Nice. I picked up something like this idea from Anna. Basically the idea is that the words that help one person are not the words that help another, and so if you come up with different words to describe the same thing you should share them in case they help someone else. Thus there is value in writing your own self-help, even if it only helps yourself, since usually it also helps others.
Put more poetically, it doesn’t take great genius to help somebody; it just takes being enough like them and knowing something they don’t that you can explain it to them in a way that they understand.
Now put this into contrast with how science is typically done. There is one original description. Everyone is supposed to reference it. And you don’t get any points for writing the same thing using different words.
Nice. I picked up something like this idea from Anna. Basically the idea is that the words that help one person are not the words that help another, and so if you come up with different words to describe the same thing you should share them in case they help someone else. Thus there is value in writing your own self-help, even if it only helps yourself, since usually it also helps others.
Put more poetically, it doesn’t take great genius to help somebody; it just takes being enough like them and knowing something they don’t that you can explain it to them in a way that they understand.
Now put this into contrast with how science is typically done. There is one original description. Everyone is supposed to reference it. And you don’t get any points for writing the same thing using different words.
Compare: Chris Olah and Shan Carter on Research Debt.
What an Omega-send. Added to my morning reading list.
Mostly, yes. Feynman gets a lot of credit for making QED comprehensible, even though he didn’t make it in the first place.