I generally held the view that I did not understand them, and that it would be beneficial to live as poorly as possible ( intellectually, materially, emotionally, geopolitically, whatnot ), in order to learn about them, or at the very least to be able to say later that I had put significant time into making sure that I had tried to do so.
Review questions :
1. Were my presumptions incorrect? What evidence is there?
2. Assuming correct presumptions, did I fail to achieve what I set out to do? What evidence is there?
3. Assuming correct presumptions, and success at what was attempted, was the project worthwhile? What evidence is there?
Discussion ( inconclusive ) :
- My presumption that I did not understand them was too risk averse - I already understood them quite well at 18. Nevertheless, it was worthwhile to check and make sure.
- Operationally, I made some costly mistakes. I would often write-off huge chunks of time, to assist specific individuals, on their whimsical directions. This would have been more valuable if I had apportioned smaller chunks of time to individuals, or the larger chunks to a larger body of stakeholders. In summary, I underdiverisified.
- Was this chunk of two major phases, four years in academia, and 18 years in commerce, ultimately the best use of time? I really don't know. I don't ask much of life, so almost any results are welcome.
I proceed with these thoughts in mind.
No comments :
Post a Comment