A lot of words about a little knowledge

If you see your manager reading this, run.

One of the most famous quotes in the English language is the admonition from Pope’s Essay on Criticism:

A little learning is a dangerous thing;
drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
and drinking largely sobers us again.

It’s important to note that Pope is a lot more subtle in his language than is obvious at a glance. Pope does not say that a little knowledge is a bad thing, but that it is dangerous and intoxicating, and I think that’s exactly correct. When you start learning a new subject you have no sense of how much you don’t know and that can give you a false sense of security and lead to missteps. More learning gives you an idea of how huge the gaps in your knowledge are, and that’s an excellent antidote to unwarranted self confidence.

I think ‘a little learning’ is perfectly fine as long as you keep a humble attitude, and don’t pretend to be a world expert on things you’ve just learned. Real experts are incredibly friendly and willing to teach you if you show enthusiasm and ask questions humbly. On the flipside, watching someone who habitually pretends to be a guru make a complete ass of themselves when in a meeting with a actual experts is incredibly satisfying- and it’s even funnier if the wannabe guru walks out of the meeting without realizing the impression they just made.

Guilty of what?

Just a quick post, but came across this from twitter.

A short summary: brachial plexus injury (wikipedia) is an injury to a bundle of nerves connecting the spinal cord with the shoulder and arms. In newborn children, this can be caused by gynecologists exerting too much force on the newborn baby. Lawyers have made a lot of money from suing doctors whenever there’s been a case of an infant with such an injury. Recently, a doctor published a paper claiming that a newborn child had a case of brachial plexus injury in the absence of the gynecologist exerting excessive force. Of course, this article is potentially very dangerous to lawyers who have insisted that the only possible cause of brachial plexus injury was malpractice on behalf of the physician, and who stand to lose a huge amount of money from lawsuits.

Lawyers didn’t wait long to fire back:

A Boston lawyer who claims to have debunked the Lerner-Salamon case study has proceeded to sue its two authors, Elsevier — which publishes AJOG and many other medical and scientific journals — and Dr. Salamon’s clinic for publishing and refusing to retract it. The damages are said to be $3 million each to two families of infant plaintiffs whose lawsuits did not succeed allegedly because of the case report.

Now – I have no particular clinical expertise, and I am not able to critically evaluate the scientific merits of the scientific article, but if there is a flaw in the article, the proper place to contest it is by presenting scientific evidence, or by finding flaws in the original study. What arguments do the lawyers offer for removing the article?

First, we know from every piece of credible medical research that the mothers maternal pushing forces are not strong enough to cause a permanent brachial plexus injury. Second, and more important, the article is fraud. In fact, for reasons I would be pleased to expand upon, I have evidence that in fact at the delivery that was the subject of the article there was a shoulder dystocia and traction was applied by the doctor.

If the lawyer has compelling reasons that the article is indeed fraud, he should come forward, but so far, he’s tried making his case to the journal editors without any success, making me incredibly skeptical that he has anything as damning as he claims.

Der Spiegel interviews Donald Rumsfield

Der Spiegel interviews Donald Rumsfield

Der Spiegel, one of the best periodicals in Europe, interviews Donald Rumsfield and puts a surprising amount of resistance to his non-answers:

 

SPIEGEL: If you go into a country like Iraq and change a regime to democratize the region, is it not your duty to assist in the rebuilding of the nation?

Rumsfeld: We can certainly help, but the purpose of the war in Iraq was regime change, not nation building. I worried about the word “democracy.” Elections don’t make a democracy. Adolf Hitler was initially elected. More recently, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt was democratically elected. Neither resulted in democracies.

SPIEGEL:You seem to have a selective memory. The biggest problem was not which word was used, but that the Iraq war was started under false premises. And this is clearly the reason why Obama is having trouble gaining support for a military strike in Syria at the moment.

Rumsfeld: You can state and restate your opinions, but our current president cannot blame the Bush administration for every unfavorable situation that exists. Every president when he is elected has to live with the pluses and minuses his predecessor leaves, which includes benefits as well as burdens.

SPIEGEL:And what exactly are the advantages that Obama has as a successor to George W. Bush?

 

Perhaps my standards are low because I’m used to reading Italian newspapers, but I wish journalists made a habit of pushing back and actually challenging what they are being told more frequently.