Wednesday, February 25, 2015

All opinions are not equal

I don't know or associate with anyone working at a high level that is anti-science in regards to training, lifting, nutrition, etc.

Most of the people I know or talk to, are both pro-experience AND pro-science. For the last article I wrote, I think I read over 30 studies in order to consolidate the information within them. Yet apparently, I'm anti-science and anti-intelligence. Go figure.

The problem is, and has been for a while, there are INDEED a lot of lifters who do spend too much time reading pubmed shit, and less time being their own "scientist" by performing "experiments" in the weight room.

John Meadows has trained hundreds of clients and made them better using peri-workout nutrition. Yet according to all of the "scientific evidence" it makes no difference. That nutrient timing is irrelevant. So who has the answer? Well, I will go with a guy that trains hundreds of professionals and makes them better over a study that looked at 12 people doing leg extensions. You can go with the science in this case if you feel like that decision makes you smarter.

A person with great experience is called an expert, while a person with great education, is not always immediately regarded as an expert in his or her field. Yet apparently, all "data" or information is equally valuable.

Uh, no. That's fucking idiotic.

In military operations this would be like saying the knowledge of a private would be just as valuable as that of the knowledge of a four star general. Because you know, all information is valuable. But the source of the information is paramount in regards to importance.

The reason a private is a private is because he hasn't been in the military long enough to acquire the experience and knowledge that is needed to be an expert, and to lead. You know what privates get told? "Shut the fuck up, learn, and do your job."

Now most high ranking officers do have both education AND experience. And that is why they are in a position to lead. Because the information they have acquired is valuable through both parameters. In other words it takes BOTH experience and educational knowledge for your information to be valuable.

Yet the outcry from guys that aren't strong, and aren't developed, who do spend too much time reading pubmed, studies, and scientific articles is that their opinion or the information they know is just as valuable as that of someone who has both knowledge AND experience. No. It's not. I'm sorry that reality doesn't work that way. All opinions do not carry equal value because some opinions are far more informed than others. If all opinions and knowledge or abilities were to be deemed equal then there would be no such thing as a hierarchy anywhere in the world, in any facet.

So yes, it does matter WHERE and WHO the data or information comes from, because the value of it can only be as great as the depth of experience and knowledge from which it comes.

Lastly, collecting knowledge is indeed a great thing. But only if it is applicable to making you better. As I noted before, there are plenty of lifters who gained more knowledge, and got worse, because what they learned wasn't applicable to them, what they needed to do, and what was best for them. So once again, the difference in the novice and the expert, is that the expert is also an expert because he or she knows what applies to them, and what doesn't. The novice doesn't have enough experience to discern between the two.

Now this doesn't mean that the guy who bench presses a house has more knowledge than the guy who bench presses less. There are lots of strong guys that don't have knowledge. In contrast there are lots of guys weaker than them that have more knowledge and experience. But the guy that is a "private" in regards to bench pressing does in fact need to "shut up and just train more". Regardless of whether people like this or not, demonstrational abilities to carry weight and merit. It doesn't mean it's a direct reflection of knowledge, but if I had to pick between learning from a guy that could bench 600 and a guy that could bench 285, this is an easy choice. Whether you agree with me on that is no concern of mine. 285 pound benchers are a dime a dozen. 600 pound benchers probably had to learn a few things, even if they were already blessed with natural abilities.

Everyone wants to be a special snowflake. But not all knowledge or opinions carry equal weight. That is not my opinion, but something reflected throughout all of the fucking world. There is a reason why a company only has one CEO, why there are only so many four star generals in the military, and why there are only so many guys that are pro bodybuilders or gold medalists.

I'll finish this tl;dr piece with a quote from Skip Hill, who wrote an amazing article already addressing this very topic (I guess Skip is anti-science/anti-intelligence)....

"You can argue your knowledge, but arguing experience is pretty cut and dry. You either have it or you don’t. You can rarely, in five years, experience what someone has experienced in twenty or thirty years. You may have yourself convinced that you can, but this is incredibly rare. So if you have knowledge, I can understand and respect that. In return, it would be great if you could understand and respect the experience of people who have been around much longer than you have. I have been very vocal about my respect for those who have done it longer than I have or have done it long before I did. They deserve that from me."

1 comment:

  1. somewhat relevant.