Improvement of society

[Aetherous]

Just presenting a basic concept...

If we try to be good at everything, we don't master anything. The way that things change for the better is through revolutionary advancements, new insights, breakthroughs, etc...improvement of a subject is based on individual mastery of it, and a life dedicated to that subject.

(I am pondering this because of looking at recent research that found a wasp whose venom can destroy cancer cells)

It benefits society in the long run for us to focus acutely on a subject...to become an expert at something, and live in our field of work so much that we break the barrier of what's already known and thought about the topic.

People who come after us can "stand on the shoulders of giants", just like we did, by depending upon the knowledge we were taught regarding our subject of interest...knowledge derived from other people's hard work.

Imagine what the world would look like if everyone truly did this...if everyone mastered something.

Does it really matter if we know everything about everything? We might be good at living and getting by, but we aren't contributing to the advancement of knowledge and society. By feeling the need to know it all, we end up becoming failures because of not being experts in any one thing...by becoming myopic and nerdy about one thing, we have a chance at success.

What's your one thing?

[Marblehead]

 

What's your one thing?

 

Being retired.  I've already done my thing.

[dust]

Surprisingly (sarcasm), I disagree. As politely as possible. Great topic though.

 

We, humans, are the great generalists. Of all the animals, we are capable of the widest range of action and thought. We can thrive in a wide range of habitats, perform a wide range of physical feats (walk, run, swim, climb, jump, lift, throw, make, manipulate various objects/tools in precise and intricate ways, etc), understand a wide range of subjects (languages, mathematics, sciences, aesthetics, etc).

 

We have as a species accomplished great things by specializing, but we have also sacrificed a great many things.

 

We accomplish many great things as specialists, but as individual specialists we rob ourselves of the beauty of being human.

 

Of course, we cannot do everything. There is too much shared knowledge, there are too many physical pursuits. And we each have our strengths -- certainly we should not all aim to be the same (that would be the most terrible). But we can each find our unique 'schema', our own collection of varied abilities. I strongly believe specialism destroys. It destroys us as individuals and as a society. The more we as individuals specialize, the worse things get.

 

 

edit: A quote from Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations:

 

"In the progress of the division of labour, the employment of the far greater part of those who live by labour, that is, of the great body of the people, comes to be confined to a few very simple operations, frequently to one or two. But the understandings of the greater part of men are necessarily formed by their ordinary employments. The man whose whole life is spent in performing a few simple operations, of which the effects are perhaps always the same, or very nearly the same, has no occasion to exert his understanding or to exercise his invention in finding out expedients for removing difficulties which never occur. He naturally loses, therefore, the habit of such exertion, and generally becomes as stupid and ignorant as it is possible for a human creature to become. The torpor of his mind renders him not only incapable of relishing or bearing a part in any rational conversation, but of conceiving any generous, noble, or tender sentiment, and consequently of forming any just judgment concerning many even of the ordinary duties of private life. Of the great and extensive interests of his country he is altogether incapable of judging, and unless very particular pains have been taken to render him otherwise, he is equally incapable of defending his country in war. The uniformity of his stationary life naturally corrupts the courage of his mind, and makes him regard with abhorrence the irregular, uncertain, and adventurous life of a soldier. It corrupts even the activity of his body, and renders him incapable of exerting his strength with vigour and perseverance in any other employment than that to which he has been bred. His dexterity at his own particular trade seems, in this manner, to be acquired at the expence of his intellectual, social, and martial virtues. But in every improved and civilized society this is the state into which the labouring poor, that is, the great body of the people, must necessarily fall, unless government takes some pains to prevent it."

— Book V, Chapter I, Part III

Edited March 4, 2017 by dust

[dust]

Sorry to apparently disregard your question ("What is your one thing?") but the only honest answer I can give is "Please not just one thing!"

 

What is your one thing? And could you really see yourself doing only that? And how would that be beneficial to society?

[Aetherous]

we can each find our unique 'schema', our own collection of varied abilities.

 

I like that approach - it's more balanced. Of course complete specialization makes us a master of one thing, and a failure of everything else, which isn't good. On the other hand, no specialization at all makes us stagnant in terms of societal progress and personal achievement.

 

Maybe it's good to have one thing be paramount, a few other things be interests that we cultivate (but not to the extent of the specialization), and then stuff that doesn't interest us be pretty much off-radar.

 

As for myself, I chose Chinese Medicine so I'm specializing in a certain style of that.

[dust]

My very basic knowledge of it has led me to believe that Chinese Medicine itself is a generalized approach. Like a general practitioner in Western medicine, one must gain and maintain a broad understanding of various (broad and detailed) principles involved, and be able not just to work directly with the body and qi, but also advise on physical activity, diet, lifestyle, etc?

 

I think it's a great approach. Good medicine, preventative and corrective, is a cornerstone of a happy society. And we can't all be doctors or acupuncturists. But if every medical professional specialized in a certain area, and generalists in medicine diminished, we'd be in trouble. And a medical professional, with all the knowledge he must have, can still pursue other things as a part of his varied collection of abilities.

 

Maybe my first post came on too strong. I'm not against specialization in any form, only extreme specialization at the expense of other things. A lot of people spend their life pursuing one career, one job, one very specific task, trying to be the very best and forgetting that there is so much else to experience. And as Adam Smith said, this usually leads to a diminished capacity for intellectual, social, and physical wellbeing.

Edited March 4, 2017 by dust

[rene]

Wonderful thread!

 

I think both Aetherous and Dust have the right idea - and that which of the two ways (and the many variations of each) one might choose should depend on the nature of the person!

 

I am not capable of doing repetitive factory work; nor could I dedicate my life to only one focus. Too many interesting things out there!

 

We need both specialists and generalists, yes? Maybe society is best served by each of us doing what fits our own natures, which allows us to be happier, and therefore more contributive, members.

 

To answer your question, Aetherous, my primary thing is self-sufficient living...specifically independence from utility companies for survival. Speaking of which, lol...

 

It's time to head back up, fire up the stove, check on the critters, unload the supplies, and get ready for the coming spring. Heh, maybe my contribution to society is staying out of its way.

 

Warmest regards

[Stosh]

I get a bit obsessive, but change hobbies every few years, so I think Im pretty good at a few things. Theres other things Ive never been good at, or even average, for instance I cant remember calendar dates of events. Some people have extreme talents and dont have to make effort to just be way beyond the scope of averageness, I think just makes us different, suited to different situations, and , when out of our element , or talent is as much disadvantage as it was advantage otherwise.

That being said, it takes a heck of a lot of effort to exceed mediocrity in something we arent naturally graced with ,but wisely chosen, the gain is worth it, perhaps even more than natural gift.

[Aetherous]

My very basic knowledge of it has led me to believe that Chinese Medicine itself is a generalized approach. Like a general practitioner in Western medicine, one must gain and maintain a broad understanding of various (broad and detailed) principles involved, and be able not just to work directly with the body and qi, but also advise on physical activity, diet, lifestyle, etc?

 

I think it's a great approach. Good medicine, preventative and corrective, is a cornerstone of a happy society. And we can't all be doctors or acupuncturists. But if every medical professional specialized in a certain area, and generalists in medicine diminished, we'd be in trouble.

 

It's true, most practitioners don't specialize.

 

There are some who focus solely on gynecology and infertility, for instance...or others who primarily work with pain and sports medicine. Some don't take patients requiring other things.

 

I personally want to be a general practitioner in that sense...to be able to work on anything.

 

Aside from that, there are different schools of thought throughout Chinese medicine's history. If we expand it to "East Asian medicine", then we can see that there are Korean schools, Japanese schools, etc. There are also people who practice strictly from certain texts, like the Nei Jing, the Shang Han Lun, the wen bing texts, the Pi Wei Lun...in contrast to practicing from the modern textbooks of TCM, which took little pieces of many different schools of thought and tried to make it coherent as one thing. So there is some choice of specialization that way. The style I'm learning requires quite a bit of dedication, so it has to be a specialization despite being able to address any patient...and it has to be learned on top of the basic TCM required in colleges and licensing boards - in that sense, it's hard to specialize in it as much as would be ideal.

[Aetherous]

I get a bit obsessive, but change hobbies every few years, so I think Im pretty good at a few things. Theres other things Ive never been good at, or even average, for instance I cant remember calendar dates of events. Some people have extreme talents and dont have to make effort to just be way beyond the scope of averageness, I think just makes us different, suited to different situations, and , when out of our element , or talent is as much disadvantage as it was advantage otherwise.

That being said, it takes a heck of a lot of effort to exceed mediocrity in something we arent naturally graced with ,but wisely chosen, the gain is worth it, perhaps even more than natural gift.

 

Yes, I think being in line with our talents and interests is very important for specializing...being in line with our destiny. Otherwise, what would motivate us toward pushing the envelope in that field?

[Stosh]

To crush yoor enemies , see them flee before you.....

[Aetherous]

To crush yoor enemies , see them flee before you.....

 

 

[thelerner]

As Vito Andolini once said:

I crush my enemies    

by making them my friends 

then stab them in the back, later.  

 

I think Aetherous is right.   Maybe not so much specialization as passion; which may end up being the same thing.  A life lived with passion is the most worthwhile.  In the play 1001 Nights, the wisest person in the world was asked 'What is the secret of life?'.   She replied with two words- 'Cultivate enthusiasm'.  Not bad. 

 

Not that I'm a good example. 

[silent thunder]

I am a master woodworker and a weak musician.

I love them both dearly and they each bear a major role in my daily life, and though my proficiency and skill with wood far outstrips my ability with instruments of music, I find they both bring similar depth of value to my life.  While my woodworking and metallurgical skills bring much value to society... my music has little value to society, much to me and some to my wife and son (even if only to test their patience).

 

I am a wordsmith and studied with intense discipline... then lived the life of a professional actor and playwright for years.  I was a stand up comic as well and brought some laughter to a good deal of folks.  I am still a writer, every day, though now mostly philosophy and poetry. 

 

I am a watcher and a listener.

I am the spawn of supernovae, the result of mass violent disturbances far in the past of deep space.

 

I am a healer.  Though as often to trees and shrubs as to humans, cats and the occasional neighbor's dog.

 

I am a painter and a sketch artist. 

A proficient hiker and nature survivalist.

A collector of memories and a distributor of hugs.

I am an appreciator of nature and an unapologetic worshiper of clouds and rain, stone and tree, shrub and tall grass.

I am an obsessive climber of rock faces and an addict for bolder hopping.

I am the deep diving swimmer and lover of rivers and lakes and ocean coral head drop-offs.

 

I am a Father and a husband.  Teacher and Student.

I still think of my self as a Son, though my parents have returned to source and I am now the elder of our tribe.

 

I am instinct and intuition, rolled up with a good dose of skepticism and reluctant, yet seemingly endless and enduring optimism.

 

It seems often that I am entirely made of faults, loosely stitched together with good intentions.

 

Lately I am mastering sitting still and relaxing. 

 

and I am breath. in all those other endeavors, I am breath and this serves all as it comes and goes around and around...

all in all, all for all

 

As I breath out, you breath in... again and again.  You breath out and I, in... again, again, again.

 

We are all one. 

[liminal_luke]

"a distributor of hugs"  --- a wordsmith indeed!  Thanks...

[silent thunder]

"a distributor of hugs"  --- a wordsmith indeed!  Thanks...

*hug*! 

[Brian]

I'm a nuisance, mostly -- but I'm pretty good at it, so...

 

<shrug>

[Aetherous]

I'm a nuisance, mostly -- but I'm pretty good at it, so...

 

<shrug>

 

Knowing your gift is half the battle!

[Orion]

Some people are jacks/jills of all trades. Some are specialists.

 

If everyone was a traveler then nobody would sit still long enough to develop societies. If there were not travelers, societies would stagnate and not network with one another.

 

We need every kind of person, beyond a categorical way of looking at it, for humanity to thrive. Nature thrives on diversity and divergence, not one-size-fits-all. The second you look at it, it has already changed.

[dust]

The notion that there are many different types of people and that we thrive on diversity is certainly true. We are diverse as individuals, thriving during our evolution on being capable of many things, and this has led to a great diversity between us also. And so in groups, when we each come to terms with our individual strengths, and start to specialize, we can thrive even more. But when taken to a certain point, when people start to specialize at the expense of certain (previously) basic human activity, we get civilization. And I'd argue that, contrary to appearance, modern civilization isn't a picture of a thriving humanity.

 

When humans each made their own tools, ran through the forests and plains hunting and gathering their own food, gathered their own wood and built their own fires, defended their own homes, created their own languages, etc, life was really fucking difficult. But this was also the time that humans evolved into the super-intelligent and complex creatures that exist today. When humans started splitting into professions -- farming, military, politics, masonry, carpentry, king, etc -- and then within those professions even more specialized roles -- apple picker, infantry, lawmaker, wall builder, chair maker, etc -- we, as Adam Smith notes, started to lose many of the qualities that make a great human what it is.

 

There's such a thing as too much specialism. At this point in time, most human societies are far too focused on individual specialization, even more than in the past. I bet that you only need to take a look around at yourself, family, friends, colleagues, etc, to see this, and the harmful effects of overspecialization. We all know people (or are people) who sit on a chair 8-12 hours per day, hunched over the keyboard, typing some report or code or essay, maybe choosing to go out for an hour at the end of the day to "do exercise" (which consists of some half-assed squats and a bench press), then drinking till midnight and passing out in front of Game of Thrones or American Idol. Or a health professional, a nurse for example, who works 16-hour shifts, eating junk from the machine at the end of the ward, seeing the family for an hour in the morning...

[Aetherous]

In making this thread, it wasn't about the subject of controlling others...although I get why it seems that way, because of asking the question "what if everyone mastered something"...

 

It was more so about pondering the difference in my personal life, between the dissipation of focus and force (for instance by always going to research what's behind the newest political drama so as to be informed), versus the concentration of focus and force (for instance, avoiding all extraneous stuff that has no bearing on my life, and dedicating more time to what matters). And maybe others would like to ponder the same thing...are they effective enough in life, or are they dissipated by things that waste time?

It's been interesting to hear the inevitable balancing of views...I think it is true that human beings do best when somewhat well rounded (and especially maintaining a more natural and healthy lifestyle). I especially liked the idea that people should have their own "schema" of a collection of things they're good at (in my own view, if one thing was paramount and the others were secondary...if the one thing was focused on to like 70%). And definitely, everyone is different...it's important to follow one's heart, to be on their path and doing what they're passionate about...rather than specialization meaning working only at a factory doing one thing for 12 hour shifts. While that kind of job is a foundation of society, I don't think it improves society in the same way as something like what this woman did:



Is modern civilization and society not a picture of a thriving humanity? Like anything in life, we can see two sides to that coin...one hopeful, and one skeptical. Both views are correct. We're doing great, and we can do better.

[silent thunder]

Your last line echoes some words of Shunryu Suzuki that I dearly love.

"you are all perfect just as you are... and you could all use a little work>"

 

I just love that.

[dust]

In making this thread, it wasn't about the subject of controlling others...although I get why it seems that way, because of asking the question "what if everyone mastered something"...

 

It was more so about pondering the difference in my personal life, between the dissipation of focus and force (for instance by always going to research what's behind the newest political drama so as to be informed), versus the concentration of focus and force (for instance, avoiding all extraneous stuff that has no bearing on my life, and dedicating more time to what matters). And maybe others would like to ponder the same thing...are they effective enough in life, or are they dissipated by things that waste time?

 

It's been interesting to hear the inevitable balancing of views...I think it is true that human beings do best when somewhat well rounded (and especially maintaining a more natural and healthy lifestyle). I especially liked the idea that people should have their own "schema" of a collection of things they're good at (in my own view, if one thing was paramount and the others were secondary...if the one thing was focused on to like 70%). And definitely, everyone is different...it's important to follow one's heart, to be on their path and doing what they're passionate about...rather than specialization meaning working only at a factory doing one thing for 12 hour shifts. While that kind of job is a foundation of society, I don't think it improves society in the same way as something like what this woman did:

 

Certainly I did not get the impression that your intended subject was the control of others, and I doubt anyone else did...? Tthough I guess it is easy for the discussion to head that way at some point.

 

I am sorry that you've had to read so much of my balancing of views in particular. But -- obviously! -- I feel quite strongly about the subject..

 

So, regarding this "focus and force". You would be suggesting, with the OP championing specialism, that it would be preferable for one's focus and force to be concentrated on areas directly connected to one's daily life -- and therefore less focus/force on researching the news if that is not one's career or primary enjoyment in life?

 

I'd like to agree on that -- arguing about Trump doesn't do anything to make my life better, I don't think -- but at the same time, we would be in trouble if only a few specialists in each nation were interested in the news, right? Our society requires us to remain involved on a conversational level, otherwise those in charge really will be able to simply "brainwash" us...

[Aetherous]

Certainly I did not get the impression that your intended subject was the control of others, and I doubt anyone else did...? Tthough I guess it is easy for the discussion to head that way at some point.

 

I am sorry that you've had to read so much of my balancing of views in particular. But -- obviously! -- I feel quite strongly about the subject..

 

So, regarding this "focus and force". You would be suggesting, with the OP championing specialism, that it would be preferable for one's focus and force to be concentrated on areas directly connected to one's daily life -- and therefore less focus/force on researching the news if that is not one's career or primary enjoyment in life?

 

I'd like to agree on that -- arguing about Trump doesn't do anything to make my life better, I don't think -- but at the same time, we would be in trouble if only a few specialists in each nation were interested in the news, right? Our society requires us to remain involved on a conversational level, otherwise those in charge really will be able to simply "brainwash" us...

The balancing of views is essential to the truth! I've been agreeing this whole time.

[dust]

I know you have, which in a way makes it worse. I'm more used to people disagreeing with me