“Just because you don’t know anybody from the right-hand side of the bell curve doesn’t mean they’re not there”
navigating the second Gilded Age through humor, invective and insight
“Just because you don’t know anybody from the right-hand side of the bell curve doesn’t mean they’re not there”
Because of course that will solve the problem!
The other day the Bureau of Labor Statistics revised the employment data they’d published over the last few months. The revision highlighted how — surprise! — Trump’s actions have been undermining the economy and reducing employment.
Was it a conspiracy to make His Imperial Idiotic Majesty look bad? A plot by the deep state to interrupt Dear Leader’s parade to a Glorious Future?
No. It was just an ordinary, run of the mill action that’s taken place many times throughout history, without much in the way of controversy.
Trump’s response — to fire the head of that department — was typical. He tried to frame it as getting rid of a Biden loyalist who was out to damage his reconstruction of America. Which was, on the face of it, sheer nonsense, and a sign of a man — excuse me, overgrown toddler — who doesn’t know how to deal with reality or bad news, and definitely not both at the same time.
But there’s more to unpack here.
First off, can you imagine what it would be like working for this asshole? If the reaction to bad news is to (metaphorically) chop off someone’s head, well, guess what? You’ll never get any bad news. Until it’s too late to do anything intelligent or useful in response. Which can quickly lead to disastrous outcomes. I wouldn’t be surprised to find this behavior is a big part of the reason he has such a terrible track record running businesses.
More importantly, though, it shows, quite clearly, that he doesn’t know how to think critically. Rational people never reject the data. They may question it or challenge it, but that’s all part and parcel of trying to understand what reality is telling you. Only people who insist on living in their own personal fantasy world don’t do this.
Now, to be clear, I’m fine with anyone, Trump included, living in their own fantasy world. I live in one, too, where people always strive to be rational and treat all others with respect.
But I don’t want anyone’s pursuit of their fantasy world to route me and the people I care about to hell. In fact, someone doing that is guaranteed to earn my ire and hatred. There’s very little in the world worse to me than forcing me to do something stupid.
Under Trump, sadly, such things happen continuously.
For many reasons, I will never forget Mr. Muchio, who taught me algebra in the 7th grade.
One of the biggest challenges in learning algebra isn’t the math itself. It’s learning how to parse descriptions into mathematical equations you can then use the rules of algebra to solve. It’s a process of abstraction, figuring out what are the essential details and what is “merely” descriptive and/or reflective of a particular situation. This is commonly known as learning to solve word problems.
We quickly became masters of this…or thought we had.
As Mr. Muchio pointedly kept reminding us, what we were actually doing was leaving stuff out to overly simplify the problem. I still remember his admonition, decades later: “You’re using a silly rule: ‘when in doubt, leave it out’. But it means the problem you solve isn’t the one you were supposed to solve. Be careful about what you leave out!”
Once upon a time I was chief financial officer of a startup biotech company. One day my boss, the CEO, and I were traveling back to meet with investors to pitch them on why they really wanted to keep buying our stock.
During the flight I reviewed the financial models and presentation I’d spent days creating. Somewhere over the Midwest I suddenly realized several of the key summary values, which were central to my analysis, had gotten hard-coded. They didn’t reflect the revised assumptions I’d made.
This meant my beautiful and compelling pitch was completely wrong. In fact, we didn’t look like such a good investment after all.
Needless to say, I didn’t get much sleep that night. I had to revise everything.
Ever since, my Excel models are littered with “check figure” lines, that confirm totals are, in fact, reflective of the data they claim to summarize.
One of my earliest political memories was of Joe Namath, a very talented and famous quarterback in 1968, being asked who he thought should be our next President. I was 13 at the time.
I remember thinking “He’s a phenomenal quarterback. But why in the world would anyone think that’d make him an expert on national politics and the Presidential candidates?”
It takes a lot of time and effort — and focus — to become an expert in anything. Very few of us have the resources to do that in many different fields.
This spillover expertise effect really comes into play, at least in the United States, with business titans and governing.
Just because someone is successful in business, they don’t necessarily have a clue as to how to successfully lead a community in its pursuit of happiness and the greater good. Business, for all its challenges, is a much, much simpler environment to operate in than government. I know this from personal experience because I worked in each for 20 years, as a financial executive and as a local elected official.
In business, you succeed by focusing on making money while not breaking the rules. Or at least not breaking them too much.
In government, at least in a representative constitutional democracy, there is no single goal, and no marketplace in which to value tradeoffs from moment to moment. In fact, there’s often no market at all.
The Michelson–Morley experiment, which produced the data that overthrew Newtonian physics, was performed in 1887.
But it went unexplained until 1905, when Albert Einstein published the special theory of relativity.
What were the world’s physicists doing during those 18 years? Ignoring the data and hoping it would go away? Playing pinochle?
No, they were trying to jam the empirical data into Newtonian physics. Because that just had to be true! It’d successfully explained everything (well, almost everything) for centuries!
Once you accept the box you’re in, it’s damn hard to break out of it. Or even realize you’re in a box.
Ever wonder why research reports in Science, Nature, or any other scientific journal are terribly boring and hard to read?
It’s because the authors are required to disclose, fully, materials and methods, how they did their analysis, etc. They have to establish provenance, and reproducibility…both of which are key to critical thinking.
They only get to discuss what their results (might) mean in the last few bits.