"If they were capable of understanding it, they'd probably be practicing it instead of in politics."
That's a rather loaded statement. Are you saying that people who have chosen to specialise in a "non technical" set of domain skills and specialised knowledge aren't capable of picking up different skills? It reads like you're implying that if a person is capable of learning, say, engineering, they'd automatically consider that a more worthy career choice than economics. Because if you are saying that, I do take personal offense.
Let's remember that the people who rise to become and remain senior politicians are by-and-large extraordinarily smart and capable people. These are world-leaders in their field, and it's a very competitive field. The domain knowledge required to understand certain topics is not generally out of reach of these people if they wanted to acquire it - it's simply a matter of priorities.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-10-31 09:56 pm (UTC)From:That's a rather loaded statement. Are you saying that people who have chosen to specialise in a "non technical" set of domain skills and specialised knowledge aren't capable of picking up different skills? It reads like you're implying that if a person is capable of learning, say, engineering, they'd automatically consider that a more worthy career choice than economics. Because if you are saying that, I do take personal offense.
Let's remember that the people who rise to become and remain senior politicians are by-and-large extraordinarily smart and capable people. These are world-leaders in their field, and it's a very competitive field. The domain knowledge required to understand certain topics is not generally out of reach of these people if they wanted to acquire it - it's simply a matter of priorities.