[Read] ➯ Wrong By David H. Freedman – Horse-zine.co.uk

Wrong chapter 1 Wrong , meaning Wrong , genre Wrong , book cover Wrong , flies Wrong , Wrong bf70f77605cb7 Our Investments Are Devastated, Obesity Is Epidemic, Test Scores Are In Decline, Blue Chip Companies Circle The Drain, And Popular Medications Turn Out To Be Ineffective And Even Dangerous What Happened Didn T We Listen To The Scientists, Economists And Other Experts Who Promised Us That If We Followed Their Advice All Would Be Well Actually, Those Experts Are A Big Reason We Re In This Mess And, According To Acclaimed Business And Science Writer David H Freedman, Such Expert Counsel Usually Turns Out To Be Wrong Often Wildly So Wrong Reveals The Dangerously Distorted Ways Experts Come Up With Their Advice, And Why The Most Heavily Flawed Conclusions End Up Getting The Most Attention All The So In The Online Era But There S Hope Wrong Spells Out The Means By Which Every Individual And Organization Can Do A Better Job Of Unearthing The Crucial Bits Of Right Within A Vast Avalanche Of Misleading Pronouncements

10 thoughts on “Wrong

  1. says:

    I gave this title three stars because, in my opinion, it fulfilled only half of its promise Why experts keep failing us and how to know when not to trust them It did a great job explaining why experts keep failing us, but when it comes to figuring out when not to trust themwell, the author doesn t have a clue either The bottom line is, the odds of the experts being right are about the same as winning a crap shoot.This book is worth reading to the extent that most people actually believe that the experts are right most of the time I once had a blog argument with a dreamer who chided me for daring to suggest that scientists taking government grant money would be bias toward the government s preconcieved conclusions Silly me Turns out, this happens a lot than you think, according to Freedman s research After two weeks of reading, however, I m still pretty much on my own when it comes to figuring out what to believe and what not to believe failed, yet again, by another expert claiming to know the answer

  2. says:

    The title and chapter length subtitle are enough to give you an idea of what this book is about It s a treatise on how so called experts can disagree with one another and give out advise that is less than advisable David H Freedman trots out examples of fraud, laziness, greed, pride, funding, poor research, and hasty conclusions to support his point One is encouraged to be highly suspicious of research papers, television pundits and online reviews alike.I had mixed feelings while reading this Learning to view expert opinion with suspicion is one of the basic lessons of critical thinking and skepticism, and these are lessons I m already abundantly aware of So, on one hand, what s the point The entire time I was wondering what exactly Freedman proposed to fix these issues On the other hand, for people who aren t aware that expert advise should be suspect, this could be a helpful primer Even in that case, however, this book might be misleading and leave someone paralyzed to a point where they don t know who or what to listen to In the hands of a science denier, the book could simply serve as out of context fuel to dismiss genuine evidence and expertise, and try to establish equivalency between all viewpoints.I kept waiting for Freedman to address the obvious point the only reason he could say that these experts were wrong is because other experts scientists came along and demonstrated exactly that While he never fully addresses that point, Freedman does eventually give some advice about warning signs to watch out for, as well as the hallmarks of good advice.The best thing I can say about this book is that it goes quickly Since the concepts are broad and the details of the examples aren t particularly important, one can breeze through this in a few days at least, I did Freedman might have re ordered things to place the examples in context before he gives them, and not toward the end as he does He could have easily had at least one appendix removed, as there are four of them One is a list of contradictory quotes from various experts on specific issues Another gives his personal recounting of the history of expertise, which is a brief history of human invention and the scientific method which might be helpful to someone who is not familiar with the history of science I d sooner recommend Bill Bryson s A Short History of Nearly Everything, or James Burke s Connections, or the Neil de Grasse Tyson Cosmos series The third is a collection of scientific fraud The fourth appendix is an unnecessarily long winded and self indulgent answer to the flippant question, Well what if THIS book is wrong I ll end with my favorite paragraph from the book, which I wish was indicative of the work as a whole and should have come much sooner than half way I truly don t mean to convince people that they should hold science in low regard, particularly compared to other types of expertise I think scientists ARE our most trustworthy experts, and the basic methods of science are exactly the right way to approach the problems and mysteries that face us in the world In short, when it comes to experts, scientists ought to be seen as perching at the top of the heap But that doesn t mean we shouldn t have a good understanding of how modest a compliment it may be to say so Hear, hear.

  3. says:

    , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 50% 1000 , 25% , , , , , , , .

  4. says:

    I picked up Wrong Why Experts Keep Failing Us and How to Know When not to Trust Them by David Freedman on a whim The book really offered very little that was new or particularly enlightening it was useful as a reminder of how even well meaning and well constructed research can go wrong as well the realities of publishing and the ways in which the need for new and compelling materials magnifies the problem All of this is interesting but not interesting enough to fill an entire book, a book that basically tells the reader to trust his or her own common sense and approach expert information with a healthy dose of skepticism.The simple truth is that we are all overwhelmed with too much information and too much media all competing to win our attention and loyalty We want simple answers and are too willing to accept them simply because it makes life easier and less frightening I think this book is appealing to that all too human desire to know how to know who you should believe and how to discern the difference, but of course any simple answer to that question would probably be wrong

  5. says:

    This book is an all out assault on authoritarianism It encourages you to evaluate alternative sources for persepective in life, even to conduct your own research experiments This books get right at the HEART of what motivates todays scientists business analysts Reading this you will see just how far from exact the scientific method can be You will se why you can be told conflicting things about the same foods You will learn the MANY ways in which scientist can alter data and misinterpret findings as well as their motivation for doing so This book was reccomended to me by a guy who taught PHYSICS classes at MIT at the age of 16 Genius material for sure One of the best books i have ever read The people who criticize this book likely do so because the author is unable to give them concrete answers on how to obtain the truth this is why they read the book This is because everyones path for finding it can be different He gives you the tools you need and what to look out for Knowing who to NOT to trust is simply of a pressing problem than finding one of the few truth tellers in our day and age.

  6. says:

    Disappointing, not because it s a bad book, but because I have always had faith in Science than is apparently justified Freedman makes a strong case for why even meticulous science is frequently dead wrong, never mind all the management fads and junk science that clutter up the media.Freedman doesn t have a solution for the problem, just an approach for living with it The best defense against experts turns out to be common sense and critical thinking skills, and a little healthy skepticism can go a long way.

  7. says:

    I like this book because it sums up my position on many of the science findings that come out regularly in the media be skeptical Be very, very skeptical That said, I found the book suffered from some flaws, such as using dubious studies to back up points that the author wanted to make, although he did mention that it s highly probable that his entire book could be flawed due to that very type of thing Definitely worth a read if you re not used to thinking critically, or if you d like some pointers in that direction.

  8. says:

    There is so much information in this book that make you really start to think about what experts say I have always been leery about the information I receive from doctors and other professionals Like so many things in life, there is never a clear cut answer It all depends on interpretation I liked having my thoughts reinforced with David s book.

  9. says:

    I read this book only because a neighbor thrust it upon me She s a tea party fan so I was immediately suspect about the book But I tried to be fair minded as I read skimmed flipped The best I can say is that this book might be useful to someone who believes headlines he she sees in the grocery store line tabloids I mean Or even those who believe that the latest scientific finding about xyz is the final word on xyz The author says too often that scientists deliberately mislead the public by publishing findings that are later disproved I object Science is never settled completely and many ideas are found to be off the mark by scientists who do further research It s very true that many findings are overhyped, especially with the rise of the internet and social media where everyone has a say, or a thousand says But I refuse to believe that most scientists are out of fool us So I read the damn book and now I have to find a tactful way to return it to tea party neighbor and say neutral things about it I m not looking for a fight

  10. says:

    My oldest son, Will, was born a month early surprise , and though small, was judged healthy enough to come home after only two days in the hospital A few days later, he turned blue in my arms twice prompting a frantic 9 1 1 call and rush back to the hospital It was a scary, emotional, and disorienting time He outgrew the issue, a result of his prematurity, and is healthy today, but what I remember as some of the most frustrating moments during our additional time in the hospital, were doctors rounds when we were presented with a myriad of divergent medical opinions We saw no less than eight physicians during that week and it seemed that every single one had a different approach to Will s care This one wanted one certain test that one thought these other two tests would provide better information The third suggested one sleeping arrangement while the fourth expressed her opinion that that was completely unnecessary Another one convinced us that his recommendation of a particular medication was best, only to have a different physician dismiss that idea as ineffective As brand new, sleep deprived, and frankly terrified parents, it was maddening to us that all these experts not only weren t on the same page, but actively contradicted each other If they, with all their medical training and knowledge, couldn t come to a consensus on the best course of treatment, how on earth were we, with little medical experience, supposed to make intelligent, informed decisions for our son In Wrong Why Experts Keep Failing Us and How to Know When Not to Trust Them, Mr Freedman discusses this phenomenon, along with many similar situations in which experts in many different fields find themselves To open the book with a bang, Mr Freedman interviews Dr John Ioannidis, a physician whose specialty is calculating the chances that studies results are false Dr Ioannidis reveals that most medical treatment simply isn t backed up by good, quantitative evidence, and that even when a study is published in a reputable, peer reviewed journal, often it is only a matter of months, and at most a few years, before other studies come out to either fully refute the findings or declare that the results were exaggerated In fact, he states, even in the top echelons of published medical research, results that held up were outweighed two to one by results destined to be labeled never mind That s not particularly reassuring, but it certainly provides some insights into why those eight pediatricians we dealt with in the hospital weren t all singing the same tune.So why are experts and Mr Freedman defines an expert as someone whom the mass media might quote as a credible authority of some topic as well as, for example, scientists and others who gain some public recognition for their experience and insight so often wrong Well, there are an impressive number of reasons, so many that by the end of the book you may be surprised that experts ever get anything right than that they are so often wrong Setting aside egregious faults like the deliberate falsification of data, it turns out that experts are just as susceptible to human errors as the rest of us, such as lacking good data or ignoring data that doesn t fit pre conceived notions , using indirect or surrogate measurements that don t really measure what you want to measure but are, for whatever reason, easier or accessible , or trying to force simple answers onto complex questions like homing in on one or two factors as the key for reducing obesity.Mr Freedman also confronts the myth that teamwork and collaboration are effective ways to battle individual error While I could certainly point to some anecdotal evidence of that from my college days and working life, it was affirming to read that crowds, far from being reliably wise, turn out to be at least as good at discouraging and suppressing the production and dissemination of excellent work as highlighting it, and tend to bring some of the worst work to the top Group settings actually present additional opportunities for error including social loafing in which people in groups don t work as hard as people working alone and groupthink where there is pressure to conform to the majority opinion.Finally, Mr Freedman closes with a few suggestions regarding how we as laypeople or non experts can judge wisely among all the expert advice with which we are bombarded on a daily basis After listing typical characteristics of less trustworthy expert advice and characteristics that should be ignored, he provides traits of trustworthy expert advice, including It s heavy on qualifying statements It s candid about refutational or conflicting evidence It provides some context for the research It provides perspectiveWith an appropriate level of wariness with regard to any expert pronouncement, and a bit education about just what expert advice entails, which Mr Freedman provides here, we can be better prepared to judge which advice to follow and which to ignore amongst the cacophony of opinions, viewpoints, and theories For book reviews, come visit my blog, Build Enough Bookshelves.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *