Just be happy 2007-10-09

The so-called adapting to social competition is to adapt to the needs of society. Talents who meet the needs of society are more competitive. In today's era of information explosion, the requirements for talents are getting higher and higher. We believe that professionals are more suitable for social competition. First, with the refinement of social division of labor, the knowledge structure corresponding to the division of labor is becoming more and more detailed, so majors are also developing in a more complex direction. The requirements for talents also tend to be more refined and higher, so the requirements for talent specialization are very obvious. Second, specialists possessing professional knowledge and skills in a certain field will be more attractive than generalists. In the composite cross-cutting field, the final research and implementation are also implemented in a single field. Because the individual work of generalists lacks efficiency, division of labor focuses energy on individual areas, which is more conducive to realizing social value. Third, adapting to social competition lies in adapting to social needs. The relationship between talents and society is a two-way selection. All-rounders have a wide range of choices, but they can only be selected once, and there is uncertainty. "Everyone can meet opportunities, but not everyone can cash them in." Comprehensive and broad knowledge is just a capital to show off. Modern society with detailed division of labor requires highly sophisticated talents, that is, specialists. To sum up, we believe that professionals are more adaptable to social competition. Let me first explain my point of view: I think professionals are more adaptable to social competition! First, expertise refers to talents who are particularly good at one aspect and know a little bit about other aspects. They are not idiots who only know one skill but know nothing about other aspects. Second, as we all know, science and technology are now developing towards "high, precision and cutting-edge". The requirements for science and technology are getting higher and higher, requiring people to have increasingly sophisticated professional knowledge and skills. However, time is limited, and talents who specialize in one skill must The technical level must be higher than that of talents with multiple skills, so the contribution they make will be higher. In this skill, expertise is what society needs. And generalists are not as good as specialists in those areas in other aspects. In turn, how can generalists compete with specialists in an era of increasingly demanding technology? Third, the development of productivity determines social division of labor and cooperation to improve production efficiency, and now social division of labor is becoming more and more detailed. An industry involves thousands, tens of thousands, or even millions of technologies. Is it possible for a generalist to exist? The definition of a generalist is a talent who is good at all aspects within a certain range. In the past, small industries involved few technologies and low levels. Generalists may exist within the scope of small industries. In today's various industries, it involves There are so many technologies that a generalist simply cannot exist. To take a step back, even if such a generalist exists, his technical level should be far inferior to that of a specialist. The reason is simple. If you bite off more than you can chew, the social value created in the same amount of time will not be as good as that of specialists. In other words, production efficiency It is lower than that of specialists. Assuming that generalists are more adaptable to social competition, won’t the development trend of productivity become lower and lower? This goes against the law of development of productive forces and is impossible. This is also the most critical factor. Time is limited, but knowledge and technology are unlimited. I always believe that as long as you are proficient in one skill and know a little about others, it is enough. It is better to cut off one of his ten fingers than to cut off one of them. Today's scientific research is no longer done in the days of Newton, Huygens, and Edison, which can be accomplished by one person who forgets sleep and food and works hard. Now it is done by the cooperation of research groups one by one. Yes, social progress needs talents who can cut off one finger of a difficult problem. Many such talents together can eat away at the difficult problem. And many people who can only hurt the ten fingers of the problem will only be able to hurt their skin and flesh, but cannot break their bones and muscles due to lack of technical strength. First, generalists and specialists are relatively speaking. The correct way to distinguish them lies in their knowledge structure. In layman's terms, they are specialists and polymaths. Second, being an all-rounder does not mean knowing everything, but refers to being an all-rounder in a certain field. If we think that only those who know everything are all-rounders, then there will be no all-rounders in the world. Third, what really needs to be worked on in this question is "adapting to social needs." Being more adaptable to social needs does not mean who has a greater role, but it means that society needs more and more urgent people. For example, if there are many talented people now, the generals will be better suited to the needs, and if the generals are gathered together, the talented people will be better suited to the needs. Based on the above considerations, this question should be broken down as follows: Neither generalists nor specialists are so-called "generalists". They are both talents in a certain field. The difference is that specialists dig deep and generalists spread out. Therefore, a generalist does not know everything, and a specialist does not know only one subject. The so-called who is more adaptable to social needs refers to the fact that society needs a greater amount of that kind of talent, not which kind of person is more capable of achieving high positions, etc. If the other party proves that all-rounders are more capable of achieving high positions, then you should tell the other party that it is because they are in high positions. There are only a few, and if they can play a role, more specialists will be needed to work in various fields of society. Therefore, society actually needs more specialists. Because there can never be a jack-of-all-trades, right? Why? --Because the more the world knows, the more unknown it is. Who can become an all-rounder? Let alone competition, because Sun Tzu said in the Art of War: If you are not prepared for everything, you will be omnipotent. If someone in this world could build a world-leading missile today, and write an article about the missile tomorrow, he would win the Contradictory Literature Award.

Then I would rather take his missiles!"!!~~~ What is the definition of talent? It means knowing the knowledge involved in a certain range. But it is impossible for one person to know everything! But we also It depends on the situation. What our country needs now is multilateral talents, and the same goes for the economy. When you go to discuss business with others, do you want to negotiate or be aggressive? You know you are bad. It would be strange if you don't lose! Let's not talk about it for now. If we want to develop, we must vigorously engage in entrepreneurship and vigorously study unknown fields. , let’s not talk about the effect, how much space does it take up with so many people! We have a small space, why can’t we save resources and learn more about it? Let’s talk about the effect. Talk about him, what to say, in the end it is still a mess. A specialist is a re-product of a generalist. He not only has certain professional knowledge, but also combines the broad insights of a generalist. The latest survey: MBA has set the direction of anti-talent development as the cultivation of specialists. .As the social division of labor is further subdivided, the society is further in shortage of professionals. Shanghai has also imported thousands of professionals from Hong Kong with an annual salary of up to 5 million and a minimum of 100,000. Australia now imports more professionals than leaves the country! There is a saying in Kanto As the saying goes: You are full of swords and have no sharp points. I think this is the dilemma that all "all-rounders" are most afraid of. What is a generalist? Is it true that a specialist only has one major and knows nothing about others? If this is the case, how can so many specialists survive in modern society? If all talents are in this society, how will the social division of labor be carried out? How many all-rounders can this society produce if there are not so many majors? Indeed, there are indeed scholars in Beijing who have obtained postdoctoral degrees in 7 majors. So, I would like to ask this scholar Can you call him an all-rounder? Even if he has the most knowledge in the country, can you say that he is also a politician, a strategist or an expert in other fields? Generalists refer to people who are outstanding in one aspect and knowledgeable in many aspects. This is the most ideal form of talent. In reality, it is not impossible. Social positions such as Einstein are limited, and specialists will inevitably hang themselves in one place. Trees, and all-rounders can adapt to social changes faster. After all, learning also takes time, and opportunities only belong to those who are ready at any time. Social division of labor seems to be a justified reason, but we have already moved beyond simple machine-based mass production. It’s an era. Should you re-employ employees who don’t understand the overall situation and how to divide and cooperate? When I, who consider myself a professional, suddenly broke down and was typing this article, was there nothing I could do? I just talk about my own opinions casually. The so-called "appreciation of wonderful articles and analysis of doubts" is very changeable. The cruel competition makes everyone have a sense of crisis, and one more skill means one more Capital is divided, and knowledge is interlinked. Each technology actually complements each other. Even if you are only using one technology now, your extensive knowledge reserve will enable you to better utilize and apply that technology, giving you greater potential. creativity. When you buy a mobile phone, you always hope to have more functions (at the same price), even if you may not be able to use them, right? What is analogy? Only when a person understands everything can he truly get inspiration. Nowadays, many scientific masterpieces are produced in marginal subjects. Just ask a person who only knows his field. Isn't it too narrow? The highest evaluation of intellectuals in ancient times is: knowledge of ancient and modern times, knowledge of astronomy and geography. This formulation is not unreasonable. The reason why Qiao Feng dominates the world is not because of his Eighteen Dragon Subduing Palms, but because of his bizarre life experience and heroic spirit. Duan Yu is also similar. If it were based on martial arts, the old monk in the Shaolin Temple should have dominated the world long ago. Of course he is a professional! ! ! Originally, generalists and specialists are relative terms. Specialists are those who are proficient in specific fields, while generalists are relatively specialists who are not proficient in many fields. If we compare people like Madame Curie who are proficient in physics and If a person who is proficient in chemistry is regarded as a generalist, then what is the meaning and value of the definitional distinction between the two words generalist and specialist? For someone like Marie Curie who is as proficient as a specialist in different fields, she can only be called a major specialist, or a very outstanding specialist! These people are also professionals in essence! They are just experts who are more powerful than ordinary people and can specialize in several fields at the same time.

Therefore, if you want to be based in a competitive society, you still have to have the ability to do things that others cannot do, or do better than others in the same field. In this way, the society will always need you, and you will be better able to compete in the fierce society. Find your place in the competition and stay stable in society forever! After listening to so many people's speeches, I feel that everyone has inconsistent definitions of the concepts of generalist and specialist. Is the difference between a specialist and a generalist a person who is only proficient in computers and a person who is proficient in both computers and biology? difference? Or is it the difference between a person who is proficient in computers and a person who understands computers and biology but is not proficient in both? If it is the first type, is there still a need to argue this question?