The greatest changes have been as a result of exploitation of the Earth's yolk sac. Fossil fuels have powered the mechanisation of the world, and fossil fertilisers have driven the productivity of land beyond its natural level. It is this forced indebtedness of future generations that has resulted in a wealthy few, and an impoverished many.
@Degenerate Deuterium "I object to words like "Good" being used to describe an outcome. If the argument were simply that by division of labour more pins could be produced per day then that is a measurable observation, whereas "Goodness" is not an observation, but a judgement by the propounder of the outcome. "Good" is a value judgement and not part of an objective study.
@@alexalbuquerquerodriguesal108, what Taylor did -- to the detriment of quite a number of people who maimed or killed themselves to avoid another minute of unceasing drudgery -- was treat all tasks as something to be reduced to their minimal state, allowing people to be quickly trained on any given task without having to invest themselves in them. But Taylor was an authentic scientist, whether you like what his work produced or not.
@@johndemeritt3460 I know that, I was just joking, what I was saying is that Taylor came with the idea of labor division for administration when Adam Smith had already acknowledged that fact back in 1776, of course the end goal was really quite diferent.
To quote Adam Smith "the division of labour unless ameliorated by the action of Government will make a person as stupid and ignorant as it is possible for a human to become while still being considered human."
@@davidsenderodelsanto That is odd, but Marx has argued that division of labor would no longer necessary due to increases in the productive forces (usually via automation). So it is accurate to say that Marx and Smith (who influenced the former on the economics of capitalism) have criticisms of the division of labor.
3:44 Division of labour. A company specialises in assembling the propeller and painting the wing.💡Professor Dave insersts turbine jet engine and pen emoji. That's a great example of improvisation specialisation. 🤜💥🤛
While i agree with a lot of this video, i will dispute one point. The workplace and workforce is changing, while "20 different careers" is not currently the norm, the number of careers a recent graduate goes through is increasing, one day it may well be 20.
As to the example of juan. Did you consider the time spent learning how to build one table, automatically means that he would not need to spend the same amount of time on how to do it the next time he wants it build.
Yep, this type of analysis is called static analysis and It's timeless, which means that It doesn't take into consideration any sort of time (basicly you don't have the "t" variable in the function).
Because it is easier to master a specific step in a process rather than having to learn and master the entire thing. Also, getting all of the parts etc to each worker would be tough and much less productive, as each worker would also need their own assembly area. Take fast food for instance, if the person who took your order also cooked and bagged it, imagine how slow orders would go, as each order is cooked by a different person and there is limited space in the kitchen etc. Something like building airplanes is an even better example, but something like building a house really highlights specialization, as what goes into nowadays houses is so complicated. Eventually builders would group together and each work on a separate part of the house. similar to when you would split up textbook pages, or presentation slides amongst group members for an assignment at school. Sports even, military, hospitals, the roles are all divided.
@Mansa Musa Of course. There must be a balence of workload within positions to maximize efficiency. Not to specific or to broad. Obviously it varies from each industry. Good point
4:30 "Specialisation leads to higher standards of living for more people than would otherwise be possible". That is an assertion, and a political one at that. Prove it.
it's a historical observation. if you had to grow your own food, make your own clothing, and everyone else also had to, there wouldn't be anyone making electronics... would there?
@@ablebaker8664 Are you suggesting that the existence of Apple and iPhones proves that everybody benefits? How, in your analysis, have you corrected for the effects of fossil fuels and fossil fertilisers?
@@frogandspanner Let's work this from a different angle. You have a little patch of land. You head out before dawn every morning with your pointy stick. You break your back all day for a month breaking the soil, and planting seed for a month every spring. You do this... or you die. Then for the next few months you cut down the weeds and carry water... lots and lots of water. Out of every month you take 4-5 days off... if you don't you'd collapse, or your neighbors would kill you for blasphemy. Let's say you're one of the fraction of one percent that thinks beyond your immediate needs. You notice that a fire you used to cure the clay pots you use to store your grain left bits of hard metal from the soft red and yellow rocks you used to build your furnace. You play around with some if it and make some simple trinkets at first. You trade them for a few young chickens. You can add eggs to your diet now. You decide that this is a cool gig. You gather up a big pile of ochre and build a really big fire this time. You're rewarded with several pounds of iron and you begin to think forward beyond trinkets. You make yourself a stout hammer and a crude anvil... and begin replacing your fragile stone and soft metal knives and tools you made or purchased with grain. You build yourself a plow, but you have no draft animal... You barter the use of your plow with your neighbor for the use of his milking ox. It cuts your work to less than a third of what it was last season. Your neighbor feels the benefit too... He takes a cue from you and begins to make more clay pots than he needs... he gives you the slag from his firepit to add to your smelting in exchange for you doing odd bits of blacksmithing. Neither you nor your neighbor can afford the time to spend the time you used to in the field, but that's okay... You don't need to. You get your grain planted and harvested in with iron tools and animal power now. You work less and grow more. You begin to trade your iron work for animals from another neighbor in exchange for some of your surplus grain, cut wood from another neighbor for iron tools... You can no longer afford the time to work your fields, but that's okay... You delegate that chore to your sons that have grown straight and strong because you can afford to feed your family well... and you can trade for meat and vegetables... their bones are strong and they work hard. Your neighbors now have the same problem. Some have sons, others hire the sons of other neighbors. It has to be apparent that this simplification of historical fact has caused your village to prosper. A prosperity that is the direct result of tool making, time and labor saving, and above all the interdependence of neighbors who have adapted to specialized roles in mutual support of each other. This is the way civilization came about... culture... economics... trade... and industry. If you don't live in a mud hut and till the earth with a pointy stick, you enjoy the fruits of this arrangement, every hour of every day of your life. The cell phone in your pocket, designed by engineers who've never seen a farm... based upon science made possible by scholars... likewise, the advances in medicine that allow you to enjoy a mean life expectancy twice what your ancestors of only 200 years previous. You can travel... enjoy art and entertainment, education, and leisure... because the mechanics of specialization, trade, and economics makes it possible.
this vvideo feels like a callout, i study math and physics, play music, make my own instruments, code, cook and worked as a mailman, and housecleaner, and i have no idea what to do with my life :p help
i mean, writing it out its not to bad i geuss, coding, physics and math fall kind of under the same umbrella, music an dmath a bit, and the other stuff was just transitional i geuss, but it is something ive always struggled with
I think I can give my example for my specialization. I know programming but I don't know how to make circuts so I order a circut for the good I want to make like I bought Arduino uno to make a toy car.
Pretty good video Professor Dave, although this static analysis can be very limited and isn't the most used concept nowdays, It's a very good start to explain specialization. Do you pretend to expand to a dynamic analysis by any chance? That would be very interesting to see since It would put into question which type of specialization is preferable, primarily when you tackle macroeconomics.
Of course its not that simple. A musician need inspiration to become a good musician, this inspiration can for example come from the frustration or pleasure of building your own table. Also if you have to spend 12 hours at work to get the food you need and all the new needs that has been put on you, like computers etc. Then your quality of life might go down since you dont have time with your kids etc. So there is positive and negative sides to everything. Also division of labour, technology etc.
Personally I think as a society we have become to specialized. Thats why people like flat earthers show up. In ancient times you'd be laughed at for not having the most basic understand of maths and now its just okay for people to say they don't know maths.
@@paulrosebush9137 "people like flat eathers", and so called Karen's in easier terms to recognize, idiots. Your logic doesn't follow, english not being a first language and not being specialized is a hasty generalization fallacy. Nazi's breathe air, you breathe air therefore you're a nazi.... What you have concluded is an incoherent thought, and corrected my grammar. So bravo to you buddy.
Professor Dave, this isn't rightly an economic theory issue: it's a sociological theory issue. Although I could argue that economics is rightly a sub topic of sociology -- it is, after all, about social relations concerning the production, distribution, use, and disposal of goods and services -- I will, instead, defer to Emile Durkheim's 1893 work, "The Division of Labor in Society", which describes how increasingly large and more complex groups of people drove specialization in work that ultimately created the modern notion of individuals. This goes back literally thousands of years, long before the creation of nations, states, or nation-states. And it goes beyond simple trade or other economic transactions: it goes back to division of labor in families and farms; religion; governance; and a host of other social interactions. Specialization and the division of labor isn't just an economic phenomenon -- and it shouldn't be treated as one.
Wouldn't specialization actually hurt the person by making them completely dependent on other for food,shelter, ect? What happens when they need something done but they dont have access to a specialist or is its too expensive to see one? One emp and everything you've specialized in is destroyed so wouldn't having a liberal education plus basic human training( this is how you grow food,purify water, ect) be a much better idea? Your video assumes learning stops after school but what about people that aren't lame brains and keep educating themselves in various subjects while having a firm core around their profession. I see many flaws in specialization but most of all i see freedom and independence being slowly eroded all for the sake of economy and technology instead of pursuing what actually matters and brings peace which is self reliance and independence. Good video tho
No. Even in a worst case scenario, unless you're absolutely alone you still want to specialize. If a group of people gets washed onto a beach of an isolated island they want to specialize as much as possible as it increases everybodies survival. With two people there would be minimal specialization as you need redundance for the most critical taks but the more people there are the less people need to know the same skill. Even in the stone age specialization was a thing. There were dedicated hunters, dedicated gatherers etc. because the skillset for hunting and the skillset for gathering and other callings aren't crossing as much. And in such an environment the time for learning new skills is scarce so you need to prioritize. Having basic survival skills isn't a bad thing in this day and age and since we have a lot more spare time than people in the older days it doesn't hurt to train more than one skill and especially the basic skills. But you don't specialize in every skill, that you do in the skill that is most important to your life in society.
@@ezekielschmittart I also love learning new things that i find interesting. (And I find too many things interesting) The important thing is to get the prio right. Basic survival skills aren't hard to learn and while hopefully never be needed will be essential if needed. So learning them is never really a bad idea. Everything beyond that should be guided by interest or need and how realistic it is that you will actually be able to achieve your learning goal. I mean how realistic is it to repair a complex device yourself these days? A lot of issues invole a manifold of skillsets or expensive technology or selfmade tech which again requires knowledge and xp to craft. But the more complex the repair gets the more time you will need to first get proficient in it so you can be sure not to break it more than it already is. And the more likely it is that you need specific tools you likely won't have at hand. So you either need to buy those or craft them yourself. And many of those tools need other tools to be crafted. Maybe this is interesting to you: ua-cam.com/video/URvWSsAgtJE/v-deo.html The increase in cost both time and resources is extraorbitant when doing even something simple completely from scratch. And he isn't really doing it from scratch as he still uses existing technology and tools and only gets the ingredients by himself
Because of family responsibilities, some people may think its too late to start specializing in their purpose and think its more useful to earn money from a non purpose related source who is ready to employ them now. This is part of the rat race. But we're not rats. We're humans with God-given purposeful skills. Therefore, while operating your fulltime non purpose job, work on building your specialization in your purpose at least part-time until you are able to responsibly quit your non purpose job.
Haha! I like how you use aviation as an example. If you knew anything about the industry and how A&Ps have to know every aspect of an aircraft you probably would have picked something else.
I saw him couple of years ago absolutely rippin apart flag earthers and I’ve stumbled again his channel and I’ve noticed he seems to be above the need to trash flat earthers
The difference is which jobs you can actually apply, for example you will never ever be a administrator unless you 1: education on the subject, 2: experiece on the job and 3: some level trust from the company; It's (on a static analysis) rational to specialize on one job since, for example, you will earn more with cleaning services rather than programing (which you won't even be able to apply for It), on a dynamic analysis however It will depend on how much time and money It takes for you to learn programing vs cleaning services and their respective payoffs, supposing that It takes much longer and costs a lot more to learn programing than cleaning services and the payoff to each job is basically equal, than the rational decision to make is to specialises no cleaning services. In short, open work market involves specialization, everyone hunts for whichever jobs are available, but It's undeniable that they will earn more if It goes according with their expertise on a static analysis, a dynamic one takes into account that you can become more productive in other areas.
1:24 thats not an '86 civic thats an 88-91 civic ef hatch. 1:36 thats not an 89 prelude, those had poo up headlights and some had 4ws. Thats a 93-97 fourth gen prelude. You know dave, its not very cool of you to be spreading misinformation. Whats next? Electric universe or flat earth nonsense? Slippery slope youre on bucko
Professor Dave: "People usually become really good at one thing"
Also Professor Dave: *proceeds to teach every subject*
he became really good at teaching
Really good at teaching...every subject out there lol... High school teachers generally teach in one field
Division of Labor - one of the most successful advancement in human society made possible by the food surplus provided by agriculture.
Also extended by assembly line production
The greatest changes have been as a result of exploitation of the Earth's yolk sac. Fossil fuels have powered the mechanisation of the world, and fossil fertilisers have driven the productivity of land beyond its natural level. It is this forced indebtedness of future generations that has resulted in a wealthy few, and an impoverished many.
@@frogandspanner
So, basically you chose whining as your specialization.
Howzit workin for ya?
@Degenerate Deuterium "I object to words like "Good" being used to describe an outcome. If the argument were simply that by division of labour more pins could be produced per day then that is a measurable observation, whereas "Goodness" is not an observation, but a judgement by the propounder of the outcome. "Good" is a value judgement and not part of an objective study.
@Degenerate Deuterium No - that's what I object to, using a positive word to describe the outcome; that is politics, not objectivity.
Division of Labor: One of the few things that Adam Smith and Karl Marx would agree on.
Lol definitely, and there's also the copyc- I mean, academic named Taylor that came like that was an inovation.
@@alexalbuquerquerodriguesal108, what Taylor did -- to the detriment of quite a number of people who maimed or killed themselves to avoid another minute of unceasing drudgery -- was treat all tasks as something to be reduced to their minimal state, allowing people to be quickly trained on any given task without having to invest themselves in them.
But Taylor was an authentic scientist, whether you like what his work produced or not.
@@johndemeritt3460 I know that, I was just joking, what I was saying is that Taylor came with the idea of labor division for administration when Adam Smith had already acknowledged that fact back in 1776, of course the end goal was really quite diferent.
To quote Adam Smith "the division of labour unless ameliorated by the action of Government will make a person as stupid and ignorant as it is possible for a human to become while still being considered human."
@@davidsenderodelsanto That is odd, but Marx has argued that division of labor would no longer necessary due to increases in the productive forces (usually via automation). So it is accurate to say that Marx and Smith (who influenced the former on the economics of capitalism) have criticisms of the division of labor.
I'm a programmer, I specialize in blaming a machine for my own code errors
Damned JavaScript always interpreting my code errors the way I wrote them, pesky thing.
I loved the home made table 4:45
3:44 Division of labour. A company specialises in assembling the propeller and painting the wing.💡Professor Dave insersts turbine jet engine and pen emoji. That's a great example of improvisation specialisation. 🤜💥🤛
Thank you PROFESSOR DAVE this is a much better explanation then what my skol did
I loved the explanation THANKS PROFESSOR
Very well explained!
Thank you
We love you Juan!
very good explains
subscribed the moment i heard the intro
I remembered my school
Those days were the best👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
While i agree with a lot of this video, i will dispute one point.
The workplace and workforce is changing, while "20 different careers" is not currently the norm, the number of careers a recent graduate goes through is increasing, one day it may well be 20.
“Everyone is special!”
Haters: “you have nothing special about you!”
I am astonished by how well you explain things so that everyone can understand! I wish I had money for donation
very nicely explained.
Jack of all trades is a master of none
Great examples of specialization, Professor Dave. You have a good series going on principles of economics. Looking forward to the next one.
So it’s working together differently
Love your intro😄
Your videos are the best.
Great video!!
Tq so much
"You’re special”
Huh, my cousin’s birthday is the same as Rick Astley’s birthday.
Let's make Juan a happy man 👨
I'm here just to like your vedio.
Synthesis and mechanism challenges in your chem playlist are outstanding. #Chemlove♥️
Hello Dave, could you do a video on how to make inferences please, I think its quite important in daily life.
You must be a a wife then
As to the example of juan. Did you consider the time spent learning how to build one table, automatically means that he would not need to spend the same amount of time on how to do it the next time he wants it build.
Yep, this type of analysis is called static analysis and It's timeless, which means that It doesn't take into consideration any sort of time (basicly you don't have the "t" variable in the function).
Hello, can I ask What is the negative effect of not having division of labor in organizations?
Because it is easier to master a specific step in a process rather than having to learn and master the entire thing. Also, getting all of the parts etc to each worker would be tough and much less productive, as each worker would also need their own assembly area. Take fast food for instance, if the person who took your order also cooked and bagged it, imagine how slow orders would go, as each order is cooked by a different person and there is limited space in the kitchen etc. Something like building airplanes is an even better example, but something like building a house really highlights specialization, as what goes into nowadays houses is so complicated. Eventually builders would group together and each work on a separate part of the house. similar to when you would split up textbook pages, or presentation slides amongst group members for an assignment at school. Sports even, military, hospitals, the roles are all divided.
@@ntmkvlogs1386 6 mark q
@Mansa Musa Of course. There must be a balence of workload within positions to maximize efficiency. Not to specific or to broad. Obviously it varies from each industry. Good point
yeah, as a kid I always tried it all. still trying new things. I think I specialize in new experiences. Does that count?
I have the same b-day as Fidel castro
more please
Hi
Hey
Wasup
4:30 "Specialisation leads to higher standards of living for more people than would otherwise be possible".
That is an assertion, and a political one at that. Prove it.
it's a historical observation.
if you had to grow your own food, make your own clothing, and everyone else also had to, there wouldn't be anyone making electronics... would there?
@@ablebaker8664 Are you suggesting that the existence of Apple and iPhones proves that everybody benefits?
How, in your analysis, have you corrected for the effects of fossil fuels and fossil fertilisers?
Frog, there is nothing political about the mathematical facts in this video.
@@frogandspanner
Do you benefit?
@@frogandspanner
Let's work this from a different angle.
You have a little patch of land.
You head out before dawn every morning with your pointy stick.
You break your back all day for a month breaking the soil, and planting seed for a month every spring.
You do this... or you die.
Then for the next few months you cut down the weeds and carry water...
lots and lots of water.
Out of every month you take 4-5 days off... if you don't you'd collapse, or your neighbors would kill you for blasphemy.
Let's say you're one of the fraction of one percent that thinks beyond your immediate needs.
You notice that a fire you used to cure the clay pots you use to store your grain left bits of hard metal from the soft red and yellow rocks you used to build your furnace.
You play around with some if it and make some simple trinkets at first.
You trade them for a few young chickens.
You can add eggs to your diet now.
You decide that this is a cool gig.
You gather up a big pile of ochre and build a really big fire this time.
You're rewarded with several pounds of iron and you begin to think forward beyond trinkets.
You make yourself a stout hammer and a crude anvil... and begin replacing your fragile stone and soft metal knives and tools you made or purchased with grain.
You build yourself a plow, but you have no draft animal...
You barter the use of your plow with your neighbor for the use of his milking ox.
It cuts your work to less than a third of what it was last season.
Your neighbor feels the benefit too...
He takes a cue from you and begins to make more clay pots than he needs... he gives you the slag from his firepit to add to your smelting in exchange for you doing odd bits of blacksmithing.
Neither you nor your neighbor can afford the time to spend the time you used to in the field,
but that's okay...
You don't need to.
You get your grain planted and harvested in with iron tools and animal power now. You work less and grow more.
You begin to trade your iron work for animals from another neighbor in exchange for some of your surplus grain, cut wood from another neighbor for iron tools...
You can no longer afford the time to work your fields, but that's okay...
You delegate that chore to your sons that have grown straight and strong because you can afford to feed your family well... and you can trade for meat and vegetables... their bones are strong and they work hard.
Your neighbors now have the same problem. Some have sons, others hire the sons of other neighbors.
It has to be apparent that this simplification of historical fact has caused your village to prosper.
A prosperity that is the direct result of tool making, time and labor saving, and above all the interdependence of neighbors who have adapted to specialized roles in mutual support of each other.
This is the way civilization came about... culture... economics... trade... and industry.
If you don't live in a mud hut and till the earth with a pointy stick, you enjoy the fruits of this arrangement, every hour of every day of your life.
The cell phone in your pocket, designed by engineers who've never seen a farm... based upon science made possible by scholars... likewise, the advances in medicine that allow you to enjoy a mean life expectancy twice what your ancestors of only 200 years previous.
You can travel... enjoy art and entertainment, education, and leisure... because the mechanics of specialization, trade, and economics makes it possible.
Admit it. U know him from the Flat Earth debunks
Yeah 😑
More like murdering Flerfs and other pseudo scientific nonsense
Yeah boi👉😂👈
No. It was the chemistry & physics tutorials.
man those videos are so funny because of stupidity of the arguments
this vvideo feels like a callout, i study math and physics, play music, make my own instruments, code, cook and worked as a mailman, and housecleaner, and i have no idea what to do with my life :p
help
i mean, writing it out its not to bad i geuss, coding, physics and math fall kind of under the same umbrella, music an dmath a bit, and the other stuff was just transitional i geuss, but it is something ive always struggled with
Go take a camping trip. Sit under a tree and wait. What you actually want to do with your life will come to you there
I think I can give my example for my specialization.
I know programming but I don't know how to make circuts so I order a circut for the good I want to make like I bought Arduino uno to make a toy car.
Pretty good video Professor Dave, although this static analysis can be very limited and isn't the most used concept nowdays, It's a very good start to explain specialization. Do you pretend to expand to a dynamic analysis by any chance? That would be very interesting to see since It would put into question which type of specialization is preferable, primarily when you tackle macroeconomics.
Don't we all want Juan to be haply
Of course its not that simple. A musician need inspiration to become a good musician, this inspiration can for example come from the frustration or pleasure of building your own table. Also if you have to spend 12 hours at work to get the food you need and all the new needs that has been put on you, like computers etc. Then your quality of life might go down since you dont have time with your kids etc. So there is positive and negative sides to everything. Also division of labour, technology etc.
You want every Juan to be happy. I get it.
nice
Personally I think as a society we have become to specialized. Thats why people like flat earthers show up. In ancient times you'd be laughed at for not having the most basic understand of maths and now its just okay for people to say they don't know maths.
@@paulrosebush9137 "people like flat eathers", and so called Karen's in easier terms to recognize, idiots. Your logic doesn't follow, english not being a first language and not being specialized is a hasty generalization fallacy. Nazi's breathe air, you breathe air therefore you're a nazi.... What you have concluded is an incoherent thought, and corrected my grammar. So bravo to you buddy.
But what about alienation?
What software does he use to make his videos?
What if Juan is an starving guitar player? He gets stuck several miserable hours doing EVERYTHING himself! 😆
Then he goes the way of all great artists.
Could you do vid about it Because it seems pretty interesting.
Chan Rasjid Kah Chew who claims to Debunk modern physics.
get the right people for the job
U mean Huang not juan
Without specialization we would all be Minecraft Steve.
アルゴリズム用の1つ
we want a happy juan
Professor Dave, this isn't rightly an economic theory issue: it's a sociological theory issue. Although I could argue that economics is rightly a sub topic of sociology -- it is, after all, about social relations concerning the production, distribution, use, and disposal of goods and services -- I will, instead, defer to Emile Durkheim's 1893 work, "The Division of Labor in Society", which describes how increasingly large and more complex groups of people drove specialization in work that ultimately created the modern notion of individuals. This goes back literally thousands of years, long before the creation of nations, states, or nation-states. And it goes beyond simple trade or other economic transactions: it goes back to division of labor in families and farms; religion; governance; and a host of other social interactions.
Specialization and the division of labor isn't just an economic phenomenon -- and it shouldn't be treated as one.
How build skills of specialisation ?
Grow up with money, or work harder than people who have money. Also being of a hegemonic culture would give you a large boost.
@@gnomatic That’s taken all things in right away?
Or just provide for your self to do more!
His hair😭😭😭😭😭
You should debunk the supernatural
a consumer culture isnt happy
I'm an Artist. I specialize in alot more than 2 things, that's for sure.
My mom called me special before 😐
Thanks, prof Dave. Will you sometime make a good video about socialistic economy without typical strawman about it please?
An extensive political science series is in the works.
What about people that have no skill set and are unable / willing to learn one
There are Jobs that need a lot of skull, and ones that don't
*skill
They go into politics. :)
That's me! Not really that good at any one thing. I am mediocre at a lot of things and suck at most things!
Pick the thing you like doing the most and become an expert at it.
Wouldn't specialization actually hurt the person by making them completely dependent on other for food,shelter, ect? What happens when they need something done but they dont have access to a specialist or is its too expensive to see one? One emp and everything you've specialized in is destroyed so wouldn't having a liberal education plus basic human training( this is how you grow food,purify water, ect) be a much better idea? Your video assumes learning stops after school but what about people that aren't lame brains and keep educating themselves in various subjects while having a firm core around their profession. I see many flaws in specialization but most of all i see freedom and independence being slowly eroded all for the sake of economy and technology instead of pursuing what actually matters and brings peace which is self reliance and independence. Good video tho
No.
Even in a worst case scenario, unless you're absolutely alone you still want to specialize.
If a group of people gets washed onto a beach of an isolated island they want to specialize as much as possible as it increases everybodies survival.
With two people there would be minimal specialization as you need redundance for the most critical taks but the more people there are the less people need to know the same skill.
Even in the stone age specialization was a thing. There were dedicated hunters, dedicated gatherers etc. because the skillset for hunting and the skillset for gathering and other callings aren't crossing as much. And in such an environment the time for learning new skills is scarce so you need to prioritize.
Having basic survival skills isn't a bad thing in this day and age and since we have a lot more spare time than people in the older days it doesn't hurt to train more than one skill and especially the basic skills. But you don't specialize in every skill, that you do in the skill that is most important to your life in society.
Ahhhh that's a great answer thank you! I been thinking about this stuff alot lately so that helped answer a lot of thoughts!
@@ezekielschmittart
I also love learning new things that i find interesting. (And I find too many things interesting)
The important thing is to get the prio right.
Basic survival skills aren't hard to learn and while hopefully never be needed will be essential if needed. So learning them is never really a bad idea.
Everything beyond that should be guided by interest or need and how realistic it is that you will actually be able to achieve your learning goal.
I mean how realistic is it to repair a complex device yourself these days?
A lot of issues invole a manifold of skillsets or expensive technology or selfmade tech which again requires knowledge and xp to craft.
But the more complex the repair gets the more time you will need to first get proficient in it so you can be sure not to break it more than it already is.
And the more likely it is that you need specific tools you likely won't have at hand. So you either need to buy those or craft them yourself. And many of those tools need other tools to be crafted.
Maybe this is interesting to you:
ua-cam.com/video/URvWSsAgtJE/v-deo.html
The increase in cost both time and resources is extraorbitant when doing even something simple completely from scratch. And he isn't really doing it from scratch as he still uses existing technology and tools and only gets the ingredients by himself
Because of family responsibilities, some people may think its too late to start specializing in their purpose and think its more useful to earn money from a non purpose related source who is ready to employ them now. This is part of the rat race. But we're not rats. We're humans with God-given purposeful skills.
Therefore, while operating your fulltime non purpose job, work on building your specialization in your purpose at least part-time until you are able to responsibly quit your non purpose job.
Introoooo
Haha! I like how you use aviation as an example. If you knew anything about the industry and how A&Ps have to know every aspect of an aircraft you probably would have picked something else.
Not the best example but the point still stands, but It would be better for him to give a much more simpler industry though.
0:32
RIP brain
What if you suck at everything, i.e you don’t have any specializations.
I actually work as a programmer at FAANG but I wouldn’t hire myself lol
Sue is peng
Pls bully the flat earthers again
I saw him couple of years ago absolutely rippin apart flag earthers and I’ve stumbled again his channel and I’ve noticed he seems to be above the need to trash flat earthers
Trashing flat earthers isn’t the best way to put it but you get the idea
I personally prefer these lecture type videos
Yeah, girls repairing cars, I've seen lots of them xD
0:55 lol you never been on the open work market eh?
EVERYONE hunts for jobs... whatever it is
The difference is which jobs you can actually apply, for example you will never ever be a administrator unless you 1: education on the subject, 2: experiece on the job and 3: some level trust from the company; It's (on a static analysis) rational to specialize on one job since, for example, you will earn more with cleaning services rather than programing (which you won't even be able to apply for It), on a dynamic analysis however It will depend on how much time and money It takes for you to learn programing vs cleaning services and their respective payoffs, supposing that It takes much longer and costs a lot more to learn programing than cleaning services and the payoff to each job is basically equal, than the rational decision to make is to specialises no cleaning services.
In short, open work market involves specialization, everyone hunts for whichever jobs are available, but It's undeniable that they will earn more if It goes according with their expertise on a static analysis, a dynamic one takes into account that you can become more productive in other areas.
First 🤗
Second
Nice👉😂👈
1:24 thats not an '86 civic thats an 88-91 civic ef hatch.
1:36 thats not an 89 prelude, those had poo up headlights and some had 4ws. Thats a 93-97 fourth gen prelude.
You know dave, its not very cool of you to be spreading misinformation. Whats next? Electric universe or flat earth nonsense? Slippery slope youre on bucko
You really know your cars. Perhaps you're a specialist in old Honda cars. By the way I never knew cars pooped headlights. That too upwards. 😛
@@SiddharthKarunakaran oh haha. Its supposed to be "pop-up headlights"