the issue isn’t: does X person owe Y person an answer. it’s: issue X must be answered, by someone, as part of humanity making intellectual progress
people who do not participate in this are not progress-making intellectuals. of course, if they are instead answering issues Y and Z, that’s good. but sufficiently bad prioritization (e.g. ignoring a bunch of hard issues while addressing easy ones) will waste one’s career.
and what should one do about this? well, try to have some process so your prioritization isn’t biased.
the issue isn’t: does X person owe Y person an answer. it’s: issue X must be answered, by someone, as part of humanity making intellectual progress
people who do not participate in this are not progress-making intellectuals. of course, if they are instead answering issues Y and Z, that’s good. but sufficiently bad prioritization (e.g. ignoring a bunch of hard issues while addressing easy ones) will waste one’s career.
and what should one do about this? well, try to have some process so your prioritization isn’t biased.
And if I disagree on whether issue x must me answered?
Or if I believe in problem ownership. “Issue x answering” is your problem and not mine. Have fun with that. Have a nice day.
Well this is again based on a personal opinion of what is progress making and what is priority. If we disagree on those details? Then what?