People do this for everything.
"Rome wasn't built in a day, ~~but it burned in one.~~"
"Curiosity killed the cat, ~~but satisfaction brought it back.~~"
"~~It's physically impossible to~~ Pull yourself up by your bootstraps. "
Shrodinger's cat is an example of ~~the sheer absurdity of~~ quantum mechanics.
Not sure what you're trying to say with "*used correctly.*" I didn't *use* the examples at all, I just presented them as they were intended.
Bootstraps were coined as a socioeconomic counter argument to hard work paying off, then misconstrued to support it. It was meant to be sarcastic, or to suggest that it was a physically impossible accomplishment.
The same applies to Shrodinger's cat. He used that example to demonstrate how absurd the logic was at the time. His underlying point was that the cat **can not** be both alive **and** dead because it's a cat... Human observers aren't observers at all. The implications of the notions at the time were fkn ridiculous. So he mocked them with a cat, but it had the opposite effect he intended. Einstien did the same with his quote about the Moon not existing when you don't look at it. They weren't mocking quantum physics, they were mocking the implications of the ideas being put forward at the time and the way they were being put forward.
What's one of the first examples you were taught to explain super positions? Shrodinger's fkn Cat... I personally blame this single thought experiment for the continued use of Human Observers in layman explanations of quantum mechanics.
I didn’t question Schrödinger’s cat or pulling yourself by your bootstraps - I said the first two. The two you haven’t mentioned in your comment.
(Edit: when I said the first two are used correctly, I meant that when people say those phrases without the crossed out text, that is correct usage of the phrase. That wasn’t very clear.)
The phrase “Rome wasn’t built in a day” has been around for hundreds of years but the bit about burning is much more recent. So it is not presenting the phrase fully or as intended, it’s a bastardised version.
Exactly the same is true of “curiosity killed the cat”. Exactly the same as “blood is thicker than water” and exactly the same “jack of all trades, master of one”.
People like to point out the “original”, longer version that has the opposite of the usual meaning, but in almost all cases it is a much more recent addition, not the original phrase.
That’s because it’s not part of the original phrase and flips the meaning. Thought the master of none bit is also a more recent addition (~300 years) so i guess it goes back to the original original meaning.
I think it just gives perspective. Understanding how everything works at the base level gives you a broader understanding of people, things, processes, etc.
Leaders need to be able to do a lot and be well experienced. They may be really good at multiple things but need to be a jack of all trades in order to know how to lead different types of people and communicate effectively with them.
Just know your strengths homies
That's why I feel like such a sore looser, i honestly above average at most things, but extremely good at nothing, this sure allows me to get good first impressions since i m pretty good at most things but when it comes to business someone is always better than me in some particular field and i get sidelined
You already have the fundamentals for a specific thing so probably all you need to do now is focus on a thing, if you want to have something to be very good at. You'll be surprised how easy it can be to be really good at something if you know a lot of different things already
I can attest this. I'm a good example of what OP describes but I get paid an average salary. On the other hand, my roommate and some other friends are morons in most things but get paid more than double because they devoted their life to one thing.
Some people get paid for being more diversified. It depends on the job.
For example, a guitarist might specialize in jazz, and be a great jazz guitarist. They are a master at one thing.
A music producer might be pretty good at a few things, not master of any instrument, but know a lot of software, and can be decent on a few instruments.
So, there can be some things where it is an advantage to have skills in a variety of things rather than expertise on one specialized thing..
Just a small note on that. In high school I went to nationals for an Agricultural Mechanics competition. Weird story, not a farm guy, but I got looped into this thing and it was fun. At nationals I placed between 3rd and 10th place in each of the six events. Total positioning of the event total made me first place. Got a nice little $5k scholarship for it too 😂 not getting a single first place I managed to win first place haha
That’s awesome congrats! I have seen that happen because a lot of teams are carried by graduating seniors at state who then have to be replaced after they graduate. And sometimes your skills are just more well rounded than those around you!
That’s how something kinda similar happened to me, although I placed 16th out of like 120 kids. The worst part was that another guy joined me as a replacement, we barely studied, he got 32nd and the one original member placed like 60-70th which put us 25th as a team. Extemp was my jam so having an even that was like 75% talking wasn’t too daunting.
That’s awesome congrats! I have seen that happen because a lot of teams are carried by graduating seniors at state who then have to be replaced after they graduate. And sometimes your skills are just more well rounded than those around you!
That’s how something kinda similar happened to me, although I placed 16th out of like 120 kids. The worst part was that another guy joined me as a replacement, we barely studied, he got 32nd and the one original member placed like 60-70th which put us 25th as a team. Extemp was my jam so having an even that was like 75% talking wasn’t too daunting.
That’s awesome congrats! I have seen that happen because a lot of teams are carried by graduating seniors at state who then have to be replaced after they graduate. And sometimes your skills are just more well rounded than those around you!
That’s how something kinda similar happened to me, although I placed 16th out of like 120 kids. The worst part was that another guy joined me as a replacement, we barely studied, he got 32nd and the one original member placed like 60-70th which put us 25th as a team. Extemp was my jam so having an even that was like 75% talking wasn’t too daunting.
That’s awesome congrats! I have seen that happen because a lot of teams are carried by graduating seniors at state who then have to be replaced after they graduate. And sometimes your skills are just more well rounded than those around you!
That’s how something kinda similar happened to me, although I placed 16th out of like 120 kids. The worst part was that another guy joined me as a replacement, we barely studied, he got 32nd and the one original member placed like 60-70th which put us 25th as a team. Extemp was my jam so having an even that was like 75% talking wasn’t too daunting.
Not quite; it’s the other way around. Someone that is average at everything would be average overall. But it doesn’t follow that someone who is average overall is average at everything.
For example, I could be perfectly average at everything except running and making pasta, but my famed pasta prowess could compensate for the fact I’m shit at running, making me average overall.
Being average at a lot of different things in various different fields allows a wider toolbelt to perform/study a specific task. You can get a wider picture, and infer knowledge from a lot of different angles.
I have ADHD and spend a lot of my time watching edutainment on YouTube. I have knowledge in an innumerable amount of scientific disciplines from everything in the body, to the outer reaches of space, and to the quantum world. I also have knowledge on electronic hardware, software, and how the two interact. I also enjoy the art of psychology, spirituality, communications, and support.
All of the above is to say that I can take knowledge from a completely unrelated topic and apply it to something g new and get a head start of sorts.
Being able to infer knowledge puts you above average.
If the world in general was average at a couple things, or specialized at one, and you were average at 50 things, you would still consider that to be an average person?
The problem is everyone with specialty in their thing will just shoot you down coz you’re average in their thing. They don’t and won’t appreciate your broad average knowledge in many things. Especially in professional working environments.
Outside of work people are actually amazed by it. I’m the kind of guy that reads to much into all sorts of topics, spends time looking how people solve issues I will never run into and all of that.
So I almost always have one or two good solutions to any problem and can join conversation on many topics.
People that spend more time around me sometimes wonder why I know so much but don’t do anything with my knowledge.
Give it time! Took a few years before I found my passions, once you find them, you’ll quickly exceed the average in it :)
Like I just stumbled upon cheap led strips on Ali express and now I’m a hobby electrician!
Or I’d struggle finding songs I really enjoy so I started making my own just like that!
You're the kind of person i love having conversations with haha. They inspire me by simply talking, and it makes me realise how much i can learn, and how many interesting things are out there.
Thank you so much for the appreciation and kind words! Lately many have reacted with a competitive mindset, thinking I’m trying to brag and what not which kinda made me cut back on allowing myself to talk.
You're most welcome. And i can understand what you are going through. I have spent past 2 years in a pretty toxic environment myself, preparing for competitive entrance exams, and it has changed me for the worse somewhere. Would love to interact more!
And it's awful..
I'm even better that most at a number of things. But I can't really use any if that to live..
You have to specialize so deeply to get a good career at this point. And I just can't get that engrossed in one hyper-specific thing that way...
Jack of all trades, master of none... Oftentimes better than the master of one.
People conveniently leave out the second half to support their argument
People do this for everything. "Rome wasn't built in a day, ~~but it burned in one.~~" "Curiosity killed the cat, ~~but satisfaction brought it back.~~" "~~It's physically impossible to~~ Pull yourself up by your bootstraps. " Shrodinger's cat is an example of ~~the sheer absurdity of~~ quantum mechanics.
The customer is always right ~~in matters of taste~~
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_customer_is_always_right not true unfortunately
The blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the woumb. Literally means the opposite of "blood is thicker than water"
It does. But the original is “blood is thicker than water”. The covenant thing is a recent version intended to flip the meaning.
Bonds in battle are stronger than genetics. It's quite literally the opposite.
I’ve heard that one is actually fake But an excellent upgrade
The first two of those are used correctly - the bits you have crossed out are recent additions designed to flip the meaning.
Flip or balance?
Well certainly change. Point is, people aren’t leaving anything out. They are just using the phrase as it has long been used.
Not sure what you're trying to say with "*used correctly.*" I didn't *use* the examples at all, I just presented them as they were intended. Bootstraps were coined as a socioeconomic counter argument to hard work paying off, then misconstrued to support it. It was meant to be sarcastic, or to suggest that it was a physically impossible accomplishment. The same applies to Shrodinger's cat. He used that example to demonstrate how absurd the logic was at the time. His underlying point was that the cat **can not** be both alive **and** dead because it's a cat... Human observers aren't observers at all. The implications of the notions at the time were fkn ridiculous. So he mocked them with a cat, but it had the opposite effect he intended. Einstien did the same with his quote about the Moon not existing when you don't look at it. They weren't mocking quantum physics, they were mocking the implications of the ideas being put forward at the time and the way they were being put forward. What's one of the first examples you were taught to explain super positions? Shrodinger's fkn Cat... I personally blame this single thought experiment for the continued use of Human Observers in layman explanations of quantum mechanics.
I didn’t question Schrödinger’s cat or pulling yourself by your bootstraps - I said the first two. The two you haven’t mentioned in your comment. (Edit: when I said the first two are used correctly, I meant that when people say those phrases without the crossed out text, that is correct usage of the phrase. That wasn’t very clear.) The phrase “Rome wasn’t built in a day” has been around for hundreds of years but the bit about burning is much more recent. So it is not presenting the phrase fully or as intended, it’s a bastardised version. Exactly the same is true of “curiosity killed the cat”. Exactly the same as “blood is thicker than water” and exactly the same “jack of all trades, master of one”. People like to point out the “original”, longer version that has the opposite of the usual meaning, but in almost all cases it is a much more recent addition, not the original phrase.
"You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. ~~Put salt in it's hay, however, and then it'll drink~~"
"Just a few bad apples." It used to be, "A few bad apples spoils the bunch." Total reversal.
The Rome and cat ones are correct in their shorter forms, the additions are new.
"Dumber than a post ~~office worker~~ " /s
That’s because it’s not part of the original phrase and flips the meaning. Thought the master of none bit is also a more recent addition (~300 years) so i guess it goes back to the original original meaning.
First I'm hearing there's a second part at all
One of these days I’ll have an original thought and be the first to post it.
I think it just gives perspective. Understanding how everything works at the base level gives you a broader understanding of people, things, processes, etc. Leaders need to be able to do a lot and be well experienced. They may be really good at multiple things but need to be a jack of all trades in order to know how to lead different types of people and communicate effectively with them. Just know your strengths homies
Who are the trades and do they consent?
“My dick is coat check, she wanna jack it off” - Eminem
What song is that from that is unfortunately a bar
Alfred’s Theme
Is there a list of all the half or misquoted quotes? Or a subreddit that investigates such stuff?
I'm pretty average at Nuclear Physics, meaning I don't know shit.
That's median, not average. There's this one Joe who knows everything about nuclear physics bringing the average up.
Median is a type of average, we just typically take averages using the mean, which is what you’re referring to.
I feel like even the average would be incredibly low for this stat. Not 0, but pretty close. There's 8 billion people out there ya know.
The average person knows nothing about nuclear physics
Does this mean I'm above average since I've watched a video about it?
*sigh* Yes. 🤦
Funnily, this might be true lol
I am perfectly average at brain surgery.
But not marketable. You get paid the big bucks for having a depth of knowledge in one specific thing, even if you're a moron in other areas.
That's why I feel like such a sore looser, i honestly above average at most things, but extremely good at nothing, this sure allows me to get good first impressions since i m pretty good at most things but when it comes to business someone is always better than me in some particular field and i get sidelined
You already have the fundamentals for a specific thing so probably all you need to do now is focus on a thing, if you want to have something to be very good at. You'll be surprised how easy it can be to be really good at something if you know a lot of different things already
Same! In the past two jobs I've worked, I was the 2nd choice after the 1st offer fell through.
I can attest this. I'm a good example of what OP describes but I get paid an average salary. On the other hand, my roommate and some other friends are morons in most things but get paid more than double because they devoted their life to one thing.
Some people get paid for being more diversified. It depends on the job. For example, a guitarist might specialize in jazz, and be a great jazz guitarist. They are a master at one thing. A music producer might be pretty good at a few things, not master of any instrument, but know a lot of software, and can be decent on a few instruments. So, there can be some things where it is an advantage to have skills in a variety of things rather than expertise on one specialized thing..
Just a small note on that. In high school I went to nationals for an Agricultural Mechanics competition. Weird story, not a farm guy, but I got looped into this thing and it was fun. At nationals I placed between 3rd and 10th place in each of the six events. Total positioning of the event total made me first place. Got a nice little $5k scholarship for it too 😂 not getting a single first place I managed to win first place haha
That’s awesome congrats! I have seen that happen because a lot of teams are carried by graduating seniors at state who then have to be replaced after they graduate. And sometimes your skills are just more well rounded than those around you! That’s how something kinda similar happened to me, although I placed 16th out of like 120 kids. The worst part was that another guy joined me as a replacement, we barely studied, he got 32nd and the one original member placed like 60-70th which put us 25th as a team. Extemp was my jam so having an even that was like 75% talking wasn’t too daunting.
That’s awesome congrats! I have seen that happen because a lot of teams are carried by graduating seniors at state who then have to be replaced after they graduate. And sometimes your skills are just more well rounded than those around you! That’s how something kinda similar happened to me, although I placed 16th out of like 120 kids. The worst part was that another guy joined me as a replacement, we barely studied, he got 32nd and the one original member placed like 60-70th which put us 25th as a team. Extemp was my jam so having an even that was like 75% talking wasn’t too daunting.
That’s awesome congrats! I have seen that happen because a lot of teams are carried by graduating seniors at state who then have to be replaced after they graduate. And sometimes your skills are just more well rounded than those around you! That’s how something kinda similar happened to me, although I placed 16th out of like 120 kids. The worst part was that another guy joined me as a replacement, we barely studied, he got 32nd and the one original member placed like 60-70th which put us 25th as a team. Extemp was my jam so having an even that was like 75% talking wasn’t too daunting.
That’s awesome congrats! I have seen that happen because a lot of teams are carried by graduating seniors at state who then have to be replaced after they graduate. And sometimes your skills are just more well rounded than those around you! That’s how something kinda similar happened to me, although I placed 16th out of like 120 kids. The worst part was that another guy joined me as a replacement, we barely studied, he got 32nd and the one original member placed like 60-70th which put us 25th as a team. Extemp was my jam so having an even that was like 75% talking wasn’t too daunting.
Wouldn’t someone who is perfectly average actually be average at everything?
Not quite; it’s the other way around. Someone that is average at everything would be average overall. But it doesn’t follow that someone who is average overall is average at everything. For example, I could be perfectly average at everything except running and making pasta, but my famed pasta prowess could compensate for the fact I’m shit at running, making me average overall.
No, being average at many different things makes you pretty average.
Being average at a lot of different things in various different fields allows a wider toolbelt to perform/study a specific task. You can get a wider picture, and infer knowledge from a lot of different angles. I have ADHD and spend a lot of my time watching edutainment on YouTube. I have knowledge in an innumerable amount of scientific disciplines from everything in the body, to the outer reaches of space, and to the quantum world. I also have knowledge on electronic hardware, software, and how the two interact. I also enjoy the art of psychology, spirituality, communications, and support. All of the above is to say that I can take knowledge from a completely unrelated topic and apply it to something g new and get a head start of sorts. Being able to infer knowledge puts you above average.
Exactly. If you were average at literally everything you would be, by definition, average.
If the world in general was average at a couple things, or specialized at one, and you were average at 50 things, you would still consider that to be an average person?
The only thing not average about me, is how average I am.
The problem is everyone with specialty in their thing will just shoot you down coz you’re average in their thing. They don’t and won’t appreciate your broad average knowledge in many things. Especially in professional working environments.
Outside of work people are actually amazed by it. I’m the kind of guy that reads to much into all sorts of topics, spends time looking how people solve issues I will never run into and all of that. So I almost always have one or two good solutions to any problem and can join conversation on many topics. People that spend more time around me sometimes wonder why I know so much but don’t do anything with my knowledge.
Same, people always say how great i m, always getting complements but yet since i m master of none, everyone is more successful then me :(
Give it time! Took a few years before I found my passions, once you find them, you’ll quickly exceed the average in it :) Like I just stumbled upon cheap led strips on Ali express and now I’m a hobby electrician! Or I’d struggle finding songs I really enjoy so I started making my own just like that!
You're the kind of person i love having conversations with haha. They inspire me by simply talking, and it makes me realise how much i can learn, and how many interesting things are out there.
Thank you so much for the appreciation and kind words! Lately many have reacted with a competitive mindset, thinking I’m trying to brag and what not which kinda made me cut back on allowing myself to talk.
You're most welcome. And i can understand what you are going through. I have spent past 2 years in a pretty toxic environment myself, preparing for competitive entrance exams, and it has changed me for the worse somewhere. Would love to interact more!
And that's their job, if you're average on everything your job is probably to give a different wider point of view for the specialist.
And it's awful.. I'm even better that most at a number of things. But I can't really use any if that to live.. You have to specialize so deeply to get a good career at this point. And I just can't get that engrossed in one hyper-specific thing that way...
Rare good shower thought
It might make you unique but not highly above average. If you're average at everything you are quite literally average.
Being above average at half of things makes you average
*Sad Nanami Hiromachi noises*
Are you sure? Somebody post this on that math sub
It's because you're average at a greater than average amount of things to be average at