Re:When pop history bombs: a response to Malcolm Gladwell
by tptacek on Wednesday June 16, 2021 @07:19PM
(#27534599)
I guess I just wonder which is worse, misspelling "eigenvalue" in such a way that it's clear that the author is piping their source directly to the page, or spelling it correctly without understanding it, so we have to wonder how much of the mathematical validity of the source the author is vouching for.
Since I don't expect an ordinary writer to have a lot of linear algebra, it doesn't bother me much to know that they're taking their source's word for it on this stuff. But I do worry a lot about the ability for slick-talking people to persuasively name drop concepts they don't really grok.
Re:When pop history bombs: a response to Malcolm Gladwell
by kevinmchugh on Thursday June 17, 2021 @08:30AM
(#27538865)
The context that gets forgotten when people bring this up is that the essay initially appeared in the New Yorker in 2002, where "eigenvalue" was spelled correctly. All the controversy about whether he understands incidental math seems to come from his book publisher having a less careful copy editor than the New Yorker.
Maybe people could blame him for allowing the error to appear in the book, 7 years after it had been corrected in the magazine. Shrug.
When I talk to a friend and I'm unsure about something I'm about to say, I try to express my epistemic deficiency (e.g. "if I remember correctly ..."). But when I'm giving a presentation to even 5 people I'll make sure to do a quick google search to confirm if I remember correctly. If I was writing an article that I know will be read by thousands, you bet I would do a lot more.