Emotional Status: Self-Doubt, Epistemic-humility[1]
I find myself abandoning multiple written projects due to this idea: I am writing something someone has already done a better job than me at.
The Conditional: If I write something I've already encountered AND I may know less than that person, then I am cluttering the EA space, and possibly redirecting traffic from more intelligent, well-read individuals.
The Question: Thoughts?
On the other hand, I acknowledge that I might have some novel ideas and something to add.
Is it just me, or do others also feel that sense of overwhelm when encountering wonderfully thought-out posts by @Scott Alexander and others?
Sometimes, I read his works, or others on the EA forum or LessWrong, and I realize how small my knowledge map is.
Any advice, consolation, or arguments would be greatly appreciated. I'm attempting to overcome this subtle perfectionism and become more active on the forum.
- ^
I figured I'd throw in this "emotional status" instead of epistemic status disclaimer as a means to demonstrate the emotions that are influencing this since there aren't any fact claims going on.
Also, I recognize that epistemic humility is a good thing, but today I am far more epistemically humble than others due to multiple encounters with my hidden assumptions this week.
This is how I felt when I first tried to write for the EA forum. In order to know what kind of text is needed, and what would be new in the topic you are writing about, you kind of need to know everything that was already written and what sort of stuff would influence decision-makers. It’s impossible to know all that for someone new to the space. This is why I think it’s useful for senior people to suggest very concrete topics to junior researchers and then to guide them. And especially for the first few articles, the more specific the topic, the better. I think this article has more advice like that.
Hi @saulius,
That's an interesting take. I've thought about that before whenever I've been exposed to a lot of new information and felt information overload.
Some part of me has wondered "do we really need hundreds of ways to explain a single quote/book/concept" but as @MichaelStJules said above, "Having alternative write ups that are more accessible/attractive to some people, because people have different preferences over writing structure, styles, lengths, etc." so I've changed my mind a bit about this.
I wonder if part of that thinking is due to a so... (read more)