Skip to main content

Jack of All Trades or Master of One?

What does it mean to be the best at something?

Einstein. Mozart. Jordan. Aristotle. These are often the most recognized names in their respective field of work, looked up to by millions every day.  But out of the billions of people who have ever lived in this world, how many of us can reasonably expect to live up to their status and ability?


Short answer: the vast majority can't, and won't ever. But that doesn't stop us from aspiring to be the best at whatever we pursue, including me. Why do some people appear more successful than others? A short formula for our ability to do something is as follows (note that this may not be comprehensive, or entirely accurate, but is meant for simplicity's sake):

Ability = Talent x Efficient Work

where "Efficient Work" can be further broken down into time spent x quality of work. Making lots of different mistakes and reflecting on them counts as quality work. Gazing at your phone every 5 minutes while practicing the piano does not. This is an important note - simply working hard isn't enough, just like a proton's velocity in a magnetic field directed upwards, effort needs to be put in the right DIRECTION (sorry for making a right-hand rule joke, I miss physics).

Image result for saitama vs garou

What it Takes to be a Master

The greatest of all time maximize this formula - along with a prodigious talent or mind, they work EXTREMELY hard in their area of exception. Mozart, while lucky to be born in a family of talented musicians, was proactive in his studies, started composing at the age of five, and wrote his first symphony at the age of eight. In addition to having the perfect body length and shape for swimming, at his peak, Michael Phelps swam at least 50 miles a week, training five to six hours a day. The famous manga hero Saitama trained so hard he went bald. Of course, it is possible to be great with less talent or less work, and you may notice that you have classmates who can ace tests without studying, or become more skilled at a video game with much less time on the learning curve. 

Unfortunately for you and I, this formula means that we may need to spend 5 times the amount of time or more to master a skill as someone who is more talented. I won't be going into whether talent is genetic or can be learned and improved in this article, but it's a thought you can ponder through your experiences in school, work, or even online. So what are we supposed to do about this fact? Do we woefully tread away our days practicing in vain? Of course not.

Is Being a Jack of All Trades So Bad?

If you're anything like me, you enjoy exploring just about everything from chess to wakeboarding and enjoy learning everything from linear algebra to music composition. I'm not able to call myself anything above an amateur in most of these areas. However, especially at a young age, I think it is exceptionally important to open your eyes to as many potential endeavors as possible; you don't know what you have a knack for until you try. 

One of my favorite little sayings is "explore, then exploit". Aside from sounding like a Christopher Columbus motto, I interpret these words as meaning try a vast array of studies, skills, or experiences, then put all your effort in the ones you are best at or enjoy the most, or best of all, both of those. Besides, simply trying new experiences is fun.

Final Thoughts

One compromise to both of these perspectives is to be a "T-Shaped" person. This is someone who is knowledgeable or capable in many different areas but is especially good or specializes in one, a particularly good characteristic in social settings and college applications. 

A way to "hack" the notion of being the best at something is to simply create an endeavor or study that hasn't existed yet or practice a skill that little people ever develop. For example, becoming relatively good at snooker is a lot less competitive than being considered good at soccer. Ph.D. researchers who spend years synthesizing their thesis are often the most knowledgeable person in the world in their extremely specific topic of study.

All in all, the only aspects of our life we can control is what we decide to pursue and how much work to put into it. Consistency outshines sudden bursts of motivation. Explore a lot, pursue areas you enjoy feverishly, and be the best that you can be - after all, that's all we can be. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Monty Hall Problem Solved, Once and For All

The first time I ever encountered the infamous Monty Hall Problem was 5 years ago on a video from one of my favorite YouTubers, Numberphile . The problem states: Source: Wikipedia "Suppose you're on a game show, and you're given the choice of three doors: Behind one door is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick a door, say No. 1, and the host, who knows what's behind the doors, opens another door, say No. 3, which has a goat. He then says to you, 'Do you want to pick door No. 2?' Is it to your advantage to switch your choice?" The answer is a resounding yes, you are twice as likely to win by switching. However, the problem is seemingly paradoxical and to this day baffles many people - why does switching doors matter in the grand scheme? Through hundreds of YouTube comments on the original videos, I see 2 major misconceptions that I will layout and explain the best that I can.  Misconception 1: The event of the door not opened/picked is inde...

Class Review: Discrete Math and Probability Theory (CS70)

CS70 at UC Berkeley during Summer 2019 was the hardest class I've ever taken. It takes centuries of development in Discrete Mathematics and Probability Theory (some theories took decades to prove or refine) and shoves abstract concepts down your throat in a span of 8 weeks. French is beautiful I believe that there is no other class at Berkeley in which the disparity between the ability of the students in the course is so stark - students range from International Math Olympiad medalists who have years of rigorous contest math experience to beginning computer science students who hate math and just want to declare the major (a pity that this course is required for that purpose). I fall somewhere in the middle, a math-loving CS student with a bit of contest math background, but little experience in formal proof writing or anything beyond basic probability. The course is divided into two parts: Discrete Mathematics and Probability Theory (as can probably be inferred by my prev...