5 ms·

For an example of this, ask yourself: What is the world population? The longer it has been since you checked, the further off the number will be. https://www.

For an example of this, ask yourself: What is the world population? The longer it has been since you checked, the further off the number will be. https://www.google.com/search?q=world+population https://www.google.com/search?q=world+population

jimbokun 12y ago
My kids recently caught me claiming the world population is 6 billion people. Having learned the number more recently, they had the more accurate value.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
argumentum 12y ago
Unless you've checked the number enough to have realized a pattern (in this case a growth rate).
- marcosdumay 12y ago
  People don't grasp exponential growth[1]. That pattern will be useful for a very short time, and then you are wrong again. And then, when you finally accept that you don't grasp it and start calculating with a formal growth rate, the growth rate suddenly changes. [1] Nobody does. Some people know they don't, some are completely naive, the others lie to themselves. The first group have a chance of dealing correctly with it.
  - palimpsests 12y ago
    wait, did you just cite yourself?
    - drdeca 12y ago
      I think that's just meant to be a footnote.
  - Houshalter 12y ago
    Population growth isn't exponential. The rate of population growth has been steadily declining since the 1960's, and I believe the world population is expected to level out around 9 billion people in a few decades.
shliachtx 12y ago
While you make a good point (that one always needs to ensure the facts they know/take for granted are correct and haven't changed), it doesn't seem that is what he is referring to. The need to reread and reconsider books, ideas, etc. is not to check if the facts have changed, but to make sure you didn't miss a point because of lack of knowledge or bias. For example (on a very basic level), I find that if I reread a book on a programming language after using it for some time I notice things which I missed on a previous reading or wasn't able to appreciate due to lack of familiarity with the language. The same can apply to history - or any other study - where one only appreciates certain details after understanding the larger picture and surrounding events. For this reason there lies an advantage in both rereading the same book (immediately or after some time) by itself and reading after studying more on the topic from other sources.

jimbokun 12y ago

My kids recently caught me claiming the world population is 6 billion people. Having learned the number more recently, they had the more accurate value.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

argumentum 12y ago

Unless you've checked the number enough to have realized a pattern (in this case a growth rate).

marcosdumay 12y ago
People don't grasp exponential growth[1]. That pattern will be useful for a very short time, and then you are wrong again. And then, when you finally accept that you don't grasp it and start calculating with a formal growth rate, the growth rate suddenly changes. [1] Nobody does. Some people know they don't, some are completely naive, the others lie to themselves. The first group have a chance of dealing correctly with it.
- palimpsests 12y ago
  wait, did you just cite yourself?
  - drdeca 12y ago
    I think that's just meant to be a footnote.
- Houshalter 12y ago
  Population growth isn't exponential. The rate of population growth has been steadily declining since the 1960's, and I believe the world population is expected to level out around 9 billion people in a few decades.

shliachtx 12y ago

While you make a good point (that one always needs to ensure the facts they know/take for granted are correct and haven't changed), it doesn't seem that is what he is referring to. The need to reread and reconsider books, ideas, etc. is not to check if the facts have changed, but to make sure you didn't miss a point because of lack of knowledge or bias. For example (on a very basic level), I find that if I reread a book on a programming language after using it for some time I notice things which I missed on a previous reading or wasn't able to appreciate due to lack of familiarity with the language. The same can apply to history - or any other study - where one only appreciates certain details after understanding the larger picture and surrounding events. For this reason there lies an advantage in both rereading the same book (immediately or after some time) by itself and reading after studying more on the topic from other sources.