I'd say, whether this is a good or bad thing, will, as always, depend on the environment and what it demands from you. So, in a Darwinian way, the fit(ness) of

I'd say, whether this is a good or bad thing, will, as always, depend on the environment and what it demands from you. So, in a Darwinian way, the fit(ness) of those two. If this secures your income and your environment is able to fill in for the more attentive parts, you're well set. There are enough possible settings and helpful augmentations in our current society to survive and prosper with any kind of focus/attention distribution. Given they are applied to a somehow matching problem/problem space, this makes up much of this society's success. So the most positive, and therfor naturally sympathetic, aspect of the post might be the happy acceptance of one's own configuration without the need dismiss that of others. While there has always been a tendency of generalist dismissing specialists and vice versa, the insight that we only (or at least much better) progress with the right combination should not be forgotten, even if we feel unsecure or a bit greedy or envious when the opposite talent of ours was a much better fit for a certain situation, or position, again, and got all the praise this time. (Everything else will make you look Dunning-Kruger anyway.)