3 ms·
I could be totally wrong, but my hunch is that this is more related to the lowest hanging fruit rather than human capacity. Maybe scientific discoveries simply
by pier25 5y ago
I could be totally wrong, but my hunch is that this is more related to the lowest hanging fruit rather than human capacity. Maybe scientific discoveries simply get exponentially harder.
In painting, it's very rare for someone to make anything original these days. We won't have any more Picassos, etc, simply because they were the first to explore a new terrain. It's really not a matter of education, genetics, or talent. The more explored a terrain is, the less there is to discover.
So the matter is really discovering new terrains, like the internet has been in the past decades.
- WanderPanda 5y agoWhat about Banksy e.g.?
- jonnybgood 5y agoWhat do you mean by original?
- pier25 5y agoUnique?
- nwatson 5y agoIs useful, worthwhile knowledge in a "sparse" search space? If so it will take more and more effort to reach anything new, and we'll need generations-long moonshot efforts to force young kids to skip their childhoods to dedicate time to nothing more than making the next, say chemistry, discovery by the time they're 45. Many are accused of manufacturing B.S. search spaces to explore in English departments. If worthwhile knowledge is in a "fractal" search space maybe there's hope. Those kids can still have a childhood and discover something new by the time they're 30, something worthwhile. Another problem with modern genius might be that there are plenty of geniuses, but the proximity of their deep-in-the-fractal landscape is so far from what can be recognized and acknowledged by gatekeepers of genius sainthood that their work never comes to light. There also are probably lots of geniuses doing outsized work at relatively menial jobs in places where nobody can see it, and their work is taken for granted.
- archibaldJ 5y ago100% agreed. To add my 2¥ I think this aligns with a generalised version of the main thesis of the essay too. It’s just that the modern variation of aristocratically tutored is along the lines of serendipity-induced tutored (meeting the right mentors/senseis at the right time in the sense that when you turned back and look at the past you can connect the dots nicely for your future endeavour. It is in this way that you can increase your chance to prevail in a field in ways that are your choosing and only yours)
- archibaldJ 5y agoand to optimize for serendipity: https://twitter.com/sama/status/1214274038933020672?s=21 https://twitter.com/sama/status/1214274038933020672?s=21
- irae 5y agoI agree the "lowest hanging fruit" is likely a key factor, as well as tuttoring. But I would also guess that being recognized as a genius was easier in past times, especially for aristocrat family members. The same way music artists will never be as huge as the Beatles or Michael Jackson once were because of the long tail effect, we now are exposed to so many bright minds, and not way to pick out an Einstein amongst them. In other words: We might have all the geniuses we expect statistically, but when everyone is special, no one is special.
- pier25 5y agoI agree. Another point is that geniuses might not be recognized as such since we still haven't seen the long terms impacts of their work. Eg: Van Gogh.