On writing well, and why we often overestimate our abilities
Last week was focused on diving deeper on the topics related to learning. A few stories that I stumbled on:
I was happy and relieved to come across this piece by Arianna Huffington that describes her frustration with the widespread misuse of apostrophes. I get equally frustrated when I see some of the wrongful uses. While grammar evolves with each generation, which attempts to simplify archaic rules further, there are few things where simplifications cause more confusion than intended. Apostrophes fall in that category, and it’s worth to be mindful of the Dos and Don’ts (and not Do’s and Dont’s). Sticking on the topic of grammar and good writing, the most interesting thing that caught my eye on the whole Trump-Ukraine saga was this piece on how well the whistleblower’s report was written! See for yourself — here is the report itself, and here is a piece that summarises the writing takeaways from it. I am constantly learning how to write well, and there is no end to this journey. But when it’s time to put down the thoughts on paper, the act forces a clarity of thought that for me, and I assume for most, is otherwise ephemeral.
Finally, got to read this paper that has long been waiting on my desk. Titled, ‘Unskilled and Unaware’, it explains through empirical studies that people tend to overestimate their skills in many social and intellectual domains (tests were conducted in humour, grammar, and logical reasoning). A key explanation behind this overestimation is that of ‘dual burden’, i.e. not knowing the domain well enough, and then this incompetence further limits the ability to realise errors. The authors conclude ‘the same knowledge that underlies the ability to produce correct judgement is also the knowledge that underlies the ability to recognise correct judgement. To lack the former is to be deficient in the latter’. Sounds obvious, right? But not so when you bring this observation to the real world. Simply put: if I know I am good in doing maths, I will continue to hold that belief, for what’s the reason for me to improve on that skill when I know that I am good at it. However, in fields where external benchmarks and competition exists, there exist a frame of reference to test one’s abilities. For instance, if I think I am doing something worthy (for example, playing piano, or writing this newsletter), and if I don’t get an audience for that, then I should deduct that most likely something is wrong in the output that I am producing. The good thing is that — and this is not what this paper actively concludes — getting an external opinion or introducing some benchmarks should correct such overestimations. For instance, I imagine it would be tremendously hard for anyone to believe that she is good in chess — for chess is a two player game (the other side could be a computer) — and the reference (whether you’re winning) is always available. Takeaways from the paper for me were as follows: first, to be aware that I may be overestimating my capabilities, and second, to get a reliable feedback loop going. That’s why the role of a mentor in any field of learning cannot be discounted.
Have you discovered Gates Notes yet? If not, perhaps a good time to start? I discovered these notes when searching for a good review of a book that I have been meaning to read: Educated (from Gates’ review: ‘It’s the kind of book that I think everyone will enjoy, no matter what genre you usually pick up’) I don’t know why I ignored Gates’ writing/recommendations for so long. Anyhow, I am on it finally. In brief, if you are searching for detailed book summaries, and a thoughtful commentary on them, then this should be one of your go-to sources.
A quote I came across last week:
‘Learning to write matters because some day they may have something to say that really matters to them and possibly to the world — and they will want to convey it when the moment arrives in writing that’s clear and concise’
- Jane Rosenzweig
