I completely and utterly disagree. In a world where everything is a zero-sum game, the top few percent in any given area will gain more and more share. Being average or even is good is no longer enough.
I would also venture to say that the people who are good and something _and_ are generalists (e.g. the scientists in the article) are better in both halves than someone who is just one of those.
If your life is entirely oriented around hoarding as much money & power as possible, then sure, what you said it's true. But the world is filled with billions of regular people finding meaning in an average, good-enough life. The world runs on the backs of ordinary, unexceptional people like you & me.
> If your life is entirely oriented around hoarding as much money & power
Why do people have to always denigrate wanting money and power? It's an intrinsic desire to want power and resources. If somebody finds happiness that way why disparage them?
Because it's the same way unfullfilling as a drug addiction. Sure you have miles instead of needles and dots on the suit instead on the veins, but in the end you miss the one thing that matters-passing a legacy, influencing other life's in a good direction, for a socially acceptable Trainspotting reenactment.
Excessive desire for money and power alone is generally viewed as anti-social and possibly even pathological.
Of course, figuring out what is "excessive" may be contentious, especially if one also has other good intentions that come along for the ride and help balance things out (e.g. philanthropy, strong ethical boundaries).
If you look closely enough you would see that the attainment of wealth and power definitely does not bring happiness. In order to know this an individual needs to experience both ends of the spectrum and have the ability to clearly introspect and compare both experiences.
There's a big difference between wanting money & power, and "hoarding as much" as possible, as I said. It depends on your value system, but most people place a non-zero value on showing love to others & bettering the world, and a money-hoarder doesn't do that.
This is a flagrant and dangerous misunderstanding of reality. The history books are filled to the brim with examples of developments that have brought net-positive benefits to humanity.
It's correct in the short run, incorrect in the long run, and correct in the ludicrously (I'm talking cosmological scales here) long run. For all practical purposes, the long-term is much less zero-sum than the short-term.
Human existence has only been non-zero sum globally for the last hundred years or so. Additionally, it’s been non-zero sum in the Americas for several hundred years before that, but only because all the natives were wiped out. The rest of human history has been a zero sum struggle for existence.
> Being average or even is good is no longer enough.
Enough for what, exactly? What are you trying to optimize? Your contribution to society? Status? Happiness? Fulfillment? I think for some of these, average may give you a better outcome than others depending on what you want. And I also think people tend to change their goal over their lifetime
I was just thinking about this. I have some elderly grandparents that spent their lives as elementary and high school teachers with a home farm. They lived modestly and have collected retirement pensions and farmland for many years. So they are actually very well off. They want for nothing financially. They have lived long, storied, beautiful lives.
Billions of dollars of wealth and power would make no difference to them. Because they already have more than they need. In fact, it would probably just bring unwanted attention and stress.
I'm sure at a younger age, more wealth and power would have been nice. Perhaps to take away the more stressful, tedious parts of work life, but something about going through those moments make the better moments that much sweeter.
Spending your life trying to accumulate wealth for the sake of wealth and power alone will do nothing but create stress and headache for yourself.
more and more what though? I work with a lot of people that are intelligent and worked super hard their whole lives and are in the 0.1% but I really dont want to be like them. They are really boring.
Meanwhile the janitor in our building has some health problems but 15 grandchildren and always has a joke ready.
Exactly what author is trying to convince against. Today's world is 'easier to master in multiple discipline' world and future is even brighter with all new education technologies.
I would also venture to say that the people who are good and something _and_ are generalists (e.g. the scientists in the article) are better in both halves than someone who is just one of those.