The Believer (2009)
gq.com
gq.com
Imagine voting out a disease in medicine -- imagine voting cancer out of existence. In medicine, a science, such a thing cannot happen. In psychology, it happens regularly.
EDIT: once again downvoted for being right and backing up every word with evidence.
Medicine, and science in general, is constantly re-evaluating and often finding they were wrong.
No, quite the contrary -- in fact I just defined the difference between medicine and psychology. Medicine identifies new diseases using evidence. Psychology identifies new diseases using votes. All the new "diseases" in DSM-5 were added by a panel voting in secret.
> Medicine, and science in general, is constantly re-evaluating and often finding they were wrong.
Yes, using science and falsifiability (a hallmark of all scientific ideas) to identify the wrong ideas. Psychology, by contrast, identifies wrong ideas by measuring public reactions to their imaginary diseases. Asperger's wasn't voted out because it's fiction -- most psychological diseases are fiction. It was voted out because it produced an epidemic of phony diagnoses and a public relations disaster.
> Or do you regularly check up on your humor levels?
It's not easy to find humor in stories where psychology gets it wrong and kills children.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebecca_Riley
Quote: "Rebecca Riley ..., the daughter of Michael and Carolyn Riley and resident of Hull, Massachusetts, was found dead in her home after prolonged exposure to various medications, her lungs filled with fluid. The medical examiner's office determined the girl died from "intoxication due to the combined effects" of prescription drugs. ... The Riley parents were unemployed and the family relied on Social Security Benefits. From the age of two, Rebecca was diagnosed with ADHD and bipolar disorder, mainly on the basis of information given by her mother to child psychiatrist Kayoko Kifuji from the Tufts-New England Medical Center. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attachment_therapy
Quote: "Since the 1990s there have been a number of prosecutions for deaths or serious maltreatment of children at the hands of "attachment therapists" or parents following their instructions."
It shouldn't be, but it is. I think that's why.
The problem is one of funding, and the fact that acquiring money is not normally correlated with broad vision, and that having money is not normally correlated with executing that vision.
In short, Elon Musk's advantage is that he is an outlier in terms of how he was able to acquire money, and how he is able to control his use of it. Commendable, and the true lesson.
It's not as though Musk was born with a silver spoon in his mouth -- he made his own chances. "Chance favors the prepared mind" -- Louis Pasteur.
I think Musk's real advantage is being able to get very smart people to work with him. The money comes as a result of that. Even as a child he saw this... knowing that he had to get to the US because it attracted the smartest. Launching a rocket into orbit with a company of 150 people is an incredible feat. You don't do that by just getting a lot of funding. Many companies could spend billions and not do that. You have to have this ability to get brilliant people to work together.
It's also something I noticed with Steve Jobs. For all his flaws, he was able to get very smart people to work for him.