To my dear followers: Is it too much? I hope getting so many notices in your INboxes doesn’t piss you off, and if so, is there a modification we might make to the program somehow? I’ d hate to lose you .
I write a lot. (ask me how many journals, plays, articles, books, I’ve penned for the past 35 years if you want…augh!) Right now, I’m working on this new form — it is new for me, insofar as I tweak my prose as I tilt the audience.
So this is a quick read… too quick perhaps? This is Daniel H. Pink’s Current work
Ever heard of it? Read it? Super popular–which perhaps explains what I’m going to say here in a quick little note.
(I am doing some research as part of my sabbatical this year — yes, it’s true, those of us in higher education can still earn sabbaticals, though I think the tax payers may cry foul sooner than later for those of us employed at public institutions. The super shorthand overview is this: I am looking at what I call “the states of learning.” I am examining the different physical and mental states of being that affect our ability to learn, our rising and falling acumen over time–time of day, year, etc…why and how does this fluctuate? This format may serve as part of this research in the coming months.)
But to get right to it. WHEN (above) caught my attention this Spring. Pink works at being clever and cute. Ugh. He stretches his “evidence” and makes flabby conclusions. He subtitles his book, “the scientific secrets of perfect timing.” His “science is hardly science at all, insofar as his observations seem surface and obvious, his conclusions are flabby and his data is stretched…do readers really buy this as science? I’m all for questioning the assumptions tucked behind data and stats, but this book just dances over the very surface of more salient questions. This is one of my problems with the social sciences…they claim to analyze data, but they seem to sweep up numbers to support their overly constructed narratives…? whoops…my use of “they” is a foul… but much of reading of popular non-fiction leans this way. Make the assumptions, find some data, tweak the interpretation, and presto…”proof.”
I’m all for the concepts in this book — duh…it’s a brick in my sabbatical research, the thesis that we are rather fluid creatures when it comes to our productivity throughout the day…circadian rhythms and all that. But come on Mr. Pink… press down harder on the paper, would you?