We are all average.
Some (like me) are just more average than others. Yet, no matter how amazing we might be at something, or how amazing we think we are as a person, we are far less unique than we believe and far more average at most things, than we are good (or bad) at a few. Overall, no matter who we are, how rich we are, how beautiful - we are all average at the majority of everything. Even the people who would be considered "renaissance" people who are good in multiple fields, are still overly average at many more things than they are good at. It is just the way we are.
Should this upset us?
I don't think so.
Instead, I reckon it should be a reminder to focus our attention and energy on trying across too many areas simultaneously and getting not very far with any of them. Because I think that one of the dangers of spreading too thin across multiple areas is, that our human nature will favour the parts of that discipline that we enjoy, while neglecting the pieces we don't. And as a result, we will remain average at all of them because we will be missing key components that are necessary to excel at it. It is a bit like baking a cake, but only putting eggs in because we like eggs a lot. An omelette can be delicious and enjoyable, but it is not a cake, nor can we call ourselves a master pâtissier.
To be great at a single discipline requires being good at multiple components that make up that discipline, and it is highly likely that some of those units of study and practice are less enjoyable than others, and one might not like doing them, but they are necessary to do. But, we don't have to excel at every component in order to be great at the whole, we just have to be good enough in all of them so that we can shine where we do excel. But if we have gaps that aren't at a good enough level, no matter how good we are in other areas, it is highly unlikely that we can be great at the discipline. If a golfer can drive the ball 400 yards but can't putt, unless they can get a hole-in-one every time, they are a pretty useless golfer.
With the current technologies and tools, we are able to "gap-fill" a lot of what we can't actually do, but it makes us feel like we can. And while the tool stack grows, so too do our gaps, and we become increasingly reliant whilst simultaneously decreasingly skilled. Many will of course argue that using the tools is a skill in and of itself and that is partially the case, but the problem with it is that if the only skill is tool using, there is zero competitive advantage possible, because all have access to the same advantages. Like a business, the skills that differentiate one person from another have to be held skills, because if they aren't held, they aren't yours.
And the growing problem for many now and in the rapidly changing future, is that most are relying on tools to fill the gaps in areas that learning the skills build foundational competence. What I mean by this is that before we have a chance to build physical structure in our body and brain to be able to understand and process what we are doing, we are skipping to the end result. Using the baking analogy, it is like going to the shop and buying a cake as proof of work to be a pâtissier at an upscale restaurant. Why would they pay you, as they can buy the same cake and cut out the middleman.
What AI and automation is doing is cutting out the middleman in every discipline where humans used to be able to prove their work. Not only that, because it is algorithmic and can be trained on multiple bests and across multiple disciplines, it can be far better than the average individual can ever be. Even if it isn't the best at any discipline, it can be close to the best at every discipline.
We can't compete.
And this is just the start of the shift to our complete obsolescence in the workplace, because while currently the manual jobs are somewhat safe, I suspect that even those are going to rapidly be replaced by automation driven by AI that can solve a million problems faster than we can even identify a single problem to start on. For instance, one of the major issues with humanoid robots so far, is that humans have been designing them - as AI takes over, they will progress much faster and become far more precise than any human can ever be.
Clumsy today, dominating tomorrow.
As I see it, what we are doing is widening a massive gap that we don't really know how to fill. The skills we have or could learn will become largely redundant, which means we will have to find a way to live a life without having anything to do. And those who think that we can "do whatever" and be happy, have failed to recognise what we as humans value; perhaps because rather than really considering it, they have instead been using tools to gap-fill and avoid the reality of being human.
Bar a global EMP that takes away everything digital, there is no rolling-back automation, which means we are going to have to re-evaluate what we value as humans and find ways to live fulfilling lives that we consider valuable enough to keep living, otherwise we will descend into extreme dysfunction. I believe we are already rolling quickly down that hill and gaining momentum, because we keep leaning into the status quo conditions that have led us into massive wealth and opportunity inequalities, rising health issues and social polarisation and disconnection.
We are creating enormous gaps in humanity.
But pay it no mind.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
Be part of the Hive discussion.
And you may be rewarded.
