I was thinking a lot about this myself recently: those people that have a 'compulsive, arbitrary obsession' with something and the resulting wealth of knowledge they tend to have.
I also don't believe it's really about 'love or passion' per say, it often seems to be more of an obsessive/compulsive attitude, like a behaviour that's in their DNA 'just the way they are'.
Whenever I read about 'some great person' I see how there's 100x more to them than 'what we see'. There's an obsession to the subject, the 'product' is just the tip of the iceberg.
Think about the recently released 'Mr. Robison' biopic and have a gander into his past talks. This man was not just about making some hum-dum kids show. This guy was not a sociologist, he was an ordained Minister, and hugely empathetic guy who was clearly obsessed with understanding the wellbeing of children, and the show was his vehicle for communicating issues and also communicating 'values' as he saw them. He would do a lot of 'research' in terms of interviews, questionnaires, etc. Though we might be smug about this in the sense that it wasn't very formal - I think we should be cautious to dismiss his work - we can learn a lot about any subject by simply inquiring, doing, observing. We definitely do not want to do this with clinical drug trials, and we probably want to still do more formal sociological research, but I don't think anything can replace his deep commitment to the cause.
Tiger Woods, Michael Jackson, Serena Williams, Justin Timberlake, Enrique Eglisias - these people were 'trained from birth' for their roles and each have vast wealth and knowledge of their disciplines. Clearly instituted into the trades by their parents, and probably a little bit forcibly on occasions, they will have nevertheless had to encompass that kind of 'arbitrary conviction'.
I also don't believe it's really about 'love or passion' per say, it often seems to be more of an obsessive/compulsive attitude, like a behaviour that's in their DNA 'just the way they are'.
Whenever I read about 'some great person' I see how there's 100x more to them than 'what we see'. There's an obsession to the subject, the 'product' is just the tip of the iceberg.
Think about the recently released 'Mr. Robison' biopic and have a gander into his past talks. This man was not just about making some hum-dum kids show. This guy was not a sociologist, he was an ordained Minister, and hugely empathetic guy who was clearly obsessed with understanding the wellbeing of children, and the show was his vehicle for communicating issues and also communicating 'values' as he saw them. He would do a lot of 'research' in terms of interviews, questionnaires, etc. Though we might be smug about this in the sense that it wasn't very formal - I think we should be cautious to dismiss his work - we can learn a lot about any subject by simply inquiring, doing, observing. We definitely do not want to do this with clinical drug trials, and we probably want to still do more formal sociological research, but I don't think anything can replace his deep commitment to the cause.
Tiger Woods, Michael Jackson, Serena Williams, Justin Timberlake, Enrique Eglisias - these people were 'trained from birth' for their roles and each have vast wealth and knowledge of their disciplines. Clearly instituted into the trades by their parents, and probably a little bit forcibly on occasions, they will have nevertheless had to encompass that kind of 'arbitrary conviction'.