Skip to main content

Review - The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies

The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and SocietiesThe Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies by Scott E. Page
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Generally, I found the book most engaging for understanding perception, heuristics and decision making, although this did not seem to be the primary premise of the book. As for the writing, it was a bit long-winded, using analogies to make points, even though the concepts themselves are readily accessible without elucidation.

As to its purported focus, it provides academic, empirical, and statistical support for diversity, not necessarily racial or ethnic, with the premise being that diversity of viewpoint within groups is powerful, so much so that it trumps individual excellence.

View all my reviews

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Response to Twilight of the Polymaths (NY Times)

Since you are aware of the fox and hedgehog dichotomy, you might be aware of Tetlock’s book and long-term study showing how foxes best hedgehogs in political prediction, Expert Political Judgment: How Good Is It? How Can We Know? Although depth in specialties has its merits, I can see how that depth also leads to a kind of blindness, a ‘man with a hammer’ problem, while polymaths, or people with broad awareness can sometimes pull together diverse facts to form insights that are not bound by one’s expertise. Along the same lines, many insights in technology don’t come so much from depth, but by ‘cross-pollination’ of ideas, of taking the basic concepts of one specialty and applying them to a peripherally-related one.
Post a Comment
Read more

How Much Will Americans Sacrifice for Good Health Care?

I'm am often reminded of a statement, paraphrased from Amartya Sen, that one person's equality is another man's inequality when discussing social welfare. Making the system work could mean increasing taxes on the wealthy, reducing the military expenditure, reducing payments for unproven medications, reducing the power of insurers, doctors, and medical/pharmaceutical companies. American wellbeing, on the whole, might improve substantially, but the flip side is that all of those impinged upon would take umbrage as if their freedom was reduced. In the end, we have to realize there is a greater good to human welfare and life, and that the interests of the powerful matter less. Even then, if we tried, expect lawsuits and smears, accusations of socialism and tyranny... https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/16/opinion/sunday/medicare-for-all-universal-health-care.html?comments#permid=30660804
Post a Comment
Read more