You may have a point here, but ain't it a shame how we have to backtrack and defend against perspectives that are wholly reasonable, because they are the proverbial "camel's nose in the tent" for some backwards claptrap?
I say we agree that yes, a Nobel Prize winner might not be destined to become a world-class CEO or whatever. The place to hold the line is in the value of their contribution.
Perhaps we can spin this potential trap back towards reality. Really, when someone becomes a flawless violinist, or programmer, or chemist, what they have made is a tremendous sacrifice. Being best in the world at those things means letting other parts of your mind lie fallow.
I think I might have been more fun to have dinner with when I was in punk bands and reading more books. By dedicating myself to tech I'm probably making a bigger difference in the world, but at some cost to my well-roundedness.
We should laud the winners of intellectual pursuits for the sacrifice they have made for the rest of us.
I say we agree that yes, a Nobel Prize winner might not be destined to become a world-class CEO or whatever. The place to hold the line is in the value of their contribution.
Perhaps we can spin this potential trap back towards reality. Really, when someone becomes a flawless violinist, or programmer, or chemist, what they have made is a tremendous sacrifice. Being best in the world at those things means letting other parts of your mind lie fallow.
I think I might have been more fun to have dinner with when I was in punk bands and reading more books. By dedicating myself to tech I'm probably making a bigger difference in the world, but at some cost to my well-roundedness.
We should laud the winners of intellectual pursuits for the sacrifice they have made for the rest of us.