Tim Ferriss video script.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8pfl22VcAo&t=384s

 

So, I'd like to explore the question I get a lot which is "Should I specialize or should I be a generalist?" and my answer, in short, would be you should be a specialized generalist.

 

So, let me explain what that means.

 

What I interviewed Scott Adams not longer ago, I suppose It was a few years ago.

It doesn't feel like long ago.

 

Hi Scott, who is the creator of Dilbert, I looked up some of his older writing related to career advice, and

he had some really sage advice that I have applied in many ways since in concrete form.

 

sage: 현명한

since in concrete form: 구체적인 형태로

 

His recommendation in a brief although I'm paraphrasing here, of course,

is trying to combine a handful of skills that are rarely combined.

 

In other words, if you want to just specialize and become a basketball player,

you really need to be in the top 0.001% to do phenomenally well financially and otherwise.

 

phenomenally = extraordinary 경이적으로

 

On the other hand, if say you combine two skills that are valuable but even more rare, and therefore more valuable together in many instances like a computer science degree, and a law degree or extreme knowledge of finance and or mathematics plus public speaking.

 

Automatically, you have a competitive advantage that allows you to more likely end up saying the top decile of earning power.

 

competitive advantage: 경쟁 우위

top decile: 최상위 10분위

 

All right, so you're not trying to master a thousand different skills.

 

You're not dabbling as a dilettante and a million things and never going, say, a mile-deep, 

 

dabble: (스포츠, 활동 등을 취미 삼아) 조금 해보다. 잠깐 손대다.;물에 첨벙거리다.

dilettante: 딜레탕트, 아마추어 예술가 - 전문가가 아닌 취미로 예술을 하는 사람.

 

but you are spreading yourself out across multiple skills that are rarely combined and can be very effectively combined.

 

Warren Buffett as one example, the world's most or certainly one of the world's most successful investors.

 

Although anybody who's interested should check out renaissance capital as another extreme example of investing success.

 

But, Warren Buffett has said that his best investment was in Ivy League Dale Carnegie speaking course.

 

Because being a good speaker having a command of communication in spoken form and in written form, Warren's very good writer really, provides you with an Archimedes lever for whatever other skills you happen to have.

 

Archimedes lever: 아르키메데스의 지렛대

 

Because there are many who are saying technicians in a specific field but are not able to communicate effectively to lay people without dumbing things down.

 

many who are saying technicians: 기술자라고 하는 사람들

dumb down: (많은 사람들이 이해하기 쉽게 만든다고 어떠한 것을) 지나치게 단순화하다.

 

Warren is very good at this and therefore I would encourage you to consider PUBLIC SPEAKING, WRITING, and NEGOTIATING to be three very easy add-ons or multipliers for whatever your core skill or skills might be those will give you an immediate competitive advantage.

 

When I think about the best project choices that I have made, I also tend to think about winning even if I fail and this is also borrowing very much from Scott Adams,

 

winning: 얻는 것

borrowing from who: 누군가를 인용하고 있다

 

although I did this prior to being exposed to Scott,

what that means is I'm choosing my projects what I commit time to over say a six to twelve-month period based on the skills and the relationships,

I will develop that can transcend or persist after that project.

 

commit time: 일정 시간을 사용하기로 약속하다. 

transcend: 초월하다

persist: 유지하다

 

3:48 할 차례.