2 ms·

I used to believe in the thesis that "all are almost equal, only nurturing accounts for differences in talents". After reading various cases in the works of the

I used to believe in the thesis that "all are almost equal, only nurturing accounts for differences in talents". After reading various cases in the works of the late Dr. Oliver Sacks, nature (parents/genetics) also matters. However, this belief that nature matters can bring in negative consequences for many people who look for ordinary jobs. For instance, not every programming job doesn't need a genius; not every well-paid job doesn't need a genius. Once companies start looking for geniuses in the name of tough interviews for average well-paid jobs, it can create problems for the majority of non-geniuses.

musingsole 6y ago
> every well-paid job doesn't need a genius This echoes something I've been thinking a lot on recently. It's not just 'not every well-paid job'. It is quite literally most every well-paid job doesn't need a genius. A step further: most well-paid jobs will be impeded by a genius. Geniuses aren't fun, awesome, let-em-loose-and-profit machines. They're people. Worse, they're necessarily weird people. While we need to cultivate them and give them the resources they need, optimizing society for geniuses would make a society most don't want to live in. Creating narratives where you are a rockstar-whatever or failure only sets us up for failure. The message is be yourself. The message is that if you are a weird, quirky, feeling-left-out genius, that's ok. If you aren't, well, that's just normal.