| > because it is condescending yes exactly. you have perfectly summed up how its percieved by those in the defeatist culture around P can not be == NP, and this really goes to the heart of what is inefficient and not working here. and that is especially what im talking about when I speak about the psychology of compelling pay offs
for believing this, and the strong attempts at defensiveness when its being considered that the majority response doesnt work. NP defeatists can not stand the feeling they percieve of being condescended to when their choice to abandon a problem they failed to advance on or make a faster algorithm on, is unmasked from beneath the cloak of being "impossible" they covered it with, owing to their religion that P can not be NP. instead of owning their choice to give up, they disguised the problem as impossible. when that disguise is revealed, they face their choice and face the possibility their failure was not excused by its being impossible, and their belief in intellectual superiority is challenged, and they percieve it as condescension. the core contradiction is that the origin of the insecurity they are protecting against is their own choice to surrender, yet they try to blame it
on the revealing of that choice
by pretending its condescension. so they want to fight the voice that says the problem can be worked on ( and pretend its making them insecure ), to preserve their own narrative that it can't, instead of fighting their self defeatest narrative which gave them cause for the insecurity in the first place. its a common misattribution of responsibility to preserve a protective delusion: "it is not my fault i didnt solve
this, the problem is impossible" "it's not the fault of my choice to give up that I feel insecure, it's their fault for unmasking that my giving up was a choice." misattribution of responsibility
is a common maladaptive ( non workable ) response substitute instead of choosing to try another approach and create some results. it so important to think about the culture of defeat around this because the stakes of these opportunities are so high: efficient acheduling, and dispatching, and gene sequence matching. and the culture of defeat is essentially inefficiently systmeically and structurally draining resources from working on this. its of a significance that the psychology of this becomes important. science works when it embraces questioning, including self questioning, of its methods, including its structural, systemic and cultural methods. these are after all the operations or support and infrastructure faculties which support the work of science. the culture of defeat and fake excuse around P and NP, lets people off the hook, as an excuse to shutter advances on whole classes of problems, and excuses a lack of results in making more efficient algorithms to meet those opportunities. it becomes indoctrinated, a dogma, that P can not be NP, and the true believers as we have seen are all the more fervent to compensate for the absence of proof of impossibility. and this slows progress, which doesnt work. |