3 ms·
Basically, applying the scientific method here would be a great idea, but keep in mind that correlation != causation. Just because many geniuses you've heard of
by patrickyeon 15y ago
Basically, applying the scientific method here would be a great idea, but keep in mind that correlation != causation. Just because many geniuses you've heard of could pick up a difficult instrument and learn it quickly, it does not follow that learning to play an instrument is a necessary step towards geniushood. The idea that I latched on to "We've tried to domesticate genius, and lost it" suggests that parents are shaping kids that exhibit secondary characteristics of genius, but we've failed to nurture the spark that pushes someone to do amazing things.
I offer the hypothesis that an important factor towards developing very high talent in a field is a love for it and an opportunity to explore within it, make mistakes, do "some costructive play." If this is true, it seems quite possible to me that training someone to exhibit all kinds of secondary signs of genius (that they may well enjoy, but not truly love) can take up time and energy that they might otherwise dedicate to developing their true genius.
Sometimes genius isn't where you expect it. What if the next Jim Hensons are currently practicing tuba between lacrosse games and advanced calculus courses, admonished whenever they "waste their time playing" and painting their WarHammer models?
- ScottBurson 15y agoI think you nailed it. In a world in which so much routine work has been and continues to be automated, originality is becoming more and more essential for success. But originality can't be taught -- it has to be nurtured. Yes, in order to do original work, you need mastery of a medium, whether that be lacrosse, tuba, or mathematics (to borrow your examples). But people think that the mastery is the whole point, when it's actually just the toolchest. Without originality to guide the use of those tools, you're just a mechanic -- and we don't need many mechanics anymore.
- kenjackson 15y agoOriginality really isn't the right word. I've been original my whole life -- almost everyone has by definition. I can do a lot of original dumb stuff. I think what you want is closer to ingenuity. And this is why mastery is important. And its also why mastery of certain things is important. I was one of the most original (and skilled) Gorf players of my day -- no one really cares. Had I been equally skilled at chess I probably could have gotten into Harvard on that alone. Both relatively equally non-transferrable skills.
- ScottBurson 15y agoJust happened across a blog post on this topic, more or less: http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelellsberg/2011/07/22/life-lessons-from-a-fire-breathing-stilt-walking-billionaire/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelellsberg/2011/07/22/life-...