3 ms·

I don't think "curiosity to try new things" was anywhere near the top of the list of reasons why US leadership decided to go to war in Vietnam. Even “Join the

• bumby 4y ago
  I read the post as more about the pitfalls of overconfidence than curiosity. Meaning a self-proclaimed fast-learner can’t necessarily make up for lack of experience *, exemplified with the “whiz kids” that defined war strategy in Vietnam. * at least when short-term consequences tend to be dire
  • sitkack 4y ago
    The fast learner should be collecting experience as fast as they can. That is the point of learning.
    • deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    • bumby 4y ago
      I’m not sure one automatically associates with the other. Someone can collect a lot of novel experiences and still not learn a thing from any of them. But I agree with your point that the goal should be to collect lots of experience that one has learned from. That doesn’t seem to be the case with the “whiz kids” the post linked to.
      • sitkack 4y ago
        I didn't say it did, but when I am looking for a "fast learner", they develop a flow state and collect experience to fold back into their feedback model of learning a new domain. They are doing continuous hypothesizing and refutation and showing/proving the same result from multiple directions. My experience with "whiz kids" people is that they have immense raw mental analysis power, but not broad analytical ability and their lack of real world context greatly hinders them. They don't have the ability to synthesize alternative viewpoints, their view of the world is from a monocular distant vantage point.