Linked by Amjith Ramanujam on Sun 3rd Aug 2008 15:56 UTC, submitted by netpython
Permalink for comment 325472
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-02-05
I find Jeff Atwood to have tackled this issue better then anyone else I have ever read. This is one of those posts that really shook how I look at the world.
Experts are, if anything, more suspect than the amateurs, because they're less honest. Regardless, you absolutely should question everything I write here, in the same way you question everything you've ever read online -- or anywhere else for that matter. Your own research and data should trump any claims you read from anyone, no matter how much of an authority or expert you, I, Google, or the general community at large may believe them to be
This is an ongoing theme on Jeffs blog. We all suck at this, it is just a matter of degree. All we can really do is strive to suck less every year. This knowledge is the difference between an amateur and a profession in this industry.
"A couple years ago, I was talking the Institute's Bob Johansen about wisdom, and he explained that -- to deal with an uncertain future and still move forward – they advise people to have "strong opinions, which are weakly held." They've been giving this advice for years, and I understand that it was first developed by [former] Institute Director Paul Saffo. Bob explained that weak opinions are problematic because people aren't inspired to develop the best arguments possible for them, or to put forth the energy required to test them. Bob explained that it was just as important, however, to not be too attached to what you believe because, otherwise, it undermines your ability to "see" and "hear" evidence that clashes with your opinions. This is what psychologists sometimes call the problem of "confirmation bias."
When I read that for the first time, something fundamental clicked inside of me. As I have been maturing as a person, I have been scratching at the edges of this idea, but have never put it that succinctly. Having weak opinions is useless, and shows a lack of both passion and knowledge, but strong opinions must be balanced with humility (the realization that you suck), and must be weakly held. A strong opinion, weakly held is an invitation to a stimulating discussion on a topic you are passionate about. A strong opinion held strongly without humility is a call to jihad.
Anyways, I love Jeff's writing (even when I don't agree with him) The post I pulled that stuff from is here, I would highly encourage anyone who gets enjoys posting in a place like this (osnews is pretty much the 'nam of tech forums) to read it a few times, as it will probably do you some good.
http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/001124.html