TobyBartels comments on Some Heuristics for Evaluating the Soundness of the Academic Mainstream in Unfamiliar Fields - Less Wrong

73 Post author: Vladimir_M 15 February 2011 09:17AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (272)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: TobyBartels 15 February 2011 11:25:37PM *  2 points [-]

Regarding endnote [4]: I'd be as interested in examples where we should read contrarian history as in any of your other examples; I'm interested in history. However, I think that you'd probably fall into mind-killing territory.

ETA: Thanks for the suggestions!

Comment author: Vladimir_M 16 February 2011 04:55:21PM 4 points [-]

To give some concrete examples, some topics where the conventional wisdom can be very inaccurate are, for example, wars and revolutions that have significant ideological bearing (like e.g. the world wars, or the French, American, or 1848 revolutions), and the evaluations of the historical performance of various systems of governance.

For some general contrarianism, I second the Moldbug recommendation. Be warned, however, that his writing features some spectacularly good insight but also some serious blind spots, so caveat lector. Generally, worthwhile contrarian sources tend to be good on some particulars but bad on others, so it's not like you can get a fully accurate opinion on any given topic from a single contrarian author.

Comment author: Barry_Cotter 16 February 2011 12:32:14AM 9 points [-]

Google "Mencius Moldbug", "Unqualified Reservations". Read until you get bored.

Alternatively read Thomas Carlyle, (long dead historian) or actual primary documents. The TIME magazine archives are pretty cool for this, as is Google Books.