The Trinity of Quality
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 чер 2022
- The first 200 people to brilliant.org/MinutePhysics/ get 20% off an annual Premium subscription to Brilliant. MinutePhysics is on Patreon: / minutephysics
In order to make something good, you need to have the right combination of three things: Quality, Discernment and Taste. This video is about quality vs quantity, the paradox of quality, how to make good content and good videos, etc. Based on my experience over the last decade running a collaborative creative business, MinuteEarth, where we do regular internal reflection and training on the craft of science communication.
Support MinutePhysics on Patreon! / minutephysics
Link to Patreon Supporters: www.minutephysics.com/supporters/
MinutePhysics is on twitter - @minutephysics
And facebook - / minutephysics
Minute Physics provides an energetic and entertaining view of old and new problems in physics -- all in a minute!
Created by Henry Reich - Наука та технологія
ahh, good ol' minutephysics. Neither a minute, nor physics, but as long as the quality is high, I'll continue watching ;)
There is a minute amount of physics
you shown me another perspective that why brand with false claims still succeed, maybe because claims are all about our how we want and given quality is sometimes how we need things.
@@NoahLoveladyAllen You win
@@mifiwi3438 oh yeah absolutely
But is the quality actually high or is your discernment just off?
I'll lean towards the former 😉
The fact that you explain and represent completely hypothetical feelings on a line graph is very telling that you're a scientist. Which is awesome, and I would do the same.
Nitpick note: The Fad of not ending a sentence with a preposition came from academia that studied latin extensively. That rule works with latin, not so well with english. So when speaking english be fine with where the preposition is at.
Likewise splitting an infinitive is only considered "wrong" because it's literally impossible in Latin and some linguist thought that English should be as much like Latin as possible.
@@tparadox88 Might be apocrypha, what I heard is that Latin and English were taught together, and I infer that the nuance about what part applied to which language became indiscernible over time.
So _that's_ where it comes from, where the rule was found in. How it became an idea people could get behind, so now it's something we've all heard of, even if we don't know what it's there for. That we have to live under, and deal with. That, frankly, we could all do without, because it's annoying to run up against, and to work around.
(Were there any I missed out on? Here's where to post below.)
@@nathanrcoe1132 Nope - it was this guy:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Lowth
@@ps.2 you could have started a sentence with a conjunction. But doing that would have been slightly off subject.
One important additional factor is whether you know what you need to arrive at your desired tastes and whether you have the time and resources to achive it.
Everyone on the project can know exactly where it is right now, and know exactly what they want the final thing to look like, but the team may be lacking the time, experience or resources to get there and compromises need to be made.
Personally I try to identify my own limits early on to know if and where I need to dial down my ambitions. I used to be a perfectionist, and honestly still kinda am, but that used to be a pretty big hinderance to get anything done.
I still have very high standards for myself but I also know my limits to which I can achive them, and I try to get as close as I can within my limits.
This is a very important point that should've been discussed. I'm a web designer and most of my clients would call themselves perfectionist. I hate to hear that. Aiming for the highest peak everytime is counterproductive. We need to settle for good enough to get things out into the world but also once in a while create something above your average.
People also often have the misconception that in order for one to know "good quality" they themselves must have the skills to create it themselves. One critiques a drawing and someone else argues, "I bet you can't do any better!" That's a fallacy. I can't make movies, but that doesn't mean I can't form the opinion that The Dark Knight is a better superhero movie than Green Lantern or Morbius. Likewise, just because I can't perform surgery doesn't mean I can't criticize a doctor for operating on the wrong leg. But the "taste" aspect is especially important in movies. It's why it's difficult to compare a movie like Office Space to a movie like A Few Good Men. Both are considered by many to be great movies in their own right, but because they achieve the different goals in taste. I might bomb as a standup comedian, but I'll still enjoy a night out at a comedy club.
As an engineer, we both have to be perfectionist (you want a complete design after all) and actually get things done in reasonable timeframes (you want a design at all). The way we do this is:
1. Experience in schedule setting (the more experience you have the more realistic if a schedule you can create and plan out time)
2. Push all eggs along together. (If you try and make 1 aspect perfect it will break everything else and get broken when you move on to the next aspect)
3. Iteration, make everything kinda bad/shoddily and on successive passes make it better. (In writing a common piece of advice is you can't edit a blank page, same concept)
5. All else fails just publish an addendum to fix mistakes. (Time crunchs always lead to addendums)
Engineering designs have a couple quality measures, the firs being the objective code compliance and cost, but also the clarity of the drawings and general "elegance" as more subjective measures.
I work as a quality engineer and with little tweaking on terms this is my daily fight. Thank you for helping me gain perspective on working in my field and how to talk to others I work with that aren't. Good luck with the little one and new channel!
My Discernment for good wine is based on a scale of 1 to 1... "ah yes, this is wine"
"This is one of the wines ever"
Fascinating. Mine is as well: "Oh no, this is alcohol." :D
@@QemeH "ouchie it burns =["
Joke's on you- it was actually cat piss all along
Haaahaha that’s funny. Keep tasting if that’s something which interests you and you’ll get to two.
In science and engineering we often separate discernment into accuracy (how close the average "measurement" is to the true value) and precision (how repeatable is your "measurement"). This is often equated to shooting arrows at a target. After you take several shots, accuracy is how close the center of your grouping is to bullseye, precision is how small your grouping is. Both of these affect quality in different ways.
For the record, not ending English sentences with propositions is a 19th-century rule made up by people who wanted to impose Latin on English. It's totally baseless. Research it please. You can find oodles of debunking. It may be the number one popular myth about English grammar. I didn't expect that to show up on a minute video.
Agreed, and this could affect the phenomenon in the video as well.
If you are looking at something and your discernment has low accuracy but high precision, you will consistently over- or undervalue that specific property compared to the truth.
If your discernment has high accuracy but low precision, you are probably correct where the quality of a property is in general, but might have a hard time catching details that detract or add to it.
I'm trying to think of good examples, might get back with another comment.
@@JBergmansson Yes I design testers to measure specific parameters. We want precision and accuracy but the solution to low precision is different from the solution of low accuracy. You can "solve" a low precision, high accuracy problem by taking more measurements and averaging. The math (statistics) for how to do this well established but to long to describe in a comment. "Solving" low accuracy, high precision problem requires some form of calibration. Sometimes this is simple, sometimes it is not. For a shooter, high precision, low accuracy is easy to solve, just adjust your sights to compensate.
@@connecticutaggie I've also studied some engineering, so I know how those terms apply when it comes to real, tangible measurements. Yep, bad precision can be compensated for. As can bad accuracy in some cases, if the change in output is predictable or something which can be modeled.
But it's hard to come up with examples that fit with evaluating art.
@@JBergmansson I think the challenge with applying the concept or accuracy and repeatability to the quality of art is that these terms apply to measurements. For art, there is not instrument that can measure its quality. Art can only be judged by people which I do not believe an measure it objectively.
I think the closest example I can think of regarding measuring art would be the grade in an art class and, just like taking any other measurement, to have any relevance there must be a standard. For measuring distance, we have objective absolutes to measure against. Fortunately, some (hopefully most) art classes have rubrics that allow grades to be (mostly) objective. But, in that case, I guess it works because we are measuring the student and not the art.
My conclusion is that beauty in any form is, as they say, in the eye of the beholder and should be admired and enjoyed but not measured.
You know, this concept of discernment reminds me of some of my autistic tendencies. A lot of people get upset at me because I will often abstain from giving input when asked because I know I don't have a view or adequate knowledge on something. For example someone asked me if a particular song was good, and after listening to it I told them I couldn't give them an opinion on it because it's not my taste of music. Maybe there's a skill of discernment of discernment, i.e. I know what I don't know.
I think part of that is just this general assumption (at least in the USA / western cultures) than all opinions are somehow equally valid even the uninformed ones. So people rarely are willing to state "i don't know enough to have an opinion on this topic" and bow out of conversation. I could say i don't like a song after hearing it, but if its not my prefered genere then i can't judge its quality because I don't know what good vs bad pop music is because i avoid it and as such have no experience with it. (My discernment it a scale of 0-1, vs my preferred genera having a discernment of 0-100)
That can also be that they mean to ask about your taste (did you enjoy listening to it) but use the terminology of quality instead. They may get upset that you refuse to answer the question you're authoritative about just because they didn't actually ask it. My wife has learned to say "It's not my cup of tea", which implies both a lack of discernment and also that she doesn't like it, without implying that she thinks it's bad at what it's supposed to be.
Is that an autistic tendecy? I have this exact problem as well, where I cant form an opinion on things like aesthetics, or music, or food. But I was never diagnosed with any sorts of autism.
When they ask you if a song is good, they don't want you to inform them of the objective quality of the song, they want to know whether you like it, whether you enjoy it to the point that you'd listen to it again on your own, basically.
@@jasonreed7522 I think part of the problem is that music is extremely low-stakes. If you ask someone about something complicated and/or controversial (e.g. geopolitics, quantum physics, etc.), plenty of people will absolutely say "I don't know enough to have an opinion," although there are also lots of people who will share their uninformed opinion rather than be seen as ignorant. But nobody does this for music, because the quality of a piece of music doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.
I was so happy to see this pop up on Patreon!
The difference between taste and discernment sounds very-much like Dunning-Kruger's main point from their paper (the ability to discern how well you perform requires the same skills as performing well itself, thus it is hard to estimate your own ability). Seems like this breaks down pretty quickly, especially in the fine arts, which is where your focus is here (and I've found the same thing in music, photography, etc). This difference also really sounds like how babies learn languages: spend years listening to discern differences in sound, *then* start to mimic/control those sounds.
Also, your part about ending with prepositions was hilarious to listen to... Reminds me of how much Shakespeare ended with prepositions.
Great comment
I am a Software Quality Engineer. I work with this stuff every single day. What an awsesome breakdown of the field of quality.
For as much as people know nice little sentences about Quality in any given product - f.e. "Quality is noticed only by its absence, almost never by its presence" - or about how subjective, intangible, even immeasurable it's supposed to be (Yes in part it is) there ARE means and ways to quantify it, and things like this trinity can really help people understand where a quality disagreement with a customer might stem from.
To measure the quality of software i can imagine some objective measures like completeness, load/run times, file size, and crash frequency. Some subjective measures like aesthetics, "fun" (for games anyway), intuitiveness and ease if use.
And then some that are both, like bugs.
You can count the number of bugs, but you then need to subjectively weigh how severe each one is, a typo and a crash that somehow wipes the harddrive are definitely not on the same level. So finding, measuring, and appraising bugs to get a quality measurement is definitely a mix of objective and subjective.
Ideally every piece of software would be at the theoretical max of all objective measures and satisfy the creators (owners) subjective measures, but i doubt any complex program would ever get released if it tried. (I'm sure things like the 100line codes we write when learning can actually achieve such a standard, but making a website or 20hr game do it is probably impossible and thats why games release bug fixes for years after launch.)
@@jasonreed7522 Yeah you're covering several metrics that we use to measure quality objectively - however there are aspects to quality that *are* intangible and hard to put into firm words, because we're not used to actually spelling them out.
Example: The Manager of the local coffee shop wants to publish a custom cup for customers as mechndise. She has certain specifications like:
- color: white
- applications: colorful stars
- capable of holding warm liquids
- size: 200 ml (6.7 oz)
So she contacts her supplier with that list... but what she gets is not what she expects...
Her Supplier comes back with a stack of *diapers* - because if you look at it: These also match her requirements. So her supplier has fulfilled her requirements 100% - but neglected to look for the broader context of her request.
I love that you premiered this the same day that I posted my first video, which I finished a week ago but questioned whether it's actually "good enough" by my own standards. I've been wrestling with, "does this meet my standards?" and "are my standards too high?" but something I perhaps neglected is the skill of "discernment" when it comes to my own work!
This is a good way of putting language to something I've had lots of experience with. Thanks!
I've worked with artists who have what I might call overly developed discernment after a while working on a project. By the nature of the job, they delve into the minutia of the work and so know every tiny flaw that exists.
Most artists can back up and see their work from a distance but a few get hung up on these and never want to release it. If time were no object, I'd leave them to it but deadlines are a thing.
Oh, so nice! It's basically this conversation:
"I want this product to be good"
"Do you even know what good means?"
When working for others, your work is done when it needs to be done.
When working for yourself, your work is done when it is done.
Interesting observation. I hadn't thought of it like that 😃
So I suppose this means to entail the difference in attainment of "quality" when it comes to deadlines and (collected)taste. Working for companies then, again, is generally less effective for Artwork. Pretty age-old circumstance
@@dddmemaybe yeah, exactly
Taste can't be 100% ever...
It tends towards a 100%, as there is always a room for improvement!
Just like Henry & MinutePhysics, which is excellent!! And keeps getting better everyday!!
I think you meant Quality can't be 100%. Taste is what we aim for and can be perfection.
Plus, 100% is not "perfection" anyway. So even quality can be 100%. That's the whole point of the third element of the trinity: discernment. What is 100%? It's something between 995‰ and 1000‰. What is 1000‰? It's more than 999,500 per million. The closer you are to perfection the higher your discernment needs to be to realize you haven't reached it.
@@Trucmuch agreed, but I also meant that taste keeps growing and getting better with time... Like Henry's videos seemed perfect few years back, but they keep getting better with the next video!
Like we humans evolve, out taste keeps getting better, and so does the quality of a content creator improving with each iteration of what they create and keeps producing better content with time from past learning!! 😇
What I think you mean is that the longer you spend on something, the higher your discernment. It's still theoretically possible to have 100% quality (And taste, not sure why you said taste, it's very easy to have 100% taste) but realistically, we hit our goal as near as our discernment can tell and are happy. The problem is that reaching taste can take increasingly longer times for increasingly smaller returns, and the more you work on it, the more you begin to differentiate on factors that are irrelevant for almost all consumers who discernment HASN'T been hyperfocused for so long.
Basically your product is a 7, your target is a 9, so you work on it some more and suddenly you are at 85/90 and still unhappy because your discernment increased. So you work on it some more and after weeks and weeks of work...you are at an 895/900. And it seems your discernment almost always outpaces your ability to increase quality, especially with very high diminishing returns over time.
Excellent video, Glad to find it under an hour since it uploaded! Always informative and to the point.
So, taste is a bias as well...I've never thought of it that way, and I can't agree more with you, Henry. Very well put !
I won't say taste is a bias, because taste is unquantifiable, contrary to bias.You can say that very often taste leads to bias, but still they are different imo
@@NikozBG ? bias is preferencing one thing over another, taste is the same, no?
@@jonathanodude6660 I searched for a definition on bias, because I could not express my point exactly and I found this in the Cambrigde dictionary: "the fact of allowing personal opinions to influence your judgment in an unfair way". So this definition(that seems closest to the way I intrinsically understand the word) draws a clear distinction between a bias(unfair) and taste(fair).
@@NikozBG Yes, I know what you mean, technically by definition 'bias' and 'taste' are different expressions about completely different things, but in the case where Henry gave with the hot chocolates, taste could be strongly affected/biased if the choice is limited to a certain minimum. Same as different nations consider some type of food as delicacy where others may consider that food repulsive. Taste is not intrinsically universal for each newborn, rather it is formed by the food availability where one grows from young age into adulthood....which in a cense, becomes biased towards certain flavours.
@@valiokeys Still these are different. Me and my sister have almost the same taste in food, but I hate broccoli, she hates onions - that's taste. We both hate wasabi, because it taste foreign to us - this is bias. And that's the last thing I'm gonna say about this, arguing about semantics really is a pointless exercise .
I would love to see a software engineering version of this Trinity. Could be a training video for new management in the SW world (and can't use this version - ppl would get too hung up on the content/video specifics to focus on the messages).
I think the idea is his applies to every field, every kind of project. Even in structural engineering, making a model do "what you need it to do" has a lot of what this video discusses, and each participant is actively updating and improving each of their quality, goal, and discernment metrics as you work through the model and results and identify and solve weak points.
Thanks! I was struggling a lot with this at my last job. It will surely be easier to handle disagreements sending this video to my colleges LOL. I never thought how programmers and UA-camrs can have a lot in common. Thanks again.
Prepositions in English are allowed to be different than Latin, and infinitives in English can be split because English doesn't even have infinitives in the same sense as Latin, but achieves the same meaning with its almost-infinitives. To quote Churchill on trying to make English be like Latin "That is the sort of pedantic nonsense up with which I will not put!"
as a non native i really struggle grasping the meaning of that sentence
@@yessir6427 lol, as Churchill intended! In regular English it would be simply "that sort of pedantic nonsense is not something I will put up with!" Or, even more simply "I'll end a sentence with a preposition if I feel like it."
I thought the triangle diagram was about
- courage to face the challenges in the completing the task,
- power that gives the skills you need, and
- wisdom to be able to judge how well you're reaching the goal
Same
Thank you for the final summary, putting it all together.
This is an excellent way to think about things!! Thank you! I hesitated to post this cuz I didn't want to commandeer the comment section but this is particularly relevant to a majority of controversial political discussion. For example with Roe V. Wade so many people are arguing and don't realize the nuance between what the law is, what they think the law is, and what they think the law should be.
That lack of distinction and nuance is a problem with basically all political debates.
A common argument i hear is "guns have more rights than women" which is laughable if you know how heavily regulated guns are.
I wonderful but unenforceable rule would be that in order for politicians to make claims they must first be actually knowledgeable on a topic, but sadly emotion sells these days not logic.
this trinity is a useful artifice for simplifying and exploring some of the difficulties you outlined. I've felt overwhelmed recently and have tried to be more pragmatic by allowing myself to do a crappy or incomplete job (lowering my target,) but it hadn't occurred to me how bad I was at gauging the quality / progress of my work!
This channel gets a 10/9 on the actual quality scale minimum
ehh i'd say 6/5
20/18
Damn, thanks man, I was just wondering what to write for my physics assignment, I finally found a good research topic with all the work done for me.
"Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference."
Reinhold Niebuhr
The problem is that people admit the fault is in discernment, it means they might be wrong and/or have to do some work of their own. People are psychologically lazy and don't want to interrogate their own beliefs or realise their shortcomings, so they don't.
Each brain does the best it can with the resources its environment provides it. "Laziness" = fewer useful resources in your environment than someone else.
@@thewiseturtle Of course, not passing judgement on biological "laziness", only on intentional ignorance.
@@matthewbooth8487 There is only biology. Unless you're imaging some sort of demonic possession or some other supernatural force changing our behavior non-biologically.
Finally, a video that explains this. So I have something to link to instead of clumsily trying to explain it every time it comes up.
*The explanation of Discernment is really quite thought provoking!*
As someone who works as a Quality Assurance Specialist I support this video. I'd use different phrasing such as changing "perceived quality" to "measurable metrics" and "actual quality" to "achieved goals."
I think this true for no matter what you do, not just creative focused products. Very thoughtfully presented. Thanks
Reminds me of something from a book I read a long time ago called Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.
When this video talked about measuring Quality, my mind went straight to that book. Time to read it again. Last time was the summer of '75.
I enjoyed this video. It was interesting, and it shed some light on a few discussions we had when I played in a band. It is, in my view, a good video. But when I first started watching minutephysics videos, starting with the oldest and then working my way up to the newest, and then subscribed to know when a new video came out, it was because I learned about physics. Tell me more about general relativity, or some quantum mechanical spookiness, or some hydro-chrono-thermo-somethingorother- mechanical thing I don't even know yet. As said, I enjoyed the video. But it feels like it's on the wrong channel.
Still leaving a "Like", because Henry.
If I remember correctly, he's working on a video that's physics but definitely isn't a minute long, hence the lack of other physics videos
Note that this video is very much about physics. It's about the variation of observation due to the different locations in space-time observers. "Discernment" is basically what makes the difference between observing particle-like behavior or a wave-like behavior. If you're looking for the detailed location of something, and I'm looking for the general idea of something, we're going to not "agree" on what we observe, as you might see the particle as being "far from good enough", while I see the wave as being totally "good enough".
I find the most important thing for science channels is integrity and honesty. Without that none of the others matter.
I had never thought about it that way. Thanks for sharing.
I think we can 999/1000 agree that this video is a 10/10. Excellent analysis, and really neatly put!
It sure is a 10/10, now the question is is it a 93/100 a 97/100 or a 100/100.
Based on the title, I assumed this would be about what my project management classes call the "triple constraint" or "iron triangle". I.e. the combined constraints of scope, time, and budget, which together mark the constraints for a project.
Thanks, I really needed this.
Absolutely stunning composition. Thank you.
"Good enough" is that magical place full of unicorns and rainbows, halfway from "That's what I can do" and "That's what I would do"
Great video - also, the two biggest problems with people who are new to a given creative field is realising how bad their early stuff really is (which happens to everybody and is totally fine) but therefore not improving, or not being honest with themselves about whether they're actually serious about improving it. Interesting stuff!
But, if you come back even later, you may realize 'yeah it's not that good, but it's nowhere near as bad as I thought'. in the medium term you develop linearly, in the long term your priorities get sorted out, so a bunch of marginal, junk criteria is filtered out of your idea of 'quality'.
Also why it's important to do a large volume of work - when fixated on one project, there's a tendency to accumulate 'would be nice, doesn't matter though' junk criteria specific to that project.
This is so cool. How does your conclusions apply to situations, where the judgement of quality is ordinal, such as is your work in the top 5, top 100 etc? In that situation quality is defined by an inequality rather than a closed interval.
In part of this you are essentially describing what Kant would call the faculty of judgement. When judging a piece of art you recognize that there is no universal standard on which it can be determined to be beautiful, and yet you feel that there is something within it which partakes in the universal and which everyone should be able to appreciate. This goes beyond personal taste where we recognize things like different tastes in food (enjoyment on a physiological level), to an abstract (and purely psychological if you're a mind body dualist) appreciation of the form of the qualities of a work of art.
Woah! I love this video! I think I've lived by this my whole live and never knew it!
The visuals in this video were excellent in getting the point across, chapped hands notwithstanding :)
On the analogy of the not level painting
I literally have an abstract painting hanging on my wall, slightly tilted off center, because I think it looks better that way
But people keep telling me it’s slanted an try to fix it, sometimes even _after_ informing them that the slant is intentional
So sometimes a person with a different taste might not be “settling” for a lower quality because it’s “good enough” they may be _choosing_ a lower quality in some aspects because doing so raises the overall quality
High quality video about quality.
Nice
Wow, you just expressed and articulated my understanding of aesthetics. These were my collective thoughts over 17 years. Can you do a similar thing with "sphere of knowledge" or rather spongy sphere with the center or core is also being dense or consolidated as the sphere grows with a more porous portion towards the surface?
I struggle with this every single video, It is so hard to know how good your own work is
It's been a long time since I learn something this usefull
Thank you
You threw me for a loop by having the images in the corner of the trinity swap places. At the start of the video, discernment is bottom-left, and target is bottom-right, but you switch them by the end of the video. This (un?)ironically made it hard for me to parse the part of the video where you distinguish between the two things!
Nice. I tend to use the A* algorithm where I make choices and rate each choice on a scale of 1-10. Then make more choices & repeat. If I feel that I am progressing I'll continue to repeat until I am satisfied or backtrack if things are getting worse. But I never really know when I'm done.
as a tradesperson. there are times when functionality and serviceablilty is more important than looks and aesthetics.
and vice versa. it's all in the ability to determine when each is the most applicable to the situation you are in.
which you have pointed alluded to.
The issue with this is very early. The notion of "actual quality" being a thing that can be objectively measured independent of the observer's biases and tastes.
You have to be *very* particular about what you mean when you say "quality"
As in, you don't mean quality as in "how good is it" but quality as in "what qualities does it have that can be objectively measured?"
It is true that you can objectively measured a crowd's reaction to the work, however, what you would be doing there is factoring in the general tastes of the audience and accepting that as your definition of and rubric for objective quality. The issue with this is that you can cheat, and every content creator of every type throughout history has cheated this notion, by _targeting specific audiences_ .
A better approach for that first one is to call it "criteria conformity" or basically, what "qualities" (with an S) does the work have that can be objectively measured and do these qualities line up with the set of criteria necessary to achieve your goal. Basically, you're not trying to tell how "good" it is but rather, what characteristics the work has that you can objectively measure.
"Entertainment value" is a very vague and bad one. Stuff like "watch time" and "engaging the audience with questions" and "use of visual effects" and so forth.
If you don't make this distinction, quality and taste become a bit circular, unless your notion of it is something like "quality is everyone else's preferences and taste is your own preference and discernment is your ability to predict if a work will appeal to someone else's taste" sort of.
But even with something like that, it still feels clearer to think of quality as "criteria conformity" instead as that homes you in on what you are really doing regardless, trying to figure out the characteristics or "stats" your work possesses and then measure that against a set of characteristics or stats that you propose or believe or have deduced will be effective for your goal.
Great work 🥳Thank you 💜
Interesting video - thanks. One niggle: it's implied that discernment is linear.
Take a product assessed by two people: one is colour-blind, other is not.
Both have their own discernment ability, but neither can assess from both perspective.
There may be various colour and texture combinations that are perfect from each perspective, and at least one which is perfect from both. But it seems like discernment can be 'multi-channel'.
More speculatively (for me, anyway), sensory taste may have a genetic element that means two people experience the same taste differently... in which case any one wine connoisseur can have a discernment ability up to 100% based on his own DNA. There may be an achievable taste profile which satisfies connoisseurs of both (or all) relevant genetic differences, or maybe there will be no solution that can be perfect for both/all.
this video made me think about how to choose a partner, actually. the gradients of characteristics i'm looking for, if i know how to perceive them, etc. very helpful.
Discernment is a skill like any other. The way you develop it is good old fashioned practice. If you're a cine buff, watch, analyze shit loads of movies and then make videos with people for fun. You'll be a better -- whatever you are doing. Writer, read assloads, write constantly... etc. It's a visceral skill too so if you can notice your "gut" telling you something, well you've got that down. All you have to do is listen. One sure fire trick to develop good guts is to look at bad work or work that is contrary to your taste and then your own works as well. If you get the cringe however slight, that's your gut asking for mercy. Something is off and now you have to figure out why. Once you have discerned then you can go about solving whatever problem you are discerning. That's a different skill but equally as important to creating quality anything.
For example, in my case, I'm an editor. I'm really good at discerning what pictures are good and how they go together at a pace that feels good while juxtaposing images and ideas to tell a story that keeps people engaged the whole way through story arcs. When my gut says something's off with the editing I have the skills and experience to fix it. However, I'm not hugely practiced on set so if the lighting is off, I can discern that it is but would struggle with how to solve the problem. That's fine if you're not an expert because you can go to someone who is hence the collaborative nature of filmmaking. That's also how I got good at editing, not just by doing it a lot but learning form those who are better than me and asking for advice. Most people will enthusiastically oblige. Even now after 20 years of doing it, if I'm stuck. Ask a colleague, see what they think.
That might have been my favorite MinutePhysics ever.
Well thought out and clearly argued
The taste vs discernment bit is highly relevant in the review/critic world rn
And I came here thinking I was going to get a cool stick figure rendition of "Price, Time, Quality"
Then I realise that "Price, Time, Quality; pick two" is the [Universal Trinity] of which Trinity of Quality is but one segment.
This is incredibly well communicated
This was super cool. I’m a bit ashamed to say that I’ve felt like my interest in this channel has been dwindling over time. But ive been reminded with this video of the quality of content you create. Thanks, and good job.
This is not quality as taught in manufacturing. But is somewhat similar. Quality in manufacturing is a set of standards, developed comprehensively often through market analysis, experiment and expert opinion which deal with a set of desired characteristics related to a specific product. We always measure differences between the target value and actual production values. We ask the question: "How close is the arrow to the bulls eye?". The mathematical basis for the effort in industry is Fisher Information. Subjectivity is not much of an issue. Although personal perception can be a significant handicap, human beings can be trained to make remarkably consistent observations of quantities which are mostly perceived, i.e. color, style, taste, fashion etc. People are taught what it means to see the color red.
Reminds me of the XKCD comic about telling the difference between wines (and has a punchline about photos being viewed for a year in a box)
Is this the stealth announcement of the new minuteproductivity channel? 😆 Even so, loved it anyways. A long as Henry keeps being Henry, it's still going to be great!
Here I am applying this to my work in financial data and math.
My discernment for water is 0 or 1.
1: nice, its watery
0: oh no, its sparkling water.
„Henry, just post these damn minute physics videos! they are already perfect!“
Henry: …
This explains
EVERYTHING!
Another important thing- discernment not only includes knowing the quality of something but also the "taste" or how good you want it to be. If a work is of a certain quality, and you know it's that quality, you can still fail in figuring out if that is enough quality.
The triforce of quality
The triforce of perception
The triforce of objectives
Yes, you miss Zelda
The right way to hang pictures is obviously to be slightly askew, to give the OCD people in your life some sense of control over their environment.
Fantastic video, thank you.
This reminds me about the test where most people think they are above average drivers.
The mainstream reasoning is that people tend to overvalue their and undervalue others abilities.
But I think it's more because people have different tastes about what a good driver is.
Being a good driver has different qualities and people have different tastes about their importance:
- safety
- speed
- smoothness
- fuel efficiency
- wear and tear on the vehicle
-...
f.e. Someone that puts high importance on safety, could be considered a bad driver by someone that puts high importance on speed.
There's some interesting work on this in the higher education literature. The general question there is how assessment and feedback can help learners to develop their evaluative capacities and become better judges of their own work and the work of others. Boud et al. (2018) provides a nice overview of the current state of this field. I think a lot of it echoes what you've argued here, but in the context of learning, where feedback plays a crucial role in helping fine-tune our sense of quality.
I'm picturing some behind-the-scenes conflict over these issues and you decided to give 'em all what for.
I'm right, ain't I?
actual eye opener!
I've actually thought about all these in completely unrelated things to videos and i somehow thought i was alone in thinking about them. It is overthinking at it's best which makes it, not over-thinking i guess
Hey just wanted to share a possible video idea(?):
Say you had a special paint, that changes color at an even pace with the passing of time, say from blue to red. Then you paint a giant flat disk with the paint, and start spinning the disk extremely fast.
Due to the theory of relativity, wouldn't you eventually see a color gradient with blue towards the outside of the disk, and red at the center?
Discernment is Actually the #1 Principle in all of Life Holmes ,,,,,,,,,,, great channel
worth noting: the creative cycle generally involves alternating periods of developing discernment and developing actual skill. so it can be easy to feel like you're getting worse if your discernment is improving but your work isn't improving as quickly.
Great video!
I think minute physics made this video to explain this episode for his work environment and we just got to see it too
I feel like you could split goal and taste up in two categories, in cases where one has enough discernment to see how things could be better and generally prefers a more X style/quality, but is still satisfied with less than perfection because of more achievable goals than tastes
Just be yourself, it does not matter if it is good enough, for someone else 🎵
nobody talking about how adding "dugs + sex" will bring the most improvement to video
2:44
Quality is defined by the owner not the video producer... just as beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so is quality. The best horse whip is of little value today, it was quality then and is not now
This is a real interesting way to take apart the good old "there's no accounting for taste", to say "taste" might not actually be what you're accounting for.
Din, the goddess of quality; Farore, the goddess of taste; and Nayru, the goddess of discernment = the Triforce of Quality
wow dude excellent wisdom
Wonderful video! :)
Thank you for this, never really thought about it like that before. Would be interesting to know if you think that there is such a thing as a intrinsic value of taste? In your example of different taste with the same discernment you talk about the crookedness of the painting, that one might be ok with it being more crooked. This gives the idea that there is a "correct" answer to where the taste is supposed be on the scale, even if you haven't numbered it. Do you think this intrinsic value is something that exists in all kinds of taste?
Hello
If you get the time.
Can you please explain how the electric keeps us from being pushed or pulled into the centre of the earth. To be more specific, what stops us from falling into the center of the earth and why.
Thank you
I appreciate that this covers the distinction between taste and discernment, but I often find that people also frequently confuse taste with quality.
That's where I've found a lot of my own disagreements with people, and I think it's frequently the cause of poor discernment. That is, that people can't accurately judge the quality of something because they assume that if it is not to their taste, that it is of bad quality. The classic example being people who think "I didn't like that movie" means "That movie is bad."
It is a conversation I always find very frustrating, because it's entirely okay to not like certain high quality content, and totally awesome if you find low quality content that you enjoy, and people need to stop acting as if their personal preferences represent any sort of objective truth about the quality of content.
Maybe it's just semantics at that point and when people say "that's bad" they really mean "I didn't like that" but I think it's an important distinction 🤷
The really weird thing is, if you can enjoy soemthing that is low "quality" and dislike something that is high "quality"
Then what exactly is "quality" then and why does it matter given that it is not a function of or a very weak function of the utility you get out of the product (whether or not it is enjoyable)?
If the movie was enjoyable then surely that means it has succeeded at its goal and thus has the qualities to do so by the fact that experimentally it has done so. That's the thinking.
"Quality" starts to become a bunch of meaningless check marks that only gain meaning when you are targeting a specific audience that will enjoy media that have those check marks, which will then tie quality to the audience you are targeting.
It's "good for you" or "not (made) for you" in other words.
This gives me the sense of someone trying to force or impose an objective notion of quality when no such thing can or will exist. There's only standards and formalities and criteria by which we can evaluate things but these standards, formalities and criteria are at their root arbitrary and learned.
The example he gave with prepositions is an example of this, as from other comments it gets to be clear that that whole fiasco arose because people were treating English like it's Latin when it's not but some individuals (linguistic elitist so to speak) insisted on doing so and insinuated that by doing so it makes your language use of "higher" quality. How are you ever going to sustainably argue that to be the case? That because a language is closer to latin or the way someone uses their language is closer to latin that it is "higher" quality use of the language?
Really, "quality" is a loaded word as it brings with it this idea that the work has some objective intrinsic value when no such thing exists.
I think it's a default state of humans, to consider things which do not align with our preferences to be bad, and those which do as good. Personally I suspect that most people who know better than to claim they are the same thing, still can't actually manage to believe otherwise most of the time. The most I think we can do is believe preferences are relatively irrelevant, in the manner of Stoic or Buddhist thought. And maybe stop pretending that when i say quality and you also say quality, it is referring to the same thing.
I got that "Snarky " reference at 0:55 - TechnologyConnections and your impression of him wasn't too shabby :)
Surprised at 15 hours that I received a 20% off, thanks kindly. I've been meaning to start treating my brain right since graduation.
Please do a video on the particle zoo explain each and every particle in the particle zoo which are their antiparticles, I'm really interested to find out but i cant find any video that can fully explain this to me