I don't see the contradiction between making snap decisions and thinking things through. It's a question of how much time one has before one has to decide. Sometimes you have to act immediately and intuition can be a very powerful guide. Other times, we do well to employ reason to the fullest extent and that can take a very long time.
He's delightfully self-confident and so knowledgeable. Great books. As far as busting out of the gate and showing mastery of the complex at a very young age, I felt he made a glib generalization. I saw my son at 17 do it with music, and so many athletes are constantly demonstrating this capability. Not a hater, just older and really well travelled, as they say.
Prodigious children don’t need their 10000 hours. A lot of talent is pure luck and timing and not nearly 10000 hours. It’s a pure knowing , confidence and the love of your instrument.
Wow… why all the hate for Malcolm Gladwell? At least he is thinking… jeez!! And people’s thinking can shift over time especially if one has an intellectual curiosity, which he does.
I love Malcolm's novel and thought provoking perspectives and his meticulous indepth research behind his writing. That makes two glaring errors I found in his books all the more puzzling how they got in there. They're both aviation related, so as a pilot they jumped out at me...but one shouldn't have to be a pilot to catch these. I admit neither undermines the point being made, but they make me wonder how little he understands about basic aviation and how careful he and his editors are with other facts: One is on page 53 of "Talking to Strangers": He refers to "single engine Cessna Skymasters" aircraft. They're twin engine and so unique as twin engine (one in front, one in back) that anyone with even the slightest familiarity with aircraft would know that. The other is in his book "The Bomber Mafia." On page 129 he's talking about a flight of overloaded B-29 bombers on Tinian island in the Marianas in 1944. They're ready to takeoff on a critical bombing mission over Japan. But they can't takeoff because the needed "an unusually strong tailwind blowing down the runway" to be able to. I read that and my WFT light went on. WRONG. They needed unusually strong headwind. Anyone with even the most basic understanding of flight or had even watched a movie of carrier takeoffs and noticed they always turn into the wind for launching would know that. Take off with a tailwind is a basic aviation no-no, let alone with an overloaded aircraft. How did this slip by? Puzzled.
@@new_skyspirit Hi Anie .. There's no doubt those are errors. For example, the issue of whether a Cessna Skymaster is a single engine plane (as Malcom's text says) or not isn't a "gray" or "maybe" issue. Just google Cessna Skymaster, or Cessna Skymaster pictures. What make it especially odd that this would be misstated is that the Skymaster's being a twin engine is not an obscure aviation fact. It's iconic and well known as twin engine because, unlike most twin engine planes, ITS two engines are unusual in that one is on the nose and one behind the cabin. One pulls and the other pushes. What did you mean by "this comment needs more headwind?" That your surprised it didn't get more attention?
@@acensor Yeah, I just googled it. seems even the first information that comes up is the fact that it's a twin engine. I think this is the sort of thing that happens a lot when outsiders try write on various subjects. And yeah, I meant the comment deserves to get more attention.
@@new_skyspirit Two things: (1) Those two errors of fact don't in any way undermine Malcolm's point or narrative... they're not critical facts. (2) But considering how meticulous he SEEMS to be in his fact checking in other areas that he arguable isn't an expert either, and how basic these errors are, it's just plain puzzling how they're in there. I have tried to get a message directly to him though one of his sites but apparently no luck.
“A writer who is concerned about always being right… would never write.” Well I guess that explains the two *glaring* mistakes in the first few pages of Part 2 of Bomber Mafia. Enola Gay did not bomb both Japanese cities (historically inaccurate), and heavily loaded aircraft need a HEADwind for takeoff on short runways (scientifically inaccurate). Perhaps I’m an outlier.. for preferring to read books by authors that would strive to get such simple and known facts, such as these, correct.
He is so right; there exists plenty of room to disagree with his opinions! His attitudes on gifted education ignore the pain and discrimination those children experience. I will never read one of his books again without thinking of his populist attitude on this subject, and how damaging it could be if adopted by others because a best-selling author holds it.
What are you referring to specifically and which book? He dealt with that topic I believe in both outliers and David and Goliath. Wondering what you’re specifically referring to.
@@knowsutrue He has spoken in lectures (on RUclips) about the pointlessness of gifted/talented education, because he feels that identifying people as gifted is misguided. Ask parents of kids whose skills make them fit poorly in their own family, as well as in their class or in their baseball team. Their struggles are real and measurable, and should be seen as "special education" whenever a child is more than 2 standard deviations from the mean in testing...on both sides of the curve.
@@Cathy-xi8cb I couldn’t disagree with you more, respectfully. Gladwell’s ideas on resources being overly used by a select group rings true to me. Advanced education is not wasted on the mean. For example, In my daughters experimental school, all seniors were required to take AP calculus regardless of their previous math performance. To my knowledge all of them passed this very difficult class, primarily because considerable help and turoring resources were made available to everyone. Passing this class alone opened up the door to many of these seniors receiving scholarships and admissions to schools that might have been otherwise outside of their reach. This is a school with many immigrant families, people of color, and a lower socioeconomic status in general. The same could be said for raising the bar in special education groups, This is not so much a populist attitude as it is seeking to open up doors rather than anesthetize those that haven’t performed well in the past.
Interesting in contemporaries will quickly fade as the contemporaries age and die. Books are written to be remembered and stay alive even after the author's physical demise. I'm almost heartbroken to see (or finally realize) the true color of Gladwell - he used to be my favorite author.
@@tangojuli209 at 2:10 Gladwell remarks "a writer who's concerned about being right, will never write... so I think the writer's job is to be interesting." Being right/correct vs. interesting translates to me as the expression of desire for attention of contemporaries than seeking the timeless truth. Gladwell is, and has been, a popular writer. I'm not interested in pop culture any more - they are short-lived.
Interesting ! War more humane. In 1929 the Army Chemical Warfare Service release a publication that seemed to buy the German argument that chemical weapons were more humane.
The firebombing necessity isn't hard to understand: Germany... built of steel, masonry, concrete, dug in: bunker buster HE bombs. Japan... dense wood structures, industry dispersed into residences: fire bombing.
The whole idea that someone can write different books that present contradictory messages seems to weaken (if not invalidate) a writer's authority on any subject. If you read an early book, what's to say that the ideas presented have not been refuted in a later book? This is something to keep in mind when one is searching for the truth.
At the beginning he says …..if a writer always worries about being right he would never write. When I was younger I was never wrong. I, along with just about everyone else, have learned and changed my thinking on almost everything and hopefully will continue to for the remainder of my days. In order words, I can let him contradict himself and still be willing to hear what he thinks today.
@@karylrader7159 Of course we all have the ability to learn and to evolve in our thinking. Gladwell too. What I am talking about is someone picking up one of his early books and reading (and believing) something that is no longer valid in Gladwell's current view. How does someone know that he is reading outmoded ideas?
What you really want are specialists that are willing to think "out of the box" about your body, your devices, and your home, and be willing to question their own initial certainty while they do no harm to you or to your possessions.
They never mentioned the name of “the device.” Pretty poor reporting. I’m assuming they are talking about the Norden Mk. XV, kn bombsight. Anyone read this book and can confirm that?
@@27pattywhack2 Hardly...Russian mafia threatens witnesses, McCoy goes over the line, ADAs get murdered...this guy is in his little theoretical bubble.
I wonder how many wars he has fought in? I'd be willing to bet none. Or how many friends & family members he's lost to a country that's attacking you & refuses to surrender no matter how much you try to reason with Them. Back being precise was a skill, but we Have worked on it & with the new technology we can do this.
Reserve judgment until you've read his book. Malcolm has never pretended to have all the answers-he simply does his homework and presents his thoughts the best way he can, and lets the reader judge. If you think he has a political agenda, you're missing the point.
Cheyenne. Just how many wars have you fought in? I doubt any. Have you read his book? I doubt it. The whole premise of his book is one of irony. The members of the Bomber Mafia numbered only dozen Army Air Corp officers. After the horrendous casualties incurred by all sides in WW1, this group of of officers thought that high level precision bombing of enemy choke points could end wars quickly, reduce civilian and military casualties. They needed two items to achieve their goals; a long range bomber that could defend itself to and from their target, without fighter escort, and a instrument to precisely guide their bombs to the intended target from 25,000 feet up. That would be the Norden bombsight. In reality both were failures. The long range bomber the B-17 proved it could not defend it self. They were shot down by the thousands by German fighters and flak. Tens of thousands of bomber crewman were killed and more captured. To use the Norden bombsight you needed clear skies to see the target. Well the skies over Northwest were almost cloudy and targets could located. Also when mass produced the Norden was proved to have quality issues, further reducing it’s effectiveness. At the end of WW2 the Strategic Bombing Survey concluded that only 3 to 5% of all bombs dropped came anywhere near the intended target. On the first raid over Regenburg of the 2,000 bombs dropped only 84 found the target. The Americans finally gave up the idea of pinpoint bombing and followed the British strategy of mass bombing of civilians. That’s the irony of Gladwell’s book . By the time for the bombing of Japan any pretense of pinpoint bombing was abandoned and civilians became the prime targets.
Initially "thought" there was "interesting" substance to Gladwell's work, but upon further "thinking", I realized his gimmicky story-telling lacks sustainable depth.
It's because every home and building was making parts and weapons for the War that's why we burned Tokyo to the ground . Japan has a very narrow view of what it did during WW2 .
Well...that's utter BS. LeMay thought he could end the war more quickly by destroying Japan's economy, and crushing the morale of the Japanese people. The Japanese civilian population in Tokyo (mostly women and old men, and children, near the end of the war) weren't making aircraft and tanks in home workshops.
He is full of crap. Science is full of stories of men who were young and brilliant and solved difficult problems without ten thousand hours of anything.
Love love love. Brains and love..
I don't see the contradiction between making snap decisions and thinking things through. It's a question of how much time one has before one has to decide. Sometimes you have to act immediately and intuition can be a very powerful guide. Other times, we do well to employ reason to the fullest extent and that can take a very long time.
He's delightfully self-confident and so knowledgeable. Great books. As far as busting out of the gate and showing mastery of the complex at a very young age, I felt he made a glib generalization. I saw my son at 17 do it with music, and so many athletes are constantly demonstrating this capability. Not a hater, just older and really well travelled, as they say.
Bomber Mafia segment starts 3:33
Prodigious children don’t need their 10000 hours. A lot of talent is pure luck and timing and not nearly 10000 hours. It’s a pure knowing , confidence and the love of your instrument.
10,000 hours = 5 years working full-time / 40 hours a week in case you're wondering.
almost no one focuses on a skill their entire work day
Thank You :)
Wow… why all the hate for Malcolm Gladwell? At least he is thinking… jeez!! And people’s thinking can shift over time especially if one has an intellectual curiosity, which he does.
It's not deep why all the hate is here, He's BLACK that's all some people have to know 🙄
People fight tooth and nail when their delusional ideas of reality are scrutinized and crushed so brilliantly.
because he is an intellectual hack
@@joelwillis2043 He's a glib, snarky snob who never gets challenged, despite the gaping holes in his arguments and conclusions.
I love Malcolm's novel and thought provoking perspectives and his meticulous indepth research behind his writing. That makes two glaring errors I found in his books all the more puzzling how they got in there. They're both aviation related, so as a pilot they jumped out at me...but one shouldn't have to be a pilot to catch these. I admit neither undermines the point being made, but they make me wonder how little he understands about basic aviation and how careful he and his editors are with other facts: One is on page 53 of "Talking to Strangers": He refers to "single engine Cessna Skymasters" aircraft. They're twin engine and so unique as twin engine (one in front, one in back) that anyone with even the slightest familiarity with aircraft would know that.
The other is in his book "The Bomber Mafia." On page 129 he's talking about a flight of overloaded B-29 bombers on Tinian island in the Marianas in 1944. They're ready to takeoff on a critical bombing mission over Japan. But they can't takeoff because the needed "an unusually strong tailwind blowing down the runway" to be able to. I read that and my WFT light went on. WRONG. They needed unusually strong headwind. Anyone with even the most basic understanding of flight or had even watched a movie of carrier takeoffs and noticed they always turn into the wind for launching would know that. Take off with a tailwind is a basic aviation no-no, let alone with an overloaded aircraft. How did this slip by? Puzzled.
nice catch.I don't know if any of that is true but if it is, then this comment needs more headwind 😂
@@new_skyspirit Hi Anie .. There's no doubt those are errors. For example, the issue of whether a Cessna Skymaster is a single engine plane (as Malcom's text says) or not isn't a "gray" or "maybe" issue. Just google Cessna Skymaster, or Cessna Skymaster pictures. What make it especially odd that this would be misstated is that the Skymaster's being a twin engine is not an obscure aviation fact. It's iconic and well known as twin engine because, unlike most twin engine planes, ITS two engines are unusual in that one is on the nose and one behind the cabin. One pulls and the other pushes.
What did you mean by "this comment needs more headwind?" That your surprised it didn't get more attention?
@@acensor Yeah, I just googled it. seems even the first information that comes up is the fact that it's a twin engine. I think this is the sort of thing that happens a lot when outsiders try write on various subjects.
And yeah, I meant the comment deserves to get more attention.
@@new_skyspirit Two things: (1) Those two errors of fact don't in any way undermine Malcolm's point or narrative... they're not critical facts. (2) But considering how meticulous he SEEMS to be in his fact checking in other areas that he arguable isn't an expert either, and how basic these errors are, it's just plain puzzling how they're in there. I have tried to get a message directly to him though one of his sites but apparently no luck.
“A writer who is concerned about always being right… would never write.” Well I guess that explains the two *glaring* mistakes in the first few pages of Part 2 of Bomber Mafia. Enola Gay did not bomb both Japanese cities (historically inaccurate), and heavily loaded aircraft need a HEADwind for takeoff on short runways (scientifically inaccurate). Perhaps I’m an outlier.. for preferring to read books by authors that would strive to get such simple and known facts, such as these, correct.
He is so right; there exists plenty of room to disagree with his opinions! His attitudes on gifted education ignore the pain and discrimination those children experience. I will never read one of his books again without thinking of his populist attitude on this subject, and how damaging it could be if adopted by others because a best-selling author holds it.
What are you referring to specifically and which book? He dealt with that topic I believe in both outliers and David and Goliath. Wondering what you’re specifically referring to.
@@knowsutrue He has spoken in lectures (on RUclips) about the pointlessness of gifted/talented education, because he feels that identifying people as gifted is misguided. Ask parents of kids whose skills make them fit poorly in their own family, as well as in their class or in their baseball team. Their struggles are real and measurable, and should be seen as "special education" whenever a child is more than 2 standard deviations from the mean in testing...on both sides of the curve.
@@Cathy-xi8cb I couldn’t disagree with you more, respectfully.
Gladwell’s ideas on resources being overly used by a select group rings true to me. Advanced education is not wasted on the mean. For example, In my daughters experimental school, all seniors were required to take AP calculus regardless of their previous math performance. To my knowledge all of them passed this very difficult class, primarily because considerable help and turoring resources were made available to everyone. Passing this class alone opened up the door to many of these seniors receiving scholarships and admissions to schools that might have been otherwise outside of their reach. This is a school with many immigrant families, people of color, and a lower socioeconomic status in general. The same could be said for raising the bar in special education groups, This is not so much a populist attitude as it is seeking to open up doors rather than anesthetize those that haven’t performed well in the past.
10000 was also the representation of the infinite in many Taoist texts
People lived mostly in towns of hundreds at the time
Interesting in contemporaries will quickly fade as the contemporaries age and die.
Books are written to be remembered and stay alive even after the author's physical demise.
I'm almost heartbroken to see (or finally realize) the true color of Gladwell - he used to be my favorite author.
huh? What did he say to elicit your response?
I never could get him. I tried.
@@tangojuli209 at 2:10 Gladwell remarks "a writer who's concerned about being right, will never write... so I think the writer's job is to be interesting."
Being right/correct vs. interesting translates to me as the expression of desire for attention of contemporaries than seeking the timeless truth.
Gladwell is, and has been, a popular writer. I'm not interested in pop culture any more - they are short-lived.
Interesting ! War more humane. In 1929 the Army Chemical Warfare Service release a publication that seemed to buy the German argument that chemical weapons were more humane.
@@KN-oq6lv hmmm. Ever hear of Spring Valley? Google it with “chemical.” The sins of the fathers.
The firebombing necessity isn't hard to understand:
Germany... built of steel, masonry, concrete, dug in: bunker buster HE bombs.
Japan... dense wood structures, industry dispersed into residences: fire bombing.
Stay curious-in!
I agree this is about staying curious, open/growth minded, humble, and willing to evolve
The whole idea that someone can write different books that present contradictory messages seems to weaken (if not invalidate) a writer's authority on any subject. If you read an early book, what's to say that the ideas presented have not been refuted in a later book? This is something to keep in mind when one is searching for the truth.
At the beginning he says …..if a writer always worries about being right he would never write. When I was younger I was never wrong. I, along with just about everyone else, have learned and changed my thinking on almost everything and hopefully will continue to for the remainder of my days. In order words, I can let him contradict himself and still be willing to hear what he thinks today.
@@karylrader7159 Of course we all have the ability to learn and to evolve in our thinking. Gladwell too. What I am talking about is someone picking up one of his early books and reading (and believing) something that is no longer valid in Gladwell's current view. How does someone know that he is reading outmoded ideas?
Are we talking about the blink book? I believe that book still has some merit. Can you elaborate? Thank you
This is a fine example of human complexity: whether it be growth, digression or the ‘what if’ question.
Works for Trump's relatives and ex-employees...
Love Malcolm Gladwell, I crush on him because of the way he thinks. Brilliant minds are sexy.
THe Bomber Mafia does not appear unti l3:21
The interviewer is very attractive. Am I weird to think that?
Nothing weird about your thinking. I agree he is attractive.
Check out his knowledge on RUclips interview "Why does alcohol get a pass?" 👂 🎶💜
I perfer my Doctor and repairman to be correct in their diagnosis.
What you really want are specialists that are willing to think "out of the box" about your body, your devices, and your home, and be willing to question their own initial certainty while they do no harm to you or to your possessions.
@@Cathy-xi8cb Ingenuity=Good. Gossip=interesting rather than correct.
Is this about Messina they just arrested?
Is that Jane Pauley?
They never mentioned the name of “the device.” Pretty poor reporting. I’m assuming they are talking about the Norden Mk. XV, kn bombsight. Anyone read this book and can confirm that?
I just read the book, that's correct. Good book, I thought.
This video clip wasn't a news report.
He also said every Law & Order episode is exactly the same. I just don't buy everything he preaches.
Every law and order episode is the same
@@27pattywhack2 Hardly...Russian mafia threatens witnesses, McCoy goes over the line, ADAs get murdered...this guy is in his little theoretical bubble.
@@27pattywhack2 😂 lol
ruclips.net/video/gP3MuUTmXNk/видео.html
He sounds just like Ken Burns.......
... so truth and being correct is not important?? so full of it!! and the reason why this country is going down in flames.
I wonder how many wars he has fought in? I'd be willing to bet none. Or how many friends & family members he's lost to a country that's attacking you & refuses to surrender no matter how much you try to reason with Them. Back being precise was a skill, but we Have worked on it & with the new technology we can do this.
Amen.
Reserve judgment until you've read his book. Malcolm has never pretended to have all the answers-he simply does his homework and presents his thoughts the best way he can, and lets the reader judge. If you think he has a political agenda, you're missing the point.
Not sure what you're talking about, but deliberately targeting and firebombing civilians is a war crime.
Cheyenne. Just how many wars have you fought in? I doubt any. Have you read his book? I doubt it. The whole premise of his book is one of irony. The members of the Bomber Mafia numbered only dozen Army Air Corp officers. After the horrendous casualties
incurred by all sides in WW1, this group of of officers thought that high level precision bombing of enemy choke points could end wars quickly, reduce civilian and military casualties. They needed two items to achieve their goals; a long range bomber that could defend itself to and from their target, without fighter escort, and a instrument to precisely guide their bombs to the intended target from 25,000 feet up. That would be the Norden bombsight.
In reality both were failures. The long range bomber the B-17 proved it could not defend it self. They were shot down by the thousands by German fighters and flak. Tens of thousands of bomber crewman were killed and more captured. To use the Norden bombsight you needed clear skies to see the target. Well the skies over Northwest were almost cloudy and targets could located. Also when mass produced the Norden was proved to have quality issues, further reducing it’s effectiveness.
At the end of WW2 the Strategic Bombing Survey concluded that only 3 to 5% of all bombs dropped came anywhere near the intended target. On the first raid over Regenburg of the 2,000 bombs dropped only 84 found the target.
The Americans finally gave up the idea of pinpoint bombing and followed the British strategy of mass bombing of civilians.
That’s the irony of Gladwell’s book . By the time for the bombing of Japan any pretense of pinpoint bombing was abandoned and civilians became the prime targets.
Please don’t put sound effects and background music in audio books. It’s just annoying
sometimes it works. Esp if its mixed well. I've listened to many that didn't work. But look fwd to relistening tothe ones that did.
Malcolm's books don't provide reading resources, they teach you how to think
He is wrong wrong wrong.
I / We Shallll seeee A.I.
beating Man / Men aka
Humans
including him. #🔮
Good writing is rarely true.
Initially "thought" there was "interesting" substance to Gladwell's work, but upon further "thinking", I realized his gimmicky story-telling lacks sustainable depth.
Those are the exact kinds of books that get best-selling status. I am all for story telling but with substance.
Interesting because the United States did not have an Air Force in World War II. What’s going on here?
That's correct, it wasn't called the Air Force until 1947. He does point that out in the book.
It's because every home and building was making parts and weapons for the War that's why we burned Tokyo to the ground . Japan has a very narrow view of what it did during WW2 .
I thought it was strategic bc all of the homes of the civilian population were made of paper and wood 🤡
@@giovannidelgado284 It's called WAR for a reason
@@darrellenglish2704 then why try n sugar coat it
@@giovannidelgado284 That's what the Uber Left does best
Well...that's utter BS. LeMay thought he could end the war more quickly by destroying Japan's economy, and crushing the morale of the Japanese people. The Japanese civilian population in Tokyo (mostly women and old men, and children, near the end of the war) weren't making aircraft and tanks in home workshops.
I’ve bought my last Gladwell book.
You could just check them out from the public library.
Kook.
He is full of crap. Science is full of stories of men who were young and brilliant and solved difficult problems without ten thousand hours of anything.
Too bad those are just stories.
@@elizabethhenning778 No, it's a story that all people are equal and if you just put the time in you will make the great discovery.
@@watermelonlalala Neither Gladwell nor anyone else said that. But thanks for playing in this week's "Straw Man."