Stereotypical geniuses have highly developed self-correcting mechanisms. They learn from their mistakes and avoid repeating them. This allows them to build on their existing knowledge and develop what we recognize as expertise.

Stereotypical idiots have poorly developed self-correcting mechanisms. They do not learn from their mistakes. They may not even be aware of their mistakes, perhaps attributing undesirable outcomes to external circumstances beyond their influence. Their “knowledge” does not have much integrity- it’s largely baseless, and cannot be built upon.

Sometimes we will see manifestations of stereotypical genius and idiocy evident in the same person, often in celebrities and sportsmen who develop intensively within the limited sphere of their expertise, but do not make parallel developments in their social and emotional spheres. This is often emotionally distressing to witness.

I believe that there’s nothing more important than developing a broad self-correcting mechanism that is effectively functional across every aspect of our lives- especially in the physical, emotional and financial spheres. A good self-correcting mechanism is a precursor to a balanced, healthy, pleasurable and fulfilling life.

Philosophy, in a practical sense, could be described as the study of the development of self-correcting mechanisms within the context of the human condition. It’s much broader than that, of course- you could flip it around instead and say that self-correcting mechanisms are revealed, developed and discovered through processes such as philosophy. My interest in philosophy is largely driven by a desire to assimilate the wealth of human knowledge and wisdom into my own self-correcting mechanisms, that I might be able to make better and more effective decisions in all contexts.

It can be interesting and relevant to study self-correcting mechanisms (and self-destructive ones) in social, biological, economic and other systems. Systems theory is the study of systems in general, and there are many signs that suggest that there are universal properties and general rules that apply across all systems. This would make systems theory a beautiful companion to philosophy, because philosophy itself could be described as a system, with mechanisms of its own- and yet systems theory is not above and independent of philosophy, for some of the first questions a philosopher is compelled to ask upon discovering the systems perspective is- what does that mean?

Biology could be described as a study of living systems, in a conventional sense. In an unconventional sense, almost all systems could be described as “alive”. Languages, cities, economies, the internet and all of human knowledge could be described as living things that grow, evolve, mutate and so on. As such, I imagine that an erudite biologist would have a lot of knowledge that would be incredibly valuable to a linguist or an economist. Part of my goal in life is to facilitate such conversations.

There is a deep indescribable pleasure in learning and understanding such things that permeate everything else. As a philosopher and a systems enthusiast, I see beauty, meaning and value in absolutely everything I encounter. Everything is a part of something greater than itself. Perhaps if this sense of wonder could be shared effectively with our entire species, we would all act a little differently from the way we do now. That too is something I plan to dedicate my life to.