My Deep Research: Why and How
A subscriber posted this.
The article, "Time Management Experiment: De-Clutter Your Digital Life", https://www.garynorth.com/members/17871.cfm , is very helpful for a news junkie.In the last paragraph you write:
""" I spend almost no time editing my articles. That is because I have been using deep work techniques all of my life. I reduced editing in 1974, when I started Remnant Review. I began to write off the top of my head. I have done this ever since with my journalism. I still edit my book chapters, but not extensively.
If you can take a week off from digital distractions, you should see improvement in your output. """
My immediate thought is that I would enjoy reading a follow-up article on how you do "deep work". I've searched through a great deal of your articles and I see that some of the answers are in your articles that come up using "time management" as the search criteria.
Here is my question:
1. How do you (Dr. North) do "deep work?" I understand the idea behind it and have experienced it myself throughout life. I'm curious about your specific methods. I realize this comes naturally to you, like writing a book in one week (https://www.garynorth.com/members/forum/openthread.cfm?articleid=232628#232628).
Is it something similar to what you write about here: Time Management and College, https://www.garynorth.com/members/11917.cfm or here: Academic Bootcamp, https://www.ronpaulcurriculum.com/public/department48.cfm?
I have found these additional articles that touch on the above: Personal Success Relies Heavily on Budgeting, Which Most People Hate to Do. https://www.garynorth.com/members/department46.cfm
Time Management for People Who Are Falling Behind https://www.garynorth.com/members/9409.cfm
I assume that the person who asked this question has in mind the concept of deep work that is basically academic. It means a book with footnotes or a long article with footnotes. Presumably, it also means research that is based on either a new theory or a specialized insight or angle that had not previously been discovered. In other words, it is work that could conceivably lead to further research and new interpretations of a particular topic.
I regard my book on Marx as my first endeavor in what might be called deep work. I think I started in 1965, but it may have been in 1966. It was published in 1968. I regard it as a serious piece of work. No one had investigated this aspect of Marx's thought before I did. I placed Marx's work within the tradition of ritual revolution which would lead to social and individual transformation. It is found in classical culture. It was found in the rituals of ancient Greece and Rome. It can be found in primitive societies. That's why I titled the book Marx's Religion of Revolution. But nobody else picked up on the topic and did anything with it. It was an entrepreneurial venture. But I did it mainly to satisfy myself. I wanted to know. Rushdoony intervened with his publisher and got it published. That was a nice benefit for me, but it was not crucial to my intellectual development or my academic development. I did win a Weaver Fellowship the next year, and I think probably the book did it for me. I had applied the previous year, and I had not won. So, it actually put money on the table. My academic writing has not.
I did this in my spare time. I took some courses for which I wrote papers on Marx. Those courses helped me write the book, but I did not do this as a part of my program to gain a Ph.D. in history. Nobody suggested that I write it. I wrote it to satisfy my own curiosity. With the exception of my Ph.D. dissertation, all of the heavily footnoted academic materials I have ever written, I wrote to satisfy my own curiosity.
I regard my motivation as something comparable or analogous to the inventor who is constantly curious. He probably is not trying to make a lot of money, although he may be. I never had any illusions in this regard. I think people who get involved in deep research are curious people. They may be trying to change the world. They may be trying to change somebody's opinion. And they may be trying to get a job. But I think the primary motivation is curiosity. Somebody has described the heart of scientific investigation as the result of two words: "That's odd." I think this assessment is correct. The other great motivation is from two other words: "Oh, yeah?"
If somebody is not innately curious, he probably is not going to do deep work that is not associated with his business or occupation. He may do deep work because somebody assigned him the task, but it is not something he would do in his free time. The heart of it is what you do in your free time. You turn your free time, which is never free, into productive study. There is always a lot of uncertainty. It is probably not going to pay off financially. If it is not worth finding out as part of the development of your world and life view, then you probably will not get involved in deep work of your own. You will only do it if somebody pays you to do it. But if somebody else pays you to do it, you are probably replaceable. You are salaried. Somebody else is going to get the lion's share of the money.
There have been a few truly brilliant men who have been salaried, and who also got credit for their work. In the early part of the 20th century, the best example is Charles Steinmetz, who really was a genius. He worked for the company that was later absorbed by General Electric. He did tremendous work for both companies. They made piles of money off of his inventions. He was well-paid, but he did not get rich. The other example worked for another company named general: Charles Kettering. He worked for General Motors. The man who ran General Motors, Alfred Sloan, had the common sense to leave Kettering alone. He provided him with anything Kettering wanted. Kettering made major discoveries that made millions of dollars for General Motors. He is a legend. His name is on the Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Wikipedia reports:
In 1934, John D. Rockefeller, Jr. donated land on York Avenue for a new location. Two years later, he granted Memorial Hospital $3,000,000 and the hospital began their move across town. Memorial Hospital officially reopened at the new location in 1939. In 1945, the chairman of General Motors, Alfred P. Sloan, donated $4,000,000 to create the Sloan-Kettering Institute for Cancer Research through his Sloan Foundation, and Charles F. Kettering, GM’s vice president and director of research, personally agreed to oversee the organization of a cancer research program based on industrial techniques. The originally independent research institute was built adjacent to Memorial Hospital.
I learned how to do basic research beginning when I was 14 years old. I had to write a five-page typed paper for a course in Spanish. I had to write a paper for a course in algebra. I have not really thought about it before, but writing the paper for the algebra course was important for me most of all for what I learned about my competitors. The teacher was retired from the Army. He had the mentality of an officer. He later had a painted image of himself in Army gear on the cover of Time Magazine. Another student did not turn in the term paper. I have never forgotten his words: "I planned to write it." I think those words can serve as the epitaph for most of the people who have ever lived. The teacher made it clear that planning to do something without executing the plan is worth nothing. The guy got an F on the assignment. I wrote my paper on a gold-mining stock.
Both of these papers were typed. I suppose that was the transition from children's papers to something vaguely resembling deep research. I had to learn how to type. I never did, unfortunately. I still use hunt and peck for my deep research-based writing.
People make time for the things that are important to them. There is no such thing as spare time. There is a lot of wasted time. My deep research is always based on something I find interesting, and which I think other people have misunderstood. Other people have got the story wrong, and I want to do my best to get the story right. I get the story right for my own satisfaction. If anybody else wants to come along for the ride, that is all right with me. I write for this audience: myself. I am a severe critic and a tough editor.
The greatest single breakthrough in my life was my switch to digital word processing in 1980. That doubled my output in one week. I learned a new way of writing. Because it costs almost nothing to delete something and rewrite, I began to debate with myself on screen. I would write things that I would later blip. I agree with the person who said this: the reason I write is so that I will know what I think about a subject. With word processing, my ability to think about a subject vastly expanded. That was because the cost of making corrections was reduced to strictly a time cost, not a typing cost. The cost-benefit ratio moved in the direction of on-screen typing. I had never used detailed outlines.
I wrote my final typewriter-written book in 1980: Unconditional Surrender. I wrote it off the top of my head while using an IBM Selectric III typewriter. It took me 14 days. I did that deliberately, so as not to make the writing in any way unreadable. I wanted it to sound like a flow of information in a discussion. After I went to word processing a few months later, that approach to writing became a lot easier.
CONCLUSION
As with any long-term project that involves an allocation of available -- not free -- time, my deep writing begins with motivation. It begins either with curiosity or else a desire to prove that somebody else is incorrect.
The major project in my life is my economic commentary on the Bible, coupled with all the support volumes. That has been driven by curiosity, which began in the spring of 1960, but was motivated higher in the late 1960's by the constant comment that I got from skeptics: "There's no such thing as Christian economics." I got that a lot from Christians. I decided to prove them wrong. It has taken well over 50 years. I am not quite finished. I am doing the index for the teacher's edition of my book on Christian economics. After that, I will have two more volumes to write, plus a book on leadership.
I have never self-consciously done my deep writing in order to make money. That would've been like trying to dig gold out of an abandoned gold mine. It would've wasted my time.