4 ms·
Perhaps controversial, but after 65-70 continuing working is fine but the type and focus of work should change because if not, the work will be at the expense a
by mint2 3y ago
Perhaps controversial, but after 65-70 continuing working is fine but the type and focus of work should change because if not, the work will be at the expense and harm of the next generation.
After a certain point the focus should no longer be on doing work first hand, but should be working to help, mentor and advise others to provide them a path instead of occupying the top.
Fostering the next generations should be the goal, not occupying career space until the grave.
- JSavageOne 3y ago> the work will be at the expense and harm of the next generation. How is his work since 70 at the expense of the next generation? People should do what they enjoy. If that's mentoring others, then great. If one doesn't enjoy mentoring others, that's fine too.
- mint2 3y agoIt’s like comparing US presidents vs the English king/queen. There’s been a heck of a lot more people reach the top in the US. When there is turnover at the top, more people can have a career at it. Otherwise it’s very stagnant at the top. Look at Charles, he had to wait until normal retirement age to advance. If people don’t shift into mentor ship roles and instead cling to the top roles until they die, then it’s pretty obvious the next generations are going to be held back in terms of achievement. Also while I’m not commenting on his work in particular, but there’s the colloquialism “Science progresses one funeral at a time”. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_principle https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_principle