Writing and Thinking Less Badly with Mike Munger

Episode Summary

Executive Summary: Mike Munger argues that academic success depends on treating writing as disciplined daily exercise, not a last-minute task or mere byproduct of thinking. He emphasizes output-based goals, finding a compelling puzzle and voice, scheduling protected writing time, revising relentlessly, and using journals/referees as free research assistants. The episode frames writing as the main vehicle for teaching, discovery, and long-run career payoff.

Main Topics: Writing as a daily practice (Priority: 5/5): Munger says good scholarly writing comes from consistent, repeated practice much like training for sports; talented people often fail because they rely on intelligence instead of disciplined repetition. Output over input metrics (Priority: 5/5): He warns against measuring productivity by office hours, reading, or apparent busyness and argues that written output is what actually advances an academic career. Finding a puzzle and a voice (Priority: 4/5): Strong writing starts from a real intellectual puzzle or passion, not from the abstract goal of publication; a compelling question gives the work energy and originality. Scheduling and protected writing time (Priority: 4/5): Munger recommends finding one’s best mental hours, protecting them for writing, and using smaller focused blocks rather than waiting for huge uninterrupted stretches. Revision, feedback, and referees (Priority: 5/5): He portrays rewriting as essential and journals/referees as valuable external debugging systems that improve papers despite harsh criticism. Writing as teaching and knowledge transmission (Priority: 4/5): The episode concludes that writing is the main way academics teach across time and space, turning private understanding into durable public knowledge.

Key Arguments: Writing is an exercise: repeated practice matters more than raw talent or last-minute effort. Junior academics often mismeasure work by hours spent rather than pages produced, which hides real progress. A clear puzzle—especially one that reconciles theory and evidence—makes writing and research more compelling. Small daily writing goals can accumulate into publishable output even if much of the draft is later discarded. Writing improves reading: you understand texts better when you are trying to answer a specific question in your own work. Publishing should be a byproduct of having something important to say, not the sole objective. Most first drafts are bad; substantial rewriting is normal and necessary. Referees and seminar audiences are effectively unpaid research assistants whose criticism can strengthen a paper. Academics should protect their sharpest time of day for writing and place lower-cognitive tasks elsewhere. The real function of academic writing is teaching—communicating ideas clearly to people across time and space.

Data Points: Duke tenure review window: 6 years - Munger describes the period junior faculty have to prove they can keep producing after tenure removes incentives. People watched as chair: 8 - He says he observed eight tenure cases while department chair. Failed tenure cases: 6 of 8 - He reports that six of the eight people he watched came up for tenure and were fired. Recommended daily output: 500–750 words per day - He suggests modest daily writing targets as sufficient to generate substantial annual output. Typical economics article length: 10,000–12,000 words - Used to show how regular daily output can accumulate into publishable articles. Estimated usable output every 10 days: about 2,000 usable words - He argues that even after discarding much drafting, steady writing yields enough material for articles. Minimum article count for compliance: 3 articles at journal - He uses the term “Munger compliant” to mean having three papers simultaneously in the publication pipeline. Referee report turnaround expectation: months - He notes that journal review takes time, which is why multiple manuscripts must be in circulation. Typical summer teaching pay: $4,000 - He contrasts low summer teaching pay with the far higher expected payoff of writing an article. Value of one article: at least $10,000; top journal about $25,000 - He frames publication as a major career and salary investment with substantial present-value returns. Walks into sump incident: 1 anecdote - He recounts Adam Smith being so absorbed in thought that he walked into a noisome sump while writing The Wealth of Nations. Book-review rewrite example: about 15 pages; half unusable - He says even a near-finished 15-page review still needed major deletion and rewriting. Number of complete rewrites: at least 10 - Munger says it can take him ten full rewrites before a paper is ready to show others.

Pivotal Quotes: "You have to teach other people. Sometimes you do it in the classroom. Most of the time you do it through your writing." — Mike Munger: He explains why writing is central to academic life and career survival. "If you don't get good at that, you're going to fail. So don't start. If you don't think you want to write, don't become an academic in the first place." — Mike Munger: He stresses that writing is non-negotiable for anyone entering academia. "Don't read, write." — Mike Munger: His shorthand advice to graduate students: reading should serve writing, not replace it.

Implications: For graduate students and academics, the message is clear: protect writing time, focus on producing and revising work, and treat publication as a consequence of real intellectual contribution. Better habits now can strongly improve career trajectory later.