Fascinating conversation. As a former professional ballerina who was “discovered and chosen” at age 5.5, and was “forced” into the exclusive world of elite ballet training, even being banned from doing recreational things such as downhill skiing, and just about anything that could cause injury or undo my intense physical training. Sadly, I not only burned out, but was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis at age 20 (I turned professional at age 16). As an adult I have taken the opposite approach, and have worked in a variety of fields including teaching & artistic coaching, medicine, politics, advocacy, human rights, social justice, and Disability Rights. Sadly (?), I never made it to the top of any field I have worked in...🤦🏼♀️
Multiple sclerosis probably wouldn't be caused by ballerina training. We don't know exactly what the origins of MS are in any individual person, but as I'm sure you know, it's caused by your immune system attacking the covers of nerve cells. I don't know what the connection would be between that and ballerina training. I agree with the spirit of everything else you said though, and I think you've lived a good life. :)
What a great combination of brilliance and decency! I am a longtime Malcolm Gladwell fan, and now a new fan of David Epstein’s. I’m looking forward to reading his new book “Range.”
It's amazing how accomodating they both are of each others' ideas even when some are seemingly 180 degrees out of phase. I have read both Outliers and Range and I think both books have their own place in the world. Planet Earth needs more of such a beautiful combination of brilliance and tolerance👌
“Presumably you could keep searching, forever” was meant to say, “One can’t keep searching”, and hence what should be the stopping rule. But Epstein responded to the question for himself. Gladwell smiled because even though his question was misunderstood, he was going to get a great answer. 46:08
Not finished watching, but I wanted to get this out before I forget it. As a polymath, I find it really interested that the idea of variety as a key to performance, kind of endearingly naive. Most of society REALLY wants people to stick to "their lane." And those who teach, weirdly resist any other method than the one they use. It'd be great if they just stopped "training bureaucrats" which is what the current system was designed to do.
Sir Epstein's talk is very similar to sir Ken Robinson's talk about finding the element. And i love it ❤ And when he mentioned "self regulatory learners are the best learners", unschooled or democratic schooled kids that was mentioned by sir robinsons came to mind.
The audio is really quiet I had to turn volume all the way up, a little bit of audio enhancing would make the quality of this video better. Quick reupload. ;)
33:50 "they tried throwing money at them and it didn't change anything" Reading that from a job I don't particularly like because it pays 3x as much as anything else I can find. Was it not for the pay I'd have gone after 6 months, lol. What is he on about? Paying people works. You just need to pay more than the others. They probably tried throwing pennies and concluded paying people more doesn't work. No shit.
In reference to Malcom’s comment people racing a car. I was always amazed at people racing steam engines at the turn of the century. And it seemed to be a spectacle. And a horse racing a train. Am I wrong?
There are other examples of either model being extremely successful. Mike Tyson was heavy weight champion boxer at 20 years old and unified all belts in succession before he was 24 years old. That's absolutely insane to be the best in the world at something so physically demanding at so young
"Know Thyself" means doing the action and the reflection. Without reflection we can't know anything. It's all just superficial data in unruly quantities. So, no, one doesn't know themselves just performing actions, functions; "choosing" an activity or career. It's the result that matters. Looking at the average western human, we don't tend to account for the results of what we do, at least not longer than a few seconds inside the individual bubble.
Honestly, I think specialization is relative. The example of the tennis player still involves a type of specialization, given that he played lots of sports from early childhood. He "specialized" in tennis at an age where lots of kids would still be bouncing between soccer, ballet, piano, and math club. Mid teens is still early specialization when career changes and mid and quarter life crises are so common these days - granted, not as early as Tiger Woods, but still earlier than most of the population. But to me, a true generalist would be the musician who also is a math wiz but plays soccer on the weekends or someone who excels in totally unrelated things. But, I guess it could be said that I'm confusing choosing a field with choosing a specialization...?
Fully echo your point. I doubt if generalists essentially mean excellence in wide variety of skills/discipline/subjects/vocation like math and music? Being "acceptably good" should suffice. What comes to my mind are jack of all and master(by lenient standards) of some, typically what you would think of stuff in CEO of mid size company. I would still like to explore more data on this. Mind you finding data excluding survivorship bias is difficult in this context. One more thing that is hard to factor in is role of luck
At around 53:00 Malcolm says that women leave higher positions in science because women tend to separate what they enjoy doing vs what they are good at. This overly simplifies a more complicated reality. Women leave in part because the industry is still male-dominated, especially in academia.
Serious, professionally trained ballet dancers, of both sexes, need to train hard, early, and exclusively to really “make it” to the top rung in their field. A big reason for this is physicality. Young bodies need to be trained, shaped, and formed from an early age. After age 11 most children’s bodies become harder to shape & correct. How do you react to this idea?
Fascinating conversation. As a former professional ballerina who was “discovered and chosen” at age 5.5, and was “forced” into the exclusive world of elite ballet training, even being banned from doing recreational things such as downhill skiing, and just about anything that could cause injury or undo my intense physical training. Sadly, I not only burned out, but was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis at age 20 (I turned professional at age 16). As an adult I have taken the opposite approach, and have worked in a variety of fields including teaching & artistic coaching, medicine, politics, advocacy, human rights, social justice, and Disability Rights. Sadly (?), I never made it to the top of any field I have worked in...🤦🏼♀️
Its ok. That is more than enough
Multiple sclerosis probably wouldn't be caused by ballerina training. We don't know exactly what the origins of MS are in any individual person, but as I'm sure you know, it's caused by your immune system attacking the covers of nerve cells. I don't know what the connection would be between that and ballerina training.
I agree with the spirit of everything else you said though, and I think you've lived a good life. :)
What a great combination of brilliance and decency! I am a longtime Malcolm Gladwell fan, and now a new fan of David Epstein’s. I’m looking forward to reading his new book “Range.”
it's really really good I hope you do read it!
It's amazing how accomodating they both are of each others' ideas even when some are seemingly 180 degrees out of phase. I have read both Outliers and Range and I think both books have their own place in the world. Planet Earth needs more of such a beautiful combination of brilliance and tolerance👌
they're both so tiny, and brilliant and kind.
L
Looks great
“Presumably you could keep searching, forever” was meant to say, “One can’t keep searching”, and hence what should be the stopping rule. But Epstein responded to the question for himself. Gladwell smiled because even though his question was misunderstood, he was going to get a great answer. 46:08
What a charming intro: their exchange of criticism that birthed their love 😅🥰
The degree of humility these two posses, so rooted, so tolerant, so open..... just wonderful
They just validated every person with ADHD’s experience ever
this is an interview worth watching once and then go experiment in your life, then come back once more and learn something new.
Two great authors I follow. Great!
i hate when people like this are ignorant of the Sudbury Model of K-12
These two men are very well spoken and just as considerate.
Range is a really good book! I enjoyed it immensely. I'm going to re read it soon.
Just read it. Confirmed my life!!❤
Not finished watching, but I wanted to get this out before I forget it. As a polymath, I find it really interested that the idea of variety as a key to performance, kind of endearingly naive. Most of society REALLY wants people to stick to "their lane." And those who teach, weirdly resist any other method than the one they use. It'd be great if they just stopped "training bureaucrats" which is what the current system was designed to do.
Sir Epstein's talk is very similar to sir Ken Robinson's talk about finding the element. And i love it ❤
And when he mentioned "self regulatory learners are the best learners", unschooled or democratic schooled kids that was mentioned by sir robinsons came to mind.
Malcolm Gladwell did a fantastic job in this interview❤
Range is great book! Just finished it.
wow!! amazing interview
The audio is really quiet I had to turn volume all the way up, a little bit of audio enhancing would make the quality of this video better. Quick reupload. ;)
33:50 "they tried throwing money at them and it didn't change anything"
Reading that from a job I don't particularly like because it pays 3x as much as anything else I can find. Was it not for the pay I'd have gone after 6 months, lol. What is he on about? Paying people works. You just need to pay more than the others. They probably tried throwing pennies and concluded paying people more doesn't work. No shit.
In reference to Malcom’s comment people racing a car. I was always amazed at people racing steam engines at the turn of the century. And it seemed to be a spectacle. And a horse racing a train. Am I wrong?
Beautiful minds ❤️💜🎈
There are other examples of either model being extremely successful.
Mike Tyson was heavy weight champion boxer at 20 years old and unified all belts in succession before he was 24 years old. That's absolutely insane to be the best in the world at something so physically demanding at so young
Tim Duncan is another example of an NBA player who specialized later. He was a swimmer with little interest in basketball.
So entertaining and witty.
This is so phenomenal
"Know Thyself" means doing the action and the reflection. Without reflection we can't know anything. It's all just superficial data in unruly quantities.
So, no, one doesn't know themselves just performing actions, functions; "choosing" an activity or career. It's the result that matters. Looking at the average western human, we don't tend to account for the results of what we do, at least not longer than a few seconds inside the individual bubble.
Isn't this just like the Foxes vs Hedgehog theory
Isn't the real problem that the both of you try to argue by anecdote?
poor audio and too low audio
The truth is that they met on an island or a private airplane.
00:37:10
*This guy didn't kill himself.*
OMG....HA
Honestly, I think specialization is relative. The example of the tennis player still involves a type of specialization, given that he played lots of sports from early childhood. He "specialized" in tennis at an age where lots of kids would still be bouncing between soccer, ballet, piano, and math club. Mid teens is still early specialization when career changes and mid and quarter life crises are so common these days - granted, not as early as Tiger Woods, but still earlier than most of the population. But to me, a true generalist would be the musician who also is a math wiz but plays soccer on the weekends or someone who excels in totally unrelated things. But, I guess it could be said that I'm confusing choosing a field with choosing a specialization...?
Fully echo your point.
I doubt if generalists essentially mean excellence in wide variety of skills/discipline/subjects/vocation like math and music?
Being "acceptably good" should suffice.
What comes to my mind are jack of all and master(by lenient standards) of some, typically what you would think of stuff in CEO of mid size company.
I would still like to explore more data on this.
Mind you finding data excluding survivorship bias is difficult in this context.
One more thing that is hard to factor in is role of luck
I vibe with a lot of what David Epstein is saying.
Null set, best digital computer analysis of biological unknowns, very good result to know. Centaur modelling indicated for FSD...
most beautiful 3:10
Tiger Woods is not a happy person ..too much pressure
I love ur book mr Epstein! Please...talk more slowly..it’s way toooo fast
He is not allowing the audience capture his thoughts...story telling needs work
At around 53:00 Malcolm says that women leave higher positions in science because women tend to separate what they enjoy doing vs what they are good at. This overly simplifies a more complicated reality. Women leave in part because the industry is still male-dominated, especially in academia.
Ohhh snap!
Serious, professionally trained ballet dancers, of both sexes, need to train hard, early, and exclusively to really “make it” to the top rung in their field. A big
reason for this is physicality. Young bodies need to be trained, shaped, and formed from an early age. After age 11 most children’s bodies become harder to shape & correct. How do you react to this idea?
Theory: Gladwell only agreed to this interview to bury the other google results for “Malcolm Gladwell Epstein”