pull down to refresh
171 sats \ 3 replies \ @elvismercury OP 13 Apr \ parent \ on: Some thoughts on success mostly_harmless
I agree provisionally, but my caveat is the same one that I told to our CEO on that flight. It was something like:
Outsourcing your weaknesses makes sense in the abstract as a comparative advantage play; but think of Coase as a counter. Why are there corporations at all, and not exclusively one-off networks of specialists? The most popular answer is transaction costs, and I think something comparable has bearing on this question.
Continuing the earlier example, it may be trivial to solve my math deficiencies by market-contracting whatever the math need is, but that's assuming I'm capable of knowing what needs to be contracted or understanding its proper scope. If I'm an F at math, the prospect of being able to make the requisite contract becomes tenuous.
More importantly than that, there is no contract that will give you access to the conceptual structures that the actual skill would provide. You see the world slightly different when you have different skills / capabilities -- this is an under-appreciated consequences of Heidegger's framework -- and that kind of leverage really matters, especially for the kind of creative work that I do.
I'm not an F at math, but I'm certainly no expert, and still I can't tell you how much leverage I've got over the years from an intermediate level of linear algebra knowledge, in applications that have nothing to do with linear algebra, regarding topics that have nothing to do with math.
How many other linear algebras are out there, waiting to transform how I see the world, if only I could move off of F? That's the countervailing headwind to the comparative advantage idea, which is admittedly compelling.
In addition to my experience as a student in a bunch of mathy disciplines, I taught math for a few years. I know it's just an example, but I have not seen very many people who make it usefully far in mathematics through force of will.
I certainly agree with you about how transformative mathematical study is in how we process seemingly unrelated topics. My doubt is that it would be as transformative for people who had to buckle down and will their way through the material.
Like you suggest, people draw those transformative lessons from many places. My expectation is that looking for them in subjects that you find inspiring or interesting will be more fruitful. On that note, though, I do think it's important to give things a chance and not just assume there's nothing in it of value.
I certainly think this isn't a topic where one approach is correct and the other is incorrect. It's more that I think it more often makes sense to focus on your strengths, because that moves you into less dense parts of the skill distribution, which allows you to charge more of a premium.
The reality is that you should be evaluating how the benefit of learning something compares to the cost. Sometimes, that will mean doing something very costly, because it's a bottleneck for a bunch of other stuff you are good at.
reply
I should add, as supporting evidence, my experience with music.
I'm pretty sure that I'm literally musically retarded. I took lessons on several different instruments as a kid and never got anything out of it, despite quite an investment of time and effort.
For many people, as I understand it, playing music helps them think about things other than music. While I was able to play some set of recognizable songs and answer many basic music questions, it made essentially no impact on my cognition and I think that's because I never connected with it.
reply
Outsourcing your weaknesses makes sense in the abstract as a comparative advantage play; but think of Coase as a counter. Why are there corporations at all, and not exclusively one-off networks of specialists? The most popular answer is transaction costs, and I think something comparable has bearing on this question.
The benefit of getting better at your speciality could outweigh the transaction costs of outsourcing your non-speciality.
Continuing the earlier example, it may be trivial to solve my math deficiencies by market-contracting whatever the math need is, but that's assuming I'm capable of knowing what needs to be contracted or understanding its proper scope. If I'm an F at math, the prospect of being able to make the requisite contract becomes tenuous.
You probably don't need an A in math to spot a great math person and you could always outsource the hiring to a trusted math friend (assuming one of your talents is finding such friends). You might get as much benefit discussing something with an outsourcee as you do having it all in your own brain.
reply