It occurs to me that “initiative” is another concept which is entangled in the “failure to simulate” concept. If you do accomplish something which does not require much initiative, it will be relatively easy to simulate. For example, signing up for a sports team, going to practice every day, etc. is a bit like checking off a box in the sense that the path is pretty clearly marked for you. At the same time, if you do succeed in something which is “difficult to simulate,” you can be sure that you did not follow a clearly marked path, i.e. it entails initiative.
Good point. I think initiative is important. I hadn’t listed it separately, but it was sort of implicit in my mention of standard versus nonstandard (it takes initiative to do nonstandard things) and the “convincing people” stuff. I’ll think more about what the “initiative” angle of thinking tells us over and above what I’ve already written.
Thank you. By the way, I agree that standard versus non-standard is basically the same distinction as initiative versus what you might call non-initiative. (Although really the word “standard” fits here very well.)
I was reading a while back that there are companies now who, for a fee, will set up an all-inclusive trip for teenagers to go the third world and do relief work. i.e. it’s become so standard that it doesn’t require initiative. And of course you don’t need to be Einstein to figure out that such an activity will be far less impressive to colleges than if you yourself had set things up from scratch.
Turning back to the “difficulty to simulate” hypothesis, one can imagine a hypothetical college applicant who shows initiative and sets up some kind of accomplishment from scratch. Suppose also that in his essay, he explains exactly how he did it. I think it would still be impressive even though the “difficulty to simulate” factor is diminished.
So I would hypothesize that in general in life, people who show initiative are more impressive than those who follow the more beaten path. ETA: And that “difficult to simulate” is of less significance.
It occurs to me that “initiative” is another concept which is entangled in the “failure to simulate” concept. If you do accomplish something which does not require much initiative, it will be relatively easy to simulate. For example, signing up for a sports team, going to practice every day, etc. is a bit like checking off a box in the sense that the path is pretty clearly marked for you. At the same time, if you do succeed in something which is “difficult to simulate,” you can be sure that you did not follow a clearly marked path, i.e. it entails initiative.
Good point. I think initiative is important. I hadn’t listed it separately, but it was sort of implicit in my mention of standard versus nonstandard (it takes initiative to do nonstandard things) and the “convincing people” stuff. I’ll think more about what the “initiative” angle of thinking tells us over and above what I’ve already written.
Thank you. By the way, I agree that standard versus non-standard is basically the same distinction as initiative versus what you might call non-initiative. (Although really the word “standard” fits here very well.)
I was reading a while back that there are companies now who, for a fee, will set up an all-inclusive trip for teenagers to go the third world and do relief work. i.e. it’s become so standard that it doesn’t require initiative. And of course you don’t need to be Einstein to figure out that such an activity will be far less impressive to colleges than if you yourself had set things up from scratch.
Turning back to the “difficulty to simulate” hypothesis, one can imagine a hypothetical college applicant who shows initiative and sets up some kind of accomplishment from scratch. Suppose also that in his essay, he explains exactly how he did it. I think it would still be impressive even though the “difficulty to simulate” factor is diminished.
So I would hypothesize that in general in life, people who show initiative are more impressive than those who follow the more beaten path. ETA: And that “difficult to simulate” is of less significance.