses the exact phrase "is not inherently enjoyable". Does not mean that it can't be enjoyable, only that if it is, it will be by random coincidence, so it usually won't be. It could be that the research has changed - the handbook you cite was published in 2006, the paper I cite was published in 1993.
An abbreviation of "Not necessarily inherently enjoyable" would be less misleading abbreviation. (Albeit still seeming out of place if found anywhere near the top of the list of tenets.)
The "usually won't be" is not implied by the source and isn't the point they are trying to convey. The "will be by random coincidence" is clearly false. There is a strong (and rational) motive for people wishing to achieve mastery to alter their intrinsic motivation responses (using mind hacking, etc) such that they do find deliberate practice inherently enjoyable. Apart from that there is a significant selection effect in place - people who find deliberate practice inherently enjoyable are far, far more likely to do it in volumes that are at all significant. This applies to me, for example - I take near masochistic pleasure in that kind of physical and mental exertion and so structure my life such that I do more of it.
I couldn't tell you whether the phrase 'is not inherently enjoyable' is in the 1996 reference. I don't recall it but it also isn't something I pick out as a take home message in the quote you make so I most likely wouldn't have included it in my supermemo notes on the subject in any case, at least not with that wording.
I again appreciate the overall contrasts we're considering here. What I reject is the claim "IF enjoyable THEN NOT deliberate practice" which is what is implied by the tenet list. From your reply I don't think that is a position that you are trying to take and I do appreciate the clarification and reference.