The Shape Debate
I've come to realize a thematic principle that repeatedly gets tested throughout one's life. Breadth vs. Depth. The choice between devoting a lot of resources to succeed at a specific thing or spreading out your success across many things. It's a tradeoff that has enormous impact. Whether we realize it or not, everyday is a struggle between these two forces; at every granularity, the principle is tested. Although the principle is simple in retrospect, its analysis and understanding can provide more meaning and direction in life.
To clarify the problem, every person has a finite amount of resources to use for an infinite amount of things to do. The goal is to strike the right balance between the number of things to devote yourself to, while maintaining a level of success that keeps you happy.
It's still up in the air which approach to life is better. There are many views and examples that can be made for either side, so I will try to provide the pros and cons of both with as few examples as possible.
Breadth Pros:
Quotes of Support
Proponents
The entire U.S. K-12 education system promotes and requires competency in several diverse areas of study. This continues into higher levels of education as colleges tend to accept applications from more “well-rounded” candidates.
Breadth Cons (Diverse Discrimination):
Quotes of Dissent
Depth Pros:
Quotes of Support
Proponents
Academia and Professional Sports both promote the endeavor of star power. Professors are experts in their field of study, and Professional Athletes are the best at their sports.
Depth Cons (Falling into the Abyss):
Quotes of Dissent
Reality:
The consequences of this debate are pronounced with globalization. The evolution of the economy requires an adaptive workforce that can quickly learn new ideas and execute them across different countries and cultures. As technology advances, people must be able to change with it. At the same time however, more competition exists, the ability to differentiate yourself is that much harder. Specializing helps you stand out, and doing something that cannot be easily replaceable remains vital.
My Take:
Everyone has to make choices and narrow down their paths to some degree, but by definition, not everyone can be the best at what they do.
The trick is finding the right balance. There are people who try to do too much and end up doing nothing at all (i.e. the high school student that has more extracurricular activities than classes), and there are people who spend years on a single thing and do nothing else (Russian mathematician who proved the $1 Million Poincare conjecture, but it took 7 years of solitary research and the man became so introverted he refused to attend the ceremony to receive his award). My suggestion is dabbling in a few things until you find your true interests and then excel in those areas. But nothing lasts forever, so always be willing to change, adapt, and learn, otherwise you may be missing out and life will pass you by.
Life Lesson:
Everyone is a 3D shape, and every direction is a different interest in life. The more the shape stretches in a certain direction, the better the person is at that interest. The key is to form as many sharp spikes for interests of satisfaction. A sphere is someone who has the same skill level for everything they do, otherwise known as average with no distinction. In contrast, a single spike represents someone that is good at only one thing in life and nothing else. The goal is to become a spiked ball, or a ball of spikes, that way, whatever life may throw at you, you can catch, or at least take a chunk out of.
Analogy to Chew On:
You can't simply be a knife and expect to be useful for every dish. Forks and spoons are quite practical yet each have their strengths and weaknesses. Let's not get into chopsticks, but sporks just might be the meaning of life.
To clarify the problem, every person has a finite amount of resources to use for an infinite amount of things to do. The goal is to strike the right balance between the number of things to devote yourself to, while maintaining a level of success that keeps you happy.
It's still up in the air which approach to life is better. There are many views and examples that can be made for either side, so I will try to provide the pros and cons of both with as few examples as possible.
Breadth Pros:
Quotes of Support
“The world is your oyster” - modern adaptation from Shakespeare's play, "The Merry Wives of Windsor"
“Diversify your portfolio” - Investment MantraIt is human nature to want to experience many things, and it is the motivating principle for the path of breadth. Satisfaction is derived from experiencing different things and, doing so, sparks new interests and keeps life entertaining. Furthermore, diversification creates more flexibility and adaptability for future circumstance.
Proponents
The entire U.S. K-12 education system promotes and requires competency in several diverse areas of study. This continues into higher levels of education as colleges tend to accept applications from more “well-rounded” candidates.
Breadth Cons (Diverse Discrimination):
Quotes of Dissent
“Diversification is a protection against ignorance. It makes very little sense for those who know what they're doing.” - Warren BuffetThe problem of having many diverse interests is the added layer of complexity. It runs the risk of spreading yourself too thin, not being particularly good at, nor deriving the maximum amount of satisfaction possible for, any one thing.
Depth Pros:
Quotes of Support
“Master of my Domain” - Seinfeld
“Be All You Can Be” - U.S. Military SloganThe allure of pursuing depth is the gratification of being an expert, a deep understanding and knowledge of an interest is very rewarding. At the end of the day, everyone wants to be the best at what they do. The other advantage is simplicity, once you find your calling your life is set.
Proponents
Academia and Professional Sports both promote the endeavor of star power. Professors are experts in their field of study, and Professional Athletes are the best at their sports.
Depth Cons (Falling into the Abyss):
Quotes of Dissent
“Don't put all your eggs in one basket” - English IdiomThe risk of specialization is the probability that the interest in question becomes obsolete. Specializing narrows your range of possibilities, and if that range gets outsourced or deprecated, your future is compromised. More devastating is the wasted, extra effort expended for that interest. Specializing also runs the risk of boredom, as it is difficult to predict how long the interest will last.
Reality:
The consequences of this debate are pronounced with globalization. The evolution of the economy requires an adaptive workforce that can quickly learn new ideas and execute them across different countries and cultures. As technology advances, people must be able to change with it. At the same time however, more competition exists, the ability to differentiate yourself is that much harder. Specializing helps you stand out, and doing something that cannot be easily replaceable remains vital.
My Take:
Everyone has to make choices and narrow down their paths to some degree, but by definition, not everyone can be the best at what they do.
The trick is finding the right balance. There are people who try to do too much and end up doing nothing at all (i.e. the high school student that has more extracurricular activities than classes), and there are people who spend years on a single thing and do nothing else (Russian mathematician who proved the $1 Million Poincare conjecture, but it took 7 years of solitary research and the man became so introverted he refused to attend the ceremony to receive his award). My suggestion is dabbling in a few things until you find your true interests and then excel in those areas. But nothing lasts forever, so always be willing to change, adapt, and learn, otherwise you may be missing out and life will pass you by.
Life Lesson:
Everyone is a 3D shape, and every direction is a different interest in life. The more the shape stretches in a certain direction, the better the person is at that interest. The key is to form as many sharp spikes for interests of satisfaction. A sphere is someone who has the same skill level for everything they do, otherwise known as average with no distinction. In contrast, a single spike represents someone that is good at only one thing in life and nothing else. The goal is to become a spiked ball, or a ball of spikes, that way, whatever life may throw at you, you can catch, or at least take a chunk out of.
Analogy to Chew On:
You can't simply be a knife and expect to be useful for every dish. Forks and spoons are quite practical yet each have their strengths and weaknesses. Let's not get into chopsticks, but sporks just might be the meaning of life.
