# When to follow advice and when to test it?



## DJRansome (Oct 29, 2005)

If you follow advice without having personal experience to verify, are you perpetuating a myth or benefiting from the experience of others?


----------



## Malawidolphin (Dec 15, 2006)

Trusting a person's genuine interest in helping you out


----------



## blairo1 (May 7, 2006)

Isn't _all_ knowledge only shared experience... And of course, experience brings knowledge, knowledge leads to understanding, understanding leads to opinion, opinion leads to deviation or misinterpretation, and sometimes, pure regurgitation.

So in that sense why is one persons experience, ie knowledge, ie opinion, ie reiteration, any more (or less) believable than the next, and where do you draw the line of trust. What is written in a book is only as accurate as the experience that led to the knowledge that led to that belief, which is no more or less accurate than any of my experiences, unless I have misinterpreted or purposely deviated.



So really your question lies within the boundary of - how do you trust a person you may not know? But then you must ask yourself why you trust others whom you have never met, yet their written word is fundamental to our understanding of the world around us.

There is only so much proof to be found without direct experience, after all, and how do you trust another's offerings of proof!

(Rocking in the corner yet?)

It all comes down to integrity and how you value that person. I don't know many who are willing to listen unquestionably to advice from someone unknown without credentials to prove prior success..... which is why the post look-up tool is so handy .

In my opinion, of course. :lol:


----------



## morningsky (Apr 22, 2008)

Good Question DJ-

When taking advice I tend to look at the source, there are members of this forum with a great amount of experience and education when it comes to cichlid keeping. After reading this forum for year I drew the conclusion that some members are providing excellent advice and tend to heed their advice. I do benefit and greatly appreciate their advice. I have also weighed their advice against personal experience and look at a many sources before making important decisions.

(if some of these experts said my fish needed pajamas to be tucked in at night, my next question would be WHERE DO I GET THEM? :lol: )

I have felt a need to test advice and find out by myself--going against the advice sought. I still am trying different things that are working for me right now. (not saying they are going to continue working, but it is what I want to do). Everyday I continue to learn.

As far as giving advice I try not to give advice unless I have personally encountered the problem. Sometimes I may pass on tips I have learned from others, but only if I feel it is sound and proven advice.


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

DJRansome said:


> If you follow advice without having personal experience to verify, are you perpetuating a myth or benefiting from the experience of others?


Follow advice about fishkeeping often enough and odds are you'll end up doing both no matter the 
source. Myths in aquarium keeping are plentiful and come from very experienced successful keepers, 
not just newcomers to the hobby.

Question everything. Not only is it ok, it'll benefit the hobby. Problems come when egos are bruised. 
if you've believed and followed a practice for many years, the last thing you want to hear is that it 
wasn't worth the effort put into it. We're all fallible and it's ok. You can be a very successful fish 
keeper and still be wrong about some things. If you're going to take your fishkeeping skills to the 
next level, you have to believe you're still not there.

There are some here whose posts I always read when I see them and even go so far as to 'find all' in 
their profile because they are a wealth of good info. But, are they capable of believing and passing 
on myths? Of course, we all are.

For me, when I pass on something as unverifiable, but believe it may be helpful to the OP, I try to 
preface it by saying something like 'some have experienced...', or similar instead of presenting it as a 
flat out statement of fact. Do I always, no. I may be as guilty as anyone, but I at least try to be 
careful. I always try to think to myself, "now if someone calls me on this, do I have a reference?". And 
if the answer is no, then I edit out or rephrase.

Very good though provoking question. :thumb:


----------



## kornphlake (Feb 12, 2004)

I usually question where the advice comes from, there are members here who have actually tested their methods scientifically but don't publish the results very scientifically, their recommendations do hold water (no pun intended.) Then there are members who think overkill is the new minimum standard, and members who may not even own an aquarium but really like to repeat whatever everybody else says and create hype.

Anybody watch Mythbusters? How many of the supposedly "busted" myths do you disagree with, in many situations it's difficult to create an experiment where all real world variables are controlled. I have a hard time substantiating many of the recommendations because I realize that it is very difficult to duplicate test conditions exactly. I tend to trust my gut when it comes to my own fish.


----------



## Darkside (Feb 6, 2008)

kornphlake said:


> I usually question where the advice comes from, there are members here who have actually tested their methods scientifically but don't publish the results very scientifically, their recommendations do hold water (no pun intended.) Then there are members who think overkill is the new minimum standard, and members who may not even own an aquarium but really like to repeat whatever everybody else says and create hype.
> 
> Anybody watch Mythbusters? How many of the supposedly "busted" myths do you disagree with, in many situations it's difficult to create an experiment where all real world variables are controlled. I have a hard time substantiating many of the recommendations because I realize that it is very difficult to duplicate test conditions exactly. I tend to trust my gut when it comes to my own fish.


All Mythbusters does is exemplify the divide between the scientific community and public. The majority of the public lack the time, funds or proper training to publish and test their own hypothesis "scientifically". But... nothing ventured, nothing gained.


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

*prov356*
http://www.cichlid-forum.com/phpBB/view ... p?t=192165

You've certainly made an impact on some! :thumb: :lol:


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

Number6 said:


> *prov356*
> http://www.cichlid-forum.com/phpBB/view ... p?t=192165
> 
> You've certainly made an impact on some! :thumb: :lol:


Wow, I hadn't seen that. I'm glad some have been helped, and I actually learn that way too. Forces me 
sometimes to do some research. As for writing a book, few of the ideas, if any, are my own. I tend to 
read a lot of different ideas and opinions before forming mine. The info is out there, just sometimes a 
bit tedious to sort through it all. Only a small part of what we have in the hobby has been lab tested and 
proven. Experience and instinct is very important. It should just be portrayed that way IMO.


----------



## edouthirt (Jan 22, 2008)

Advice giving and receiving is at the core of what is human. We are intensely social creatures and rely on this quality for survival. We have made the advances in technology in all facets of life relying on information sharing, and when you think of it that way... you can imagine where we would be if we didn't share information.

Given the above, it can be argued that it is innate (in most of us) to want to help others because we (perhaps subconsciously) want to create the biggest network possible to insure our own individual survival. So it's simply, "I'll rub your back if you rub mine". And with more people rubbing our backs, the better off we are.

And with that in mind maybe Tim, aka *prov356*, is just in it for himself... lol... totally kidding there. I respect Tim more than most on this forum, he has helped me greatly...

But it really is something to think about... I'm a social psychologist in the making (preparing for grad school starting in August 2010), and this is a debate among scholars, does altruism really exist (giving advice soley for the sake of the individual receiving it), or are we really just in it for ourselves?!!

I know I deviated a bit from the original idea, but I couldn't help but share some insight on why we give advice to begin with (or perhaps I'm just making sure I can rely on you guys for future advice?)


----------



## edouthirt (Jan 22, 2008)

Just a little addition..



> Trusting a person's genuine interest in helping you out


Fortunately, given what I said above, if it's true... we can do this because we can rely on the fact that this peron is going to look to us in the future for something else so they would not purposely lead us astray.

However, there are obviously examples where the exact opposite happens, and somebody purposely leads us in the wrong direction... the healthy human would only do this if they see the other individual as a threat (take the term threat very broadly), but we also have unhealthy (wired incorrectly in regards to social skills/perhaps clinically diagnosed) individuals that will lead others astray for apparently no reason. At one point in history, these individuals would not survive long because they would quickly lose the help/trust of the surrounding individuals that they purposely harmed, and be on their own in a world where the human body by itself is not going to do very well. However, today, we have institutions in place that help insure the survival of all, regardless... and how did we get there?... by sharing information and advancing technology.


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

> and this is a debate among scholars, does altruism really exist (giving advice soley for the sake of the individual receiving it), or are we really just in it for ourselves?!!


Good question. I think there's a little bit of wanting to get everyone to 'do things my way' or 'think the way 
I do' in all of us. Getting people to take our advice moves things to that end. Helps us to feel smarter 
about what we do. I don't think that's my motive, but self examination is always good. I honestly believe 
in my mind that I'm here to both help and learn. Hope that's true and hope that's everyone's motivation.

I'm reminded of a forum for IT that I go to for answers sometimes where they have a point system. If 
your answer is accepted as the 'correct' answer by the OP, you get points. So, everyone competes for 
points and they go for MVP status or some such thing. No money involved, so must just be for 
bragging rights. I think that would fall into advice given for the benefit of the giver.


----------



## edouthirt (Jan 22, 2008)

> Getting people to take our advice moves things to that end. Helps us to feel smarter
> about what we do. I don't think that's my motive, but self examination is always good.


Tim, if you decide that you have been giving all of this adive for your own good and stop doing so because you feel selfish, well... then I'm screwed! 

So, we'll exempt you from this possibility... ok? :lol:


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

> So, we'll exempt you from this possibility... ok?


Sounds good. :lol:


----------



## Darkside (Feb 6, 2008)

edouthirt said:


> But it really is something to think about... I'm a social psychologist in the making (preparing for grad school starting in August 2010), and this is a debate among scholars, does altruism really exist (giving advice soley for the sake of the individual receiving it), or are we really just in it for ourselves?!!


This is a pretty old/tired concept... haven't we come up with anything more recent? Sometimes psychologists need to pay attention to basic biology before they go barking up the wrong crazy tree. :lol:


----------



## edouthirt (Jan 22, 2008)

> This is a pretty old/tired concept... haven't we come up with anything more recent? Sometimes psychologists need to pay attention to basic biology before they go barking up the wrong crazy tree.


There is tons more that psychology has studied, theorized, brought to light, discovered, and I never indicated otherwise. This just happend to be a seemingly unanswerable question that has been studied and debated (in hopes to find an answer) for a long time.

And are you implying that basic biology has an answer for that question? If so, could you please share what that answer is...

And actually, if you wish to discuss this further, I would be glad to, however we should probably do it through pm's as this tangent has gone so far away from fish-keeping (very much my fault... sorry). I would rather keep it off this forum out of respect for the administrators and moderators.


----------



## DJRansome (Oct 29, 2005)

What about if you pass along advice based on the experience of people you trust, but have not personally experienced it?


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

DJRansome said:


> What about if you pass along advice based on the experience of people you trust, but have not personally experienced it?


Best to say that's where you got the advice from. "I have heard from experienced keepers that I trust 
that...." Then it's perfectly fine because you've disclosed where you got the advice from and the reader 
can make his own judgment.

I try not to pass anything along second hand myself. If I haven't kept a fish or used a filter, I don't 
comment unless the OP just isn't getting anything from anyone else and that's pretty rare here. In that 
case I may find a thread that addressed it in the past, or a link to something on another site.


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

*prov356* agreed... even if I have some personal experience with it but I don't feel it's been enough or I lack depth of knowledge, then I make sure to mention that.


----------



## Dewdrop (Nov 20, 2007)

I'm pretty new to fish keeping but have learned so much here. It makes me feel good to be able to answer a few questions and hopefully help someone like I've been helped. I do try to make it a point to say "from my experience" or "I've read that" or something along those lines but occasionally slips can happen. For instance, I don't have any experience at all with demasoni but have read so many times to start with at least 12 of them or you will end up with one that I feel pretty confident telling someone with 4 they will end up with one.


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

Dewdrop said:


> ...one that I feel pretty confident telling someone with 4 they will end up with one.


on a bad day I just type, "4 will become one"... even though I've never bought only four demasoni to test this assumption. On a good day, I type out "it is probable that the dominant one will kill off the rest" but then I get scolded by some for sounding all high and mighty...

can't win for trying! :lol:


----------



## DJRansome (Oct 29, 2005)

I worry when I see a post with several responses that appear to be leading the OP in the wrong direction (caveat: wrong according to 6 or more posts from mods on the topic over the last 3 years I've been reading Cichlid-forum, but nothing I have experienced).


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

DJRansome said:


> I worry when I see a post with several responses that appear to be leading the OP in the wrong direction (caveat: wrong according to 6 or more posts from mods on the topic over the last 3 years I've been reading Cichlid-forum, but nothing I have experienced).


We can still be wrong... I've held onto many a "fact" for years before coming to some revelation that there was some truth to a myth.

Activated Carbon is one of my faves on that front... for years I was told carbon will dump toxins back into the water... then for years the "facts" said this was impossible.

Finally, I found out that activated carbon is a common name covering a ton of different products all with different behaviors... some carbon will not "dump" but adsorbed stuff can get bumped in favor of more attractive molecules and so levels of some chemical could begin to climb again if carbon stayed in too long.

So although incorrect info in a thread can be disconcerting, it can also be a way that certain "facts" are challenged, explained, defended, until some bit of info brings a whole bunch of things to light.

Even "incorrect" info could have some "correct" bits in it worth looking into.


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

> So although incorrect info in a thread can be disconcerting, it can also be a way that certain "facts" are challenged, explained, defended, until some bit of info brings a whole bunch of things to light.
> 
> Even "incorrect" info could have some "correct" bits in it worth looking into.


Very true, happens all the time. Some of the best, most informative threads go along those lines where 
something is posted, then challenged. You often end up with several members researching and 
posting findings and we all learn.


----------

