WEBVTT - The Myth of Average 0:00:03.320 --> 0:00:06.200 Welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind from how Stuff 0:00:06.200 --> 0:00:13.480 Works dot com. Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind. 0:00:13.560 --> 0:00:16.360 My name is Robert lamp and Julia Douglas. Julie, here's 0:00:16.480 --> 0:00:19.280 here's a question for you, just to lead into today's episode. 0:00:19.520 --> 0:00:23.120 Do we live in a user it's all world? Sure? Right? 0:00:23.160 --> 0:00:25.560 I mean have you seen those universal symbols of men 0:00:25.600 --> 0:00:28.480 and women on bathroom doors? And we all just kind 0:00:28.480 --> 0:00:30.760 of look like that, Like I constantly have a skirt 0:00:30.760 --> 0:00:35.559 on with my hands outstretched and yours are always by 0:00:35.560 --> 0:00:38.400 your side, the pants on. Yeah, you go to a 0:00:38.560 --> 0:00:40.760 you go to the restaurant, certainly in the States, do 0:00:40.760 --> 0:00:43.479 you order your meal comes on a giant plate? Right, 0:00:44.120 --> 0:00:46.479 that's the amount of food that feeds the the the 0:00:46.520 --> 0:00:49.239 average person, and so you're supposed to eat it, all right, 0:00:49.760 --> 0:00:52.680 everybody wants that giant plate of food. Actually, I was 0:00:52.920 --> 0:00:54.440 at a restaurant not too long ago and there was 0:00:54.440 --> 0:00:56.279 a British woman next to me, and she started just 0:00:56.480 --> 0:01:00.240 talking about how terrible it is United Stay. It's like 0:01:00.280 --> 0:01:03.240 the giant portions. And I had never really thought about 0:01:03.280 --> 0:01:05.520 it because I'm so used to that restaurant dining, and 0:01:05.560 --> 0:01:08.280 I thought she's right, Yeah, bring you out of a 0:01:08.319 --> 0:01:10.160 bowl of something and it's it's it should be in 0:01:10.200 --> 0:01:13.000 the middle of a table with a family of four 0:01:13.120 --> 0:01:16.039 or five dining on it, but no, instead it's your 0:01:16.319 --> 0:01:20.319 your personal trough of food. Yeah, it's United States one's 0:01:20.800 --> 0:01:24.440 size fits all meal, just for you. And that's where 0:01:24.440 --> 0:01:27.880 it gets into this idea of of um, this kind 0:01:27.880 --> 0:01:30.680 of like what is average? This question is there really 0:01:30.720 --> 0:01:35.000 an average? And this bell curve that we have all 0:01:35.000 --> 0:01:39.120 been introduced to in primary school, elementary school and onward 0:01:39.840 --> 0:01:43.000 tends to kind of rule our lives even after we've 0:01:43.080 --> 0:01:46.280 left school, right, and we're gonna look at We're gonna 0:01:46.480 --> 0:01:50.480 look into this idea today. This this myth of average. Yeah, 0:01:50.520 --> 0:01:53.680 if you want to imagine the bell curve here, um, 0:01:53.720 --> 0:01:56.880 And certainly we're gonna have varying degrees of familiarity with this, 0:01:57.840 --> 0:02:00.720 but it's basically looks like a bell. It's it's a 0:02:00.840 --> 0:02:03.320 it's a it's a line, and then the line is 0:02:03.360 --> 0:02:05.720 going sort of flat, and then it curves up and 0:02:05.720 --> 0:02:08.240 then it curves back down again. And the idea here 0:02:08.639 --> 0:02:12.040 is that is that on a performance standpoint, as far 0:02:12.040 --> 0:02:15.520 as the statistics of performance, the idea is that you 0:02:15.639 --> 0:02:20.080 have a very small group that is underperforming, that's at 0:02:20.080 --> 0:02:23.200 the very bottom. And then you have a small group 0:02:23.280 --> 0:02:27.239 that is just really performing at a high level and 0:02:27.280 --> 0:02:29.600 they're at the top. And then you have this larger 0:02:29.639 --> 0:02:32.919 group in the middle and they that is the realm 0:02:32.960 --> 0:02:39.040 of the average. Yes, bell curves are normal probability distributions, 0:02:39.280 --> 0:02:41.840 and that's what I think it's interesting about this probability 0:02:41.960 --> 0:02:45.440 because we take this kind of distribution and we use 0:02:45.520 --> 0:02:48.200 them in real world scenarios, which we'll talk about in 0:02:48.200 --> 0:02:51.560 a second. But what you just just described is this 0:02:51.680 --> 0:02:54.480 idea that we have an equivalent number of people above 0:02:54.600 --> 0:02:57.519 and below average, and that there's a very small number 0:02:57.560 --> 0:03:00.840 of people who are two standard deviations above and below 0:03:00.880 --> 0:03:03.040 the average. So if you're thinking about that plotted out 0:03:03.040 --> 0:03:06.560 on that line, that Bell curve, then those those outliers 0:03:06.840 --> 0:03:08.800 would be the people who are super high achievers and 0:03:08.840 --> 0:03:12.920 people who are at the very low ends of achievement. Yeah. 0:03:13.040 --> 0:03:16.320 So like from a from a corporate standpoint, most of 0:03:16.320 --> 0:03:18.160 your company is going to be in the middle. That's 0:03:18.160 --> 0:03:20.280 where most of your money and resources are going, just 0:03:20.320 --> 0:03:22.720 because that's where the most people are. But that small 0:03:22.760 --> 0:03:24.960 percentage of the top, those are the ones that are 0:03:25.000 --> 0:03:27.520 that there, there's really a lot of potential for those 0:03:27.560 --> 0:03:29.960 are the ones that are really bring innovative ideas and 0:03:30.040 --> 0:03:33.280 high performance to the table. And then that the bottom, 0:03:33.320 --> 0:03:36.480 the outliers, outliers at the very bottom. Uh, those are 0:03:36.480 --> 0:03:39.200 the ones that you're going to want to cut uh 0:03:39.280 --> 0:03:42.280 and and regularly cut those. That's the slack that you 0:03:42.280 --> 0:03:44.840 want to get rid of to tighten up the rope. Yeah. Indeed, 0:03:45.160 --> 0:03:48.000 and we use this again, this is just a probability 0:03:48.040 --> 0:03:53.240 distribution in these real world scenarios to decide how well 0:03:53.440 --> 0:03:57.080 children are learning, which dictates how and what they learned. 0:03:57.160 --> 0:04:00.520 We use it to assess workplace performance and don't racist. 0:04:00.520 --> 0:04:03.080 And that's where it becomes sort of like, let's let's 0:04:03.080 --> 0:04:05.280 look at this model a little bit closer, because we 0:04:05.320 --> 0:04:09.320 have now reverse engineered a budget based on the Bell curve, 0:04:10.320 --> 0:04:13.840 and it could be that the Bell curve is quite off. 0:04:14.040 --> 0:04:17.200 In fact, research conducted in two thousand and eleven and 0:04:17.279 --> 0:04:21.120 two thousand and twelve by Ernest oh Boyle Jr. And 0:04:21.360 --> 0:04:25.080 Herman Agwynas examined the performance of more than six hundred 0:04:25.160 --> 0:04:29.440 and thirty thousand people involved in four areas of human performance. 0:04:29.520 --> 0:04:34.400 Academics writing so writing papers athletes at the professional and 0:04:34.560 --> 0:04:40.480 collegiate levels, politicians, and entertainers. And they found that performance 0:04:40.839 --> 0:04:45.800 and of these groups did not follow a normal distribution, 0:04:45.960 --> 0:04:50.160 did not follow the Bell curve. Rather, those groups fell 0:04:50.200 --> 0:04:55.240 into what is called a power law distribution. And according 0:04:55.279 --> 0:04:58.159 to a Forbes magazine article the Myth of the Bell Curve, 0:04:59.120 --> 0:05:01.479 this power law to attribution is also known as a 0:05:01.560 --> 0:05:03.680 long tale because we're looking at a picture of it 0:05:03.800 --> 0:05:08.880 right now. If you think about um a rectangle and 0:05:09.480 --> 0:05:11.920 one side of that rectangle being a sort of tale, 0:05:12.360 --> 0:05:15.840 that's more of the distribution. They say that is in 0:05:16.040 --> 0:05:19.240 keeping with what is really going on, that's reflecting reality. 0:05:19.360 --> 0:05:22.159 And they say that most people fall below the mean, 0:05:22.720 --> 0:05:25.640 and roughly ten to of the population are above the 0:05:25.680 --> 0:05:29.359 average and often far above the average, and a large 0:05:29.400 --> 0:05:32.960 population are slightly below average, in a small group are 0:05:33.000 --> 0:05:36.240 far below average. So they say that this idea of 0:05:36.360 --> 0:05:40.080 average is actually pretty meaningless when you think about what's 0:05:40.080 --> 0:05:42.520 happening in real time. Yeah, and I mean it's even 0:05:42.640 --> 0:05:45.680 it's even worse than meaningless when you start looking at 0:05:45.680 --> 0:05:50.560 the idea that, rather than describing how we perform and 0:05:50.560 --> 0:05:54.520 and really being a telling model of human behavior and 0:05:54.600 --> 0:05:59.280 human potential, the Bell curve might actually be constraining our performance. 0:05:59.600 --> 0:06:02.599 They work creating that we're taking the statistical model of 0:06:02.680 --> 0:06:07.640 human behavior and trying to shoehorn our actual behavior into it. Yeah, 0:06:07.640 --> 0:06:10.280 I mean, because think about a company or a classroom, 0:06:10.320 --> 0:06:13.719 and let's say that the company classrooms, Um, they're full 0:06:13.880 --> 0:06:17.560 of hyper performers. Okay, Let's say nineteen out of the 0:06:17.640 --> 0:06:22.960 twenty kids like they're performing at crazy rates. Okay, they 0:06:23.000 --> 0:06:25.000 are still going to be graded on the Bell curve. 0:06:25.839 --> 0:06:28.040 Let's say that nineteen of the twenty employees at a 0:06:28.080 --> 0:06:32.000 workplace are hyper performers. They're still gonna their raises. Their 0:06:32.000 --> 0:06:34.480 performance are still gonna be doled out based on the 0:06:34.520 --> 0:06:37.560 Bell curve because again, that budget has been reverse engineered, 0:06:37.600 --> 0:06:41.279 so there's only a certain amount of money and percentages 0:06:41.640 --> 0:06:44.599 that are going to be distributed across that performance. So 0:06:44.640 --> 0:06:46.520 a lot of people lose out in the scenarios. And 0:06:46.760 --> 0:06:49.800 basically it's saying, here is a model for what performance 0:06:49.800 --> 0:06:53.000 should look like. If you don't recognize that model in 0:06:53.160 --> 0:06:55.320 the group that you're judging, then you must be making 0:06:55.320 --> 0:06:57.920 a mistake. So even in that group of high performers 0:06:58.560 --> 0:07:01.200 at a company, you in end up having to rate 0:07:01.680 --> 0:07:05.080 some high performers as average, and and some average of 0:07:05.200 --> 0:07:08.720 performers as as low performers. And you're and that's just 0:07:08.760 --> 0:07:13.520 gonna end up hurting morale and and driving away talented individuals. Yeah, 0:07:13.560 --> 0:07:16.400 which is not to say that the idea of universal design, 0:07:16.600 --> 0:07:18.840 which is basically we're talking about here when we talk 0:07:18.880 --> 0:07:22.800 about Bell curve model, isn't helpful, because it is right. 0:07:22.840 --> 0:07:25.520 We can talk about universal design in the ways that 0:07:25.520 --> 0:07:28.920 our streets are laid out right or even um like 0:07:29.000 --> 0:07:32.480 catching utensils that are made for any size hand, not 0:07:32.600 --> 0:07:35.120 just a giant hand or a small hand. Um. But 0:07:35.240 --> 0:07:38.640 it's not so great when you actually talk about the 0:07:38.640 --> 0:07:45.280 individual him or herself, and you have companies, institutions, education, um, 0:07:45.320 --> 0:07:50.840 trying to mandate a sort of universal paradigm to place 0:07:51.000 --> 0:07:54.280 over it. And so this brings us to a new idea, 0:07:54.360 --> 0:07:58.160 to a new movement kind of revolutionary approach, and that 0:07:58.320 --> 0:08:01.600 is to to ban the to to throw the idea 0:08:01.600 --> 0:08:05.040 of the average out, to say, hey, this institutional model 0:08:05.400 --> 0:08:09.320 should not is false and should not dictate how we 0:08:09.480 --> 0:08:13.240 organize our lives and our industries and our educational system. Yeah. 0:08:13.240 --> 0:08:15.400 And the biggest proponent of this idea, of this man. 0:08:15.480 --> 0:08:17.960 The average is Todd Rose, who's a faculty member at 0:08:18.000 --> 0:08:21.520 Harvard Graduate School of Education. He talked about how in 0:08:21.680 --> 0:08:24.720 nineteen fifty two the U. S. Air Force had a problem. 0:08:24.760 --> 0:08:27.760 They had really good pilots flying better planes, all this 0:08:27.880 --> 0:08:30.080 money that they had sunk into better planes, but they 0:08:30.080 --> 0:08:33.760 were getting worse results and they didn't know why. And 0:08:33.840 --> 0:08:36.000 finally they figured out that it had to deal with 0:08:36.040 --> 0:08:39.320 the design of the cockpit, which was designed based on 0:08:39.559 --> 0:08:43.120 the average man. And they had an Air Force researcher 0:08:43.120 --> 0:08:45.800 by the name of Gilbert Daniels who conducted a study 0:08:45.800 --> 0:08:50.040 and found that none as zero of the four thousand 0:08:50.120 --> 0:08:54.120 pilots were average on all of the ten dimensions of 0:08:54.200 --> 0:08:58.959 size that he measured on them. We're talking about height, shoulders, chest, 0:08:59.160 --> 0:09:05.400 waste its legs, uh, their reach, right torso, neck, and thighs. 0:09:05.480 --> 0:09:08.319 And he proved that there was no such thing as 0:09:08.360 --> 0:09:13.320 an average pilot, but that they have a jagged size profile, 0:09:13.840 --> 0:09:17.560 so no one is the same one every single dimension. 0:09:17.840 --> 0:09:20.360 And just because let's say you might be the average height, 0:09:20.400 --> 0:09:22.520 it doesn't mean that you're the average weight or you 0:09:22.559 --> 0:09:26.760 have the average torso length. And so the Air Force 0:09:26.840 --> 0:09:30.679 took that information and they decided to ban the average 0:09:31.360 --> 0:09:33.960 and they refused to buy fighter jets where the cockpit 0:09:34.080 --> 0:09:37.800 was made for the average pilot, and instead they wanted 0:09:37.840 --> 0:09:40.360 them to design to what they called the edges of 0:09:40.440 --> 0:09:44.920 dimensions of size, so saying basically, hey, we're gonna have 0:09:44.920 --> 0:09:47.720 tall pilots, we're gonna have short pilots. We need you 0:09:47.800 --> 0:09:52.040 to design with these extremes in mind, instead of just saying, hey, 0:09:52.080 --> 0:09:55.040 this is the average person. One size fits all, which 0:09:55.320 --> 0:09:58.520 is not the kind of mandate that that that anyone 0:09:58.640 --> 0:10:02.120 wants to hear in the manu factoring industry, because one 0:10:02.160 --> 0:10:04.920 size fits all is a good system if you are 0:10:05.000 --> 0:10:09.080 making a screw driver, if you're making you know, to 0:10:09.120 --> 0:10:11.200 your point, you know, just some sort of ikea part 0:10:11.360 --> 0:10:14.839 or or or standard furniture product to go in your 0:10:14.840 --> 0:10:18.880 house exactly. I mean, that's the whole manufacturing business is 0:10:18.920 --> 0:10:22.520 based on that. But here you have like this really 0:10:22.600 --> 0:10:26.480 expensive equipment. You want it to be interacted with in 0:10:26.520 --> 0:10:30.240 the correct way, and then all has to do with dimensions. Yeah, 0:10:30.320 --> 0:10:32.880 I mean, yeah, you have high performers who need to 0:10:32.960 --> 0:10:35.960 use a high performance aircraft and you need to you 0:10:35.960 --> 0:10:37.960 need these two need to meet. It reminds me a 0:10:37.960 --> 0:10:41.560 lot of our relationship with computers, and not just computers, 0:10:41.559 --> 0:10:44.360 like even just like desk equipment in general, but everything 0:10:44.400 --> 0:10:47.640 everything that surrounds computing. The idea that that the computing 0:10:47.679 --> 0:10:50.720 experience should be made as human as possible, so that 0:10:50.840 --> 0:10:53.920 humans can use the machine, can use the software, can 0:10:54.040 --> 0:10:56.280 use the chair and the table, everything involved in the 0:10:56.320 --> 0:10:59.040 office environment. That they should be able to use it 0:10:59.040 --> 0:11:02.079 without wearing themselves to the level of the machine. The 0:11:02.360 --> 0:11:04.520 machine should meet that the human user, not the other 0:11:04.520 --> 0:11:06.840 way around. And so here we see the same idea 0:11:07.120 --> 0:11:13.160 with with with with institutions, with with with design in general. Yeah, 0:11:13.200 --> 0:11:15.559 and that's what Todd Rose says. He says that just 0:11:15.760 --> 0:11:19.360 like size, each student, every single one of them, has 0:11:19.400 --> 0:11:24.040 a jagged learning profile, meaning they have strengths through average 0:11:24.040 --> 0:11:26.560 at some things, and they have weaknesses. He says, we 0:11:26.600 --> 0:11:29.960 all do, even geniuses have weaknesses. And he says, if 0:11:30.000 --> 0:11:33.360 you design those learning environments on average, odds are you've 0:11:33.400 --> 0:11:36.440 designed them for nobody. He says, so, no, wonder we 0:11:36.480 --> 0:11:39.240 have a problem. We've created learning environments that, because they 0:11:39.240 --> 0:11:43.040 are designed on average, cannot possibly do what we expected 0:11:43.080 --> 0:11:45.880 them to do, which is nurture individual potential. And he 0:11:45.920 --> 0:11:49.440 talks about how we are in a very unique situation 0:11:49.600 --> 0:11:53.960 right now technologically because we can serve the individual We 0:11:53.960 --> 0:11:56.520 can serve the individual student and the way that they 0:11:56.600 --> 0:12:01.920 learn and follow those jagged profiles by giving them an iPad, 0:12:02.080 --> 0:12:05.160 in giving them different programs to bolster learning in the 0:12:05.200 --> 0:12:07.360 areas that they're a week or if they were really 0:12:07.360 --> 0:12:13.559 really high performers been challenging them with supplementation also provided 0:12:13.600 --> 0:12:16.960 by technology. And he's spot on about this, I think, 0:12:17.000 --> 0:12:21.439 because what he's saying is that schools, they spent an 0:12:21.600 --> 0:12:24.040 enormous amount of money on iPads. I think he said 0:12:24.040 --> 0:12:28.480 that they're like the second largest customer of um or 0:12:28.720 --> 0:12:32.559 consumer of iPads, and at least in the United States. 0:12:32.640 --> 0:12:35.319 So if you have the technology at your disposal, if 0:12:35.360 --> 0:12:37.760 you are spending the money, why not begin to work 0:12:37.800 --> 0:12:41.040 with the possibilities of what those programs can offer on 0:12:41.080 --> 0:12:44.600 an individual level. Because we had talked about in our 0:12:45.280 --> 0:12:49.000 podcast about Finland and why they're turning out such incredibly 0:12:49.080 --> 0:12:53.719 well rounded, smart kids who only have one test, one 0:12:53.760 --> 0:12:57.000 mandatory test at age of sixteen. It's because they're serving 0:12:57.040 --> 0:13:02.200 those kids at the individual level, and they're spending less 0:13:02.200 --> 0:13:05.840 than the United States is on education per child to 0:13:05.920 --> 0:13:08.280 do that. You know, I can't help but think back 0:13:08.320 --> 0:13:12.280 to the wire when we're talking about this, mainly because 0:13:12.480 --> 0:13:16.160 creator David Simon has often stated that that that in 0:13:16.240 --> 0:13:19.560 that show, you essentially have a Greek tragedy, but instead 0:13:19.640 --> 0:13:23.200 of gods, you have institutions, because institutions are the gods 0:13:23.200 --> 0:13:27.559 of modern society. And so in in this topic, we 0:13:27.559 --> 0:13:29.679 we kind of have to ask the question what kind 0:13:29.760 --> 0:13:33.839 of god suits, uh, the denizen of the modern world better. 0:13:34.240 --> 0:13:38.000 One is the personal god that is is involved in 0:13:38.040 --> 0:13:41.079 your life and uh and and wants to mold you. 0:13:41.160 --> 0:13:45.000 And the other is this abstract, distant god. And to 0:13:45.080 --> 0:13:47.520 reach that god, you have to change yourself. You have 0:13:47.559 --> 0:13:51.240 to jump through the hoops of of religious ritual to 0:13:51.640 --> 0:13:55.559 possibly interact with it. Oh my gosh. And as we 0:13:55.600 --> 0:13:57.920 always say, it goes back to the Platonic ideal and 0:13:58.040 --> 0:14:00.240 Plato and this idea that we're all just, you know, 0:14:01.240 --> 0:14:05.080 these cheap copies of perfection. But you know, we've decided 0:14:05.120 --> 0:14:07.120 that we're cheap copies on the on the bell curve 0:14:07.400 --> 0:14:12.439 instead of you know, on the jagged edge of dimensions. 0:14:12.559 --> 0:14:15.640 And this even relates to healthcare. If you think about 0:14:15.800 --> 0:14:21.160 health insurance, which sanctions, treatments, and the myth of average 0:14:21.200 --> 0:14:24.960 can really put people at a disadvantage. Here Rose says 0:14:25.040 --> 0:14:27.160 that if you look at the area of cancer, you 0:14:27.200 --> 0:14:31.080 see an exponential increase in effective research and treatment when 0:14:31.160 --> 0:14:34.960 the individual with all of his or her genetic predispositions, 0:14:35.000 --> 0:14:37.960 diet and environment is considered as opposed to just hey, 0:14:38.040 --> 0:14:41.960 here's this, here's how we approach cancer, this in this 0:14:42.120 --> 0:14:45.240 very universal way. And he said that's it's really only 0:14:45.240 --> 0:14:47.440 when you get down to the individual level that you're 0:14:47.480 --> 0:14:51.400 making progress. And if you think about it, um even 0:14:51.400 --> 0:14:54.560 a drug therapies, and this is from the case for 0:14:54.640 --> 0:14:57.680 Impersonalized Medicine the third edition. It says many patients do 0:14:57.760 --> 0:15:00.440 not benefit from the first drug they are offered in treatment. 0:15:00.480 --> 0:15:07.600 For example, of depression patients, arthritis patients, asthma patients, and 0:15:08.440 --> 0:15:11.520 of diabetic patients will not respond to initial treatment. And 0:15:11.520 --> 0:15:14.840 we know initial treatment is something that is offered because 0:15:15.760 --> 0:15:19.560 based on the average that they have, that is the 0:15:19.600 --> 0:15:21.680 thing that they think will work the best. Right, and 0:15:21.680 --> 0:15:23.920 it sounds good on paper, right, treat the average patient 0:15:24.040 --> 0:15:27.080 and then adjust accordingly based on the feedback. Yeah, except 0:15:27.160 --> 0:15:30.040 as as it seems as mounting evidence would seem to 0:15:30.200 --> 0:15:34.200 show us this average is indeed a myth. All right, 0:15:34.240 --> 0:15:36.320 we're gonna take a quick break, and when we come back, 0:15:36.560 --> 0:15:39.000 we're going to talk a little more about this topic 0:15:39.200 --> 0:15:47.960 and even read a few listener mails. Hey we're back, 0:15:48.160 --> 0:15:50.880 and we're of course talking about the myth of average. 0:15:50.880 --> 0:15:53.680 We're talking about what happens when you have these have 0:15:53.720 --> 0:15:58.480 an institutional model of human performance, and then you start 0:15:58.680 --> 0:16:01.120 trying to live your life and and have the whole 0:16:01.160 --> 0:16:04.640 culture work around those models, and the and the the 0:16:04.760 --> 0:16:09.800 growing revelation that this average person that everything is centered 0:16:09.800 --> 0:16:13.480 around doesn't really exist. Yeah. And the thing too is 0:16:13.520 --> 0:16:18.640 that this system is just completely permeated culture. Right, it's systemic. 0:16:18.880 --> 0:16:21.200 There is there to stay it with. Seems so Todd 0:16:21.280 --> 0:16:23.040 Rose one of one of the things that he really 0:16:23.040 --> 0:16:25.280 wants to do is to try to take this apart 0:16:25.320 --> 0:16:29.120 a bit and look more towards the individual talent method. 0:16:29.160 --> 0:16:31.640 And he has something called the Variability Project, and his 0:16:31.760 --> 0:16:34.400 idea is that you have this, you know, this system 0:16:34.520 --> 0:16:36.880 in place for a hundred and fifty years based on 0:16:36.920 --> 0:16:41.280 averages trying to understand individuals, and you have to now 0:16:41.360 --> 0:16:45.840 take this information about the myth of average and try 0:16:45.920 --> 0:16:48.880 to rework it. And so he says, there are three 0:16:48.960 --> 0:16:53.920 broad challenges data, models, and the nature of science to 0:16:54.080 --> 0:16:57.200 address the science of the individual reaching its full potential 0:16:57.200 --> 0:17:01.280 in all different fields. So what he's doing may seem 0:17:01.360 --> 0:17:03.800 a little bit pine in the sky right now because 0:17:03.840 --> 0:17:07.000 it's it's UH. I say that only because again it's 0:17:07.080 --> 0:17:11.520 very systemaic. This this UM, this average idea and Bell 0:17:11.600 --> 0:17:15.040 curve that's in place. So that's there's so many different 0:17:15.119 --> 0:17:19.480 fields that he has to try to get into and influence. 0:17:19.800 --> 0:17:23.399 That being said, he and his organization are starting to 0:17:24.000 --> 0:17:28.360 provide papers on the topic and really trying to educate people, UM, 0:17:28.480 --> 0:17:32.480 why why this is sort of erroneous thinking, and how 0:17:32.520 --> 0:17:36.640 you can get to students, to workers, UM, to health 0:17:36.640 --> 0:17:39.399 care treatments in a much more effective way, you know. 0:17:39.440 --> 0:17:41.520 And just just to go back to A. Gwynas for 0:17:41.560 --> 0:17:43.440 a second. One of the authors on that two thousand 0:17:43.480 --> 0:17:48.280 and twelve study UM he described the Bell curve as 0:17:48.440 --> 0:17:53.199 as possibly being accurate in describing human performance in the 0:17:53.240 --> 0:17:58.800 presence of an external constraint UH, such as an assembly line. 0:17:59.240 --> 0:18:02.040 You have simply line their parts moving by, and you 0:18:02.119 --> 0:18:06.040 have skilled workers doing their bit to UH to contribute 0:18:06.080 --> 0:18:09.520 to the finished air conditioning unit at the end of 0:18:09.520 --> 0:18:13.600 the line, right, but you're gonna have talented individuals on 0:18:13.640 --> 0:18:17.479 there who are not who could work faster if not 0:18:17.600 --> 0:18:22.159 held back by the pace of the line, by the 0:18:22.160 --> 0:18:26.000 the the outside constraint that is applied to them by 0:18:26.000 --> 0:18:29.560 the institution. Yeah, and it's really the institution is key here. 0:18:29.600 --> 0:18:32.119 And it's interesting to think about this because you're thinking, Okay, 0:18:32.119 --> 0:18:36.919 this is about manufacturing, right, could this possibly apply to 0:18:37.200 --> 0:18:41.240 sort of like the Krendl crem of higher education? Could 0:18:41.320 --> 0:18:45.080 IVY Leagues be a kind of assembly line. Well, there's 0:18:45.119 --> 0:18:48.400 an excellent article on this by David Brooks that published 0:18:48.960 --> 0:18:51.639 online in The Atlantic. Of course it's The Atlantic, so 0:18:51.680 --> 0:18:55.760 it's it's really long but very thorough breakdown of the 0:18:55.840 --> 0:18:59.359 state of higher education, especially as as it relates to 0:18:59.440 --> 0:19:02.560 IVY Lee For instance. He argues that, uh, that that 0:19:02.680 --> 0:19:05.520 right now, we kind of have the convergence of two models. 0:19:05.560 --> 0:19:07.520 There's the older model where to get into an IVY 0:19:07.560 --> 0:19:09.840 League school you had to be somebody a very you know, 0:19:10.320 --> 0:19:13.000 class based model and to have the clout to get in. 0:19:13.240 --> 0:19:15.320 And then you have the newer model to to get 0:19:15.320 --> 0:19:17.840 into an IVY League school. To get into it, to 0:19:17.840 --> 0:19:20.280 be a high achiever in society. You had to be 0:19:20.320 --> 0:19:22.359 an overachiever. You had to just work and work and 0:19:22.400 --> 0:19:24.679 work the right person, Yeah, you had to be the 0:19:24.800 --> 0:19:29.040 right person as opposed to the being from the right class. 0:19:29.320 --> 0:19:31.560 So they end up in this environment where they're just 0:19:31.880 --> 0:19:34.680 they're just performing at a high level all the time. 0:19:34.720 --> 0:19:38.040 They're expected and expecting themselves to just knock get out 0:19:38.040 --> 0:19:42.800 of the park, assignment after assignment, project after project. Uh, 0:19:42.960 --> 0:19:46.760 just domino after domino. Right. And as as as Brooks 0:19:46.800 --> 0:19:49.200 says in the PC says quote, learning is supposed to 0:19:49.240 --> 0:19:51.720 be about falling down and getting up again until you 0:19:51.800 --> 0:19:54.800 do it right. But in an academic culture that demands 0:19:54.840 --> 0:19:59.119 constant achievement, failures seem so perilous that the best and 0:19:59.160 --> 0:20:03.760 brightest often spend their young years in terrariums of excellence. Uh. 0:20:03.840 --> 0:20:07.280 And this is what author William Dershowitz, who's a former 0:20:07.480 --> 0:20:12.600 professor of English at Yale, terms a violent aversion to risk. 0:20:13.160 --> 0:20:16.240 So you can imagine where you were an institution like 0:20:16.320 --> 0:20:19.679 this would produce an individual that could go on to 0:20:19.880 --> 0:20:23.480 achieve great things within a similar institution, you know, the 0:20:23.600 --> 0:20:27.160 right kind of uh, financial firm, etcetera, where there again, 0:20:27.480 --> 0:20:30.920 are are these dominoes to knock down one after the other. 0:20:31.280 --> 0:20:34.600 But that kind of individual, of that kind of thinking 0:20:34.600 --> 0:20:37.760 that's been in a sense institutionalized by the the Ivy 0:20:37.840 --> 0:20:40.880 League system is not going to perform well in other 0:20:40.920 --> 0:20:45.200 areas of society. Yeah, Derschwitz, he has a book called 0:20:45.280 --> 0:20:48.800 Excellent Sheep, and he says that the Ivy League is 0:20:48.880 --> 0:20:52.840 churning out students who are super people, alien species. I 0:20:52.920 --> 0:20:57.000 think that one's fair. Uh, and bionic hamsters. I mean this, 0:20:57.200 --> 0:21:00.520 this is rough stuff here, But again I think bion 0:21:00.600 --> 0:21:03.119 a canster matches up with some people I've met that 0:21:03.119 --> 0:21:06.000 would fit that moment camps up. It's kind of awesome 0:21:06.000 --> 0:21:08.520 in a way. Yeah, I'm gonna put that on my resume. 0:21:08.920 --> 0:21:13.520 I'm not there. You go, and he says, as you said, 0:21:13.520 --> 0:21:16.040 that system manufactured students who are smart and talented and driven, 0:21:16.040 --> 0:21:20.040 but they're also anxious, timid, and lost, with little intellectual 0:21:20.160 --> 0:21:24.000 curiosity and stunted sense of purpose, trapped in a bubble 0:21:24.040 --> 0:21:26.959 of privilege, heading meekly in the same direction. Great at 0:21:26.960 --> 0:21:28.880 what they're doing, but no idea why they're doing it. 0:21:29.320 --> 0:21:30.920 And so I think it kind of goes back down 0:21:30.920 --> 0:21:34.840 to that whole individual versus universal level, because at the 0:21:34.840 --> 0:21:38.479 individual level, as Brooks has said, there is failure. You 0:21:38.600 --> 0:21:41.359 must fail, you must fail and get up and do 0:21:41.400 --> 0:21:44.639 it again in order to learn and find purpose. But 0:21:44.920 --> 0:21:49.480 at the universal level and at the university level, there 0:21:49.640 --> 0:21:55.800 is only success. That is what the big push is right, 0:21:55.920 --> 0:22:01.160 just to succeed and not to individualize the content that 0:22:01.280 --> 0:22:04.600 you are are taking in. So you could even say 0:22:04.640 --> 0:22:08.480 that it's just all about regurgitation as opposed to percolating 0:22:08.480 --> 0:22:13.120 on something, permeating your worldview and figuring it out for yourself. 0:22:13.200 --> 0:22:16.359 What doesn't matter to you as a person. So again 0:22:16.400 --> 0:22:18.680 I can't help but come back to that to David 0:22:18.720 --> 0:22:23.400 Simon's about institutions as God's and this, uh, this idea 0:22:23.480 --> 0:22:26.439 that we don't want that distant God that requires us 0:22:26.440 --> 0:22:29.119 to jump through hoops and jump through ritual We we 0:22:29.200 --> 0:22:34.880 want this institutional God that that sees us as an individual. Yeah, 0:22:34.920 --> 0:22:36.840 And I find actually a lot of comfort in this 0:22:37.000 --> 0:22:40.159 idea of the myth of the average, because you know, 0:22:40.400 --> 0:22:44.280 too often I think we we hear the statistic of 0:22:44.440 --> 0:22:47.680 you fall into this category in that category, and we're 0:22:47.720 --> 0:22:52.640 so completely categorized and labeled that we don't necessarily follow 0:22:53.440 --> 0:22:56.359 the individual path for ourselves. And I think this is 0:22:56.359 --> 0:22:58.840 a very subconscious thing. In fact, I think all of us, 0:22:58.880 --> 0:23:00.879 if you, if you thought yourself for a moment, do 0:23:00.920 --> 0:23:05.359 I subconsciously seed myself to a kind of average out 0:23:05.400 --> 0:23:09.480 there or an idea of what is average? Um? I 0:23:09.560 --> 0:23:11.720 think all of us would probably say, yeah, there's a 0:23:11.840 --> 0:23:15.199 certain sort of standard. But I hold myself to and 0:23:16.040 --> 0:23:17.919 the you know, I guess the idea is that that 0:23:18.000 --> 0:23:22.680 standard is built of myths, right, So it's very interesting 0:23:22.680 --> 0:23:24.200