While I would consider Arthur C. Brooks my ideological antithesis, it seems we've independently reached for similar learning at the same age. I'd dispute, though, the value and "usefulness" of...
While I would consider Arthur C. Brooks my ideological antithesis, it seems we've independently reached for similar learning at the same age.
I'd dispute, though, the value and "usefulness" of Brooks' very privileged position in the lofty reaches of Ivy League economics and think tank-ville.
For most of us ordinary 50+ plebeans who still have to work, who were never performing at the peaks of Olympic medals, international fame, or Nobel-winning research, the decline of age is far less significant than Brooks would have you believe. We're still useful, creative to the extent our jobs will permit, and often far wiser and more efficient in the application of our skills.
This story is, for most of you younger folk, an evil capitalist memetic to get you to work to the point of burnout and early sudden death, when you can't keep cranking out the 12+ hour days (too many at $8/hr.) anymore.
That little anti rant aside, there is wisdom in the notions of reducing your primary career commitments, bending your life back towards service to others, reconnecting with family and community, and diversifying your skills. But you shouldn't have to wait for the passing of an arbitrary "peak" in a professional career to accomplish those things.
My addenda are:
If you've forgotten what "fun" is, you're never too young or old to rediscover that. Brooks never used this word once. The ability to play with ideas and experiment for the sheer joy of it kept a chemical engineering professor of my acquaintance going past age 100, with a couple of patents awarded in his 90's.
If you stop worrying about whether you're "good" at something in an absolute sense, it's much easier to progress at it. [Brooks' mentioned early decline as a professional French horn player was much more likely due to performance anxiety and inner boredom with the rigors of practice than loss of ability.]
You can beat yourself with "I'll never be the best at..." all day, but that kind of endless comparison is unhelpful at any age. I'm learning Python, for the hell of it - no intent to be a professional programmer or measure myself against others here, not even an expectation that I'll do anything useful. I'm just having fun.
While I would consider Arthur C. Brooks my ideological antithesis, it seems we've independently reached for similar learning at the same age.
I'd dispute, though, the value and "usefulness" of Brooks' very privileged position in the lofty reaches of Ivy League economics and think tank-ville.
For most of us ordinary 50+ plebeans who still have to work, who were never performing at the peaks of Olympic medals, international fame, or Nobel-winning research, the decline of age is far less significant than Brooks would have you believe. We're still useful, creative to the extent our jobs will permit, and often far wiser and more efficient in the application of our skills.
This story is, for most of you younger folk, an evil capitalist memetic to get you to work to the point of burnout and early sudden death, when you can't keep cranking out the 12+ hour days (too many at $8/hr.) anymore.
That little anti rant aside, there is wisdom in the notions of reducing your primary career commitments, bending your life back towards service to others, reconnecting with family and community, and diversifying your skills. But you shouldn't have to wait for the passing of an arbitrary "peak" in a professional career to accomplish those things.
My addenda are:
If you've forgotten what "fun" is, you're never too young or old to rediscover that. Brooks never used this word once. The ability to play with ideas and experiment for the sheer joy of it kept a chemical engineering professor of my acquaintance going past age 100, with a couple of patents awarded in his 90's.
If you stop worrying about whether you're "good" at something in an absolute sense, it's much easier to progress at it. [Brooks' mentioned early decline as a professional French horn player was much more likely due to performance anxiety and inner boredom with the rigors of practice than loss of ability.]
You can beat yourself with "I'll never be the best at..." all day, but that kind of endless comparison is unhelpful at any age. I'm learning Python, for the hell of it - no intent to be a professional programmer or measure myself against others here, not even an expectation that I'll do anything useful. I'm just having fun.