Writing
30 Oct 2020
Part of my reasoning for going to grad school is that it would give me the opportunity to work on my skills in an environment where there are outside constraints. In a work environment the main goal is to deliver value to the company. Sometimes incentives between the individual are aligned so you learn how to be a better scientist, communicator, or clear thinker. More often I found, even in a research role, the need to deliver immediate value forces you to look beyond your personal development. One of the things that I am interested in improving is communication. I would like to become a better oral and written communicator. As part of my goal to improve my written communication, I am aiming to start writing about my experiences, thoughts, and impressions of media.
I’m TAing a course this semester, I have now experienced first hand that to be confident in conceptual understanding you need to be able to explain it to someone. I’ve read multiple sources arguing that writing is a way of clearing up your own thinking as well. Writing seems to me like a more formal constrained way to communicate your ideas. This means that the delivery needs to be more structured and your word choice can be more precise. I can view writing as a way of prodding my ideas and forcing them into more definitive shape. This requires my conclusions to be more crisp and accurate. It means that in theory the would be able to generalize learnings to new areas more efficiently.
I’ve previously thought about how an individual can have the best brightest idea, but if they are unable to communicate it, it’s worthless. I wonder how much information, and insight is lost to humanity because people are unable to communicate their thoughts to society. Imagine everyone had a lossless, succinct way of delivering their ideas to society. Language feels like a very lossy technology to express oneself. How many times has it happened just to me when the meaning of the message gets lost through text?
Ignaz Semmelweis was the first person to suggest that washing hands prior to surgery can increase patient survival due to avoiding bacterial infection. This technology is revolutionary since it allows mortality decrease of patients from all surgeries, most importantly child birth. Infamously however, this technology took an incredibly long time to spread and be acknowledged by the scientific community. This is a tragedy since for every year that this practice was not accepted and known in the scientific circles, the price was human lives. In part the reason why this finding took so long to circulate is because Semmelweis was a poor communicator. He refused to publish his findings and was combative with the rest of the medical community. This is a tragic example of devaluing communication as an key instrument in the scientific toolbox. In this case it has cost lives of many people. While I don’t think in most cases the outcome would be as horrendous as Ignaz Semmelweis’, boring talks and dry publications deter progress.
This writing experiment is mostly aimed at myself. I want to become a better communicator and as part of that I’d like to keep myself accountable by having these notes be part of the public domain. It will also be an interesting experience to reflect on changes of my writing through time.
← Philip Fradkin