On Sun, 15 Jun 2014 08:15:19 -0700, William Sommerwerck wrote:
[ a long story ]
Thanks for writing all of that. It reflects much of my own experiences as
well, both when interacting with other people, people in general, and
when doing things alone.
One thing Ive learned is that people any people, anywhere, any time
have great difficulty getting past what they believe to be true. I know
it, so it must be true. Dont disturb my complacency.
People are hugely dogmatic. And by that, I mean "things that are commonly
held to be true without actual support in fact" (or something like that).
It's obvious that philosophies and religions depend on this, but dogma
can also be found in the sciences and engineering, unfortunately, even
though these areas need to be free of it.
Some years ago, I was reading the day's news of science, and there was a
story about how researchers in psychology found that about 2/3 of people
will follow along with other people around them, rather than do what they
think or feel is right. I think in a healthy culture, this is a good
default behavior, but in today's world (and by that, I mean at least the
last 2000 years
prevents many positive changes.
When I was young, I did well in school and thought I knew things. Later,
I was surprised at how many things I learned in school and accepted as
The Truth turned out to be wrong. Sometimes that was because new
scientific research updated human knowledge, but other times it was
because my teachers weren't as smart as everyone assumed, and sometimes
because they were required to pass on what the NY State Board of Regents
required them to.
It is commonly said that small children are like sponges for information,
but they don't have a mature ability to discern truth vs. fiction. And no
part of my formal education, including required science courses at
Caltech, covered that subject.
Anyone with a disruptive point of view is usually rejected as a idiot
Again, in a healthy culture, that behavior is actually right. And unless
no one shows them otherwise, people assume their culture is correct.
"Everyone knows that ...." and "of course ..." have become red flags for
me because so often, I noticed that the words that follow are simply not
true.
My first real engineering job was with Bendix Field Engineering. Bendix
was a principal contractor for NASAs Spaceflight Tracking and
Data-acquisition Network (STDN or STADAN).
One of my first real jobs was working for NASA at JPL, and although it
was a very short job, I think it affected my attitude about what
constitutes "good engineering" in a very positive way.
One of the reasons I love engineering is that it keeps me watching
myself, checking my thinking, and asking myself, "Am I really sure I got
this right?"
Years ago, Richard Feynman did a special filmed interview in which he
passed on some of his ideas about what makes good science and good
scientists because he was very concerned about dogma and improper
thinking in science. He said that when he was young, some people taught
him about those things, and he wanted to pass on something to future
generations. Sadly, I can never find that on YouTube anymore when I look
for it. There are many other Feynman videos, but not that one. Maybe this
is another example of a dogmatic culture not wanting to consider it's own
weaknesses.
So maybe I can summarize just a little, along with my own ideas:
1. Good scientists never believe things just because other people do.
2. Good scientists are never sure of anything, and never reach
conclusions.
3. Good scientists are curious and open-minded.
He explained this as a basis for good scientific methods and thought.
The way I think of it is that a good scientific method involves both
curious open-mindedness and discernment (telling what is true and real).
All that may seem like a digression because the original topic was on
engineering, but in my mind, the same basic attitude is just what you
need to solve engineering problems, prevent yourself from getting into
trouble, and getting out of it.
I and my co-worker a buck-toothed dullard -- killed ourselves trying
to get flat response at Varians settings. We couldnt. We once spent a
whole day on just one channel, and got it kinda/sorta/maybe flat. We
called in more-experienced engineers, and none of them could figure out
what was wrong.
If you have good engineers, it really helps to have more people look at
it. Some "stupid mistakes" can be revealed more easily from another
perspective.
Note that //many// more-experienced people quite failed to solve the
problem which turned out to be ludicrously simple. I was the one who
solved it, because I asked good questions.
That's it! You have to be like a small child and keep asking, "Why?" And
keeep asking, "What are my assumptions?"
* I suspect no one else did, because they were afraid of looking stupid
-- the A man doesnt ask for directions attitude.
Yes, it's very sad. One thing about Richard Feynman as compared to other
people I met at Caltech (faculty, other staff, and students) is that he
had a lot less "ego"! The others mostly had "density to match their IQ",
in my opinion, which limited everything. When a professor said something
in class no one understood, almost no one stopped him to ask a question,
in fear that it would make them look stupid. And when I asked questions,
I could hear other students in the class snicker at me. (When that
happened in Feynman's classroom, he defended me. How cool.)
Caltech was a bad learning environment for me and I'm glad I got out of
there, but I'm sure there are other "places of learning" that are just as
bad, and that's what many professional engineers go through.
I wrote a lot about this because in my opinion, this is an important
basic issue in the human experience, and in the American scientific and
engineering cultures.