4 ms·

> If you take away the requirement for success, then sure, anyone can do anything. Part of the disconnect between our positions, and the position of society at

> If you take away the requirement for success, then sure, anyone can do anything. Part of the disconnect between our positions, and the position of society at large is that society at large sees receiving a college degree as success, or at least a strong sign of success. Where-as when people fluent in advanced technical topics describe someone being successful, they're referring to the ability to work in those topics fluently, e.g be their intellectual/professional peer. As your pointed out, there is a weak correlation between graduating college and actually being fluent in the topic, as it is commonplace for people to cram for a test and forget everything by the following week. The core disconnect is that society at large interprets "anyone can get through a degree program in any topic with sufficient support systems and resources in place" as being the same thing as "anyone can be successful in any field or topic with sufficient support systems and resources in place". This conflation does a disservice to everyone, but perhaps most of all the people who work in those fields who get stuck on teams where some colleagues are a net drag on productivity and actively drain their mental and emotionally energy rather than contributing, because as a rule the folks actually doing the work aren't empowered to control who they work with other than choosing to quit.

kiba 3y ago
I don't think this is the main contention. It's about what people are fundamentally capable of achieving absent EQ and other factors and taking into account only IQ. I am simply more optimistic.
PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
It's the difference between HS football and college football (I was a college athlete). The sheer speed difference between the two isn't something you can fully communicate to even a spectator, much less a complete layman, but it's there. professional football is going to take it up another notch. I once had a HS player tell me the state champions could beat many of the college teams in the state and I laughed my ass off. I'm sure you could find a college team that would lose to them, but in general? The speed difference is too great, the HS team would flat out not be prepared for it. And it's the same with intellectual pursuits. There's a world of difference between being the best chess player in your HS and being the best chess player in your state (and even more of a difference if you consider the US). But you know, for those who are amazing at one thing they sacrificed being decent or good at almost everything else. I can't find the video, but someone once asked Feynman why he started painting once he got older. His response is that he went very deep into physics and math and became great at it, but he did so by sacrificing almost everything else. Paint was his attempt to learn something outside of his wheelhouse.

kiba 3y ago

I don't think this is the main contention. It's about what people are fundamentally capable of achieving absent EQ and other factors and taking into account only IQ. I am simply more optimistic.

PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago

It's the difference between HS football and college football (I was a college athlete). The sheer speed difference between the two isn't something you can fully communicate to even a spectator, much less a complete layman, but it's there. professional football is going to take it up another notch. I once had a HS player tell me the state champions could beat many of the college teams in the state and I laughed my ass off. I'm sure you could find a college team that would lose to them, but in general? The speed difference is too great, the HS team would flat out not be prepared for it. And it's the same with intellectual pursuits. There's a world of difference between being the best chess player in your HS and being the best chess player in your state (and even more of a difference if you consider the US). But you know, for those who are amazing at one thing they sacrificed being decent or good at almost everything else. I can't find the video, but someone once asked Feynman why he started painting once he got older. His response is that he went very deep into physics and math and became great at it, but he did so by sacrificing almost everything else. Paint was his attempt to learn something outside of his wheelhouse.