Op-Ed Columnist - No, It’s Not About Race - NYTimes.com: "For example, for generations schoolchildren studied the long debate between Hamiltonians and Jeffersonians. Hamiltonians stood for urbanism, industrialism and federal power. Jeffersonians were suspicious of urban elites and financial concentration and believed in small-town virtues and limited government. Jefferson advocated “a wise and frugal government” that will keep people from hurting each other, but will otherwise leave them free and “shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.”"
This Hamiltonian Vs. Jeffersonians divide which has recently been stated as Blue Vs. Red states is a very rational behavior even though it does not seem so a priori and can be explained via population density and the holistic theorem: The more concentrated a population, the more it makes sense for it to seek government intermediation. The more people there are, the more government intervention makes sense, on a linear cost bringing in quadratic benefits basis.
Showing posts with label brooks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label brooks. Show all posts
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Friday, May 1, 2009
Op-Ed Columnist - Genius - The Modern View - NYTimes.com
Op-Ed Columnist - Genius - The Modern View - NYTimes.com
I really like this type of anthropo-socio-cultural subjects David Brooks often covers.
This piece reporting recent research on genius confirms many of the things I have always suspected. The development of what is referred to here as "Genius" is simply the result of implementing the predictable steps that help make things appreciably better:
- To do things well you must spend the initial time to refine or break down a whole block into smaller units that are mastered with precision
-Once this process is mastered, executing other more creative sequences can be performed with superb flawlessness.
With respect to BICs,
-the effort is yet again to break a complex product into elementary units
-Once this process is mastered, handling other more complex or creative structures can be performed with superb flawlessness.
I wish Brooks would have also dealt or would deal in another piece with the forms of genius that society fails to appreciate in due time or that get altogether lost, those ultimate artists of Flaubertian imagery; the type of structural societal changes that may help unhindered expression or enjoyment of the various forms of genius. In the end a genius that is not duly recognized is a loss to society.
As Schopenhauer said: "talent hits a target no one else can hit, genius hits a target no one else can see". Using this lexicon, we'd say the article is more a discussion on talent rather then genius.
I really like this type of anthropo-socio-cultural subjects David Brooks often covers.
This piece reporting recent research on genius confirms many of the things I have always suspected. The development of what is referred to here as "Genius" is simply the result of implementing the predictable steps that help make things appreciably better:
- To do things well you must spend the initial time to refine or break down a whole block into smaller units that are mastered with precision
-Once this process is mastered, executing other more creative sequences can be performed with superb flawlessness.
With respect to BICs,
-the effort is yet again to break a complex product into elementary units
-Once this process is mastered, handling other more complex or creative structures can be performed with superb flawlessness.
I wish Brooks would have also dealt or would deal in another piece with the forms of genius that society fails to appreciate in due time or that get altogether lost, those ultimate artists of Flaubertian imagery; the type of structural societal changes that may help unhindered expression or enjoyment of the various forms of genius. In the end a genius that is not duly recognized is a loss to society.
As Schopenhauer said: "talent hits a target no one else can hit, genius hits a target no one else can see". Using this lexicon, we'd say the article is more a discussion on talent rather then genius.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)