Back to episode — Episode 1111 Scott Adams - Portland Mayhem, CDC Death Count, Crazy Bernie Bad Math, Middle East Peace
Context —
sumption. Or that he's a racist when again everything we observe shows that he cares about people who are citizens more than those who are not. But beyond that that's it. That's it. That's his whole preference. And he prefers people who obey the law of course. But if you do those two things, you're a citizen and you obey the law, he likes you. And not just a little bit. Ask Herschel Walker. Does h…
← Previous segment →w was going to happen for the most part. And if you don't know what's going to happen, it's chaos.
So just putting a clever word on it and labeling it doesn't change the fact that the world is unpredictable all the time. Do you think you could hire or elect a president who would make the chaos go away? I hope not, because if the chaos goes away we're all dead. The only way you could have no chaos is to literally be dead because the world serves up a lot of chaos. You hope that you have a president who knows how to deal with it.
And one way not to deal with all the chaos is to really dig into all the details. I have much less respect for the presidents who try to master all the details of the topics. I know that sounds counterintuitive. You think, well Scott, that's exactly what you need, isn't it? Don't you want the president who really gets into the nuts and bolts, really digs in a little bit deeper? No, no. You want that kind of person who has, like if somebody works in a cubicle, you want somebody who can really dig into the details because that's your job if you work in a cubicle. I'm not disparaging people working in cubicles. I spent much of my career there. I'm just saying that that's a different job.
Some people's job it is to get into the details. Other people are sitting on top of this giant ball of chaos, let's call it, and they're trying to nudge the chaos in intelligent ways whenever there's an opportunity. And understanding all the details of all the chaos would be the least productive thing you could do. It's not what a leader does. It's what the cubicle does. The cubicle can dig in but they only dig into their topic. The cubicle that's one cubicle over, they also dig in but only to their topic because the level of complexity would overwhelm anybody if you don't chunk it down to its smallest part.
So the last thing you want is a leader who's obsessing over the details. You just can't lead that way. You wish that were possible but that's wishful thinking. Instead you have leaders who are dealing with do I trust this person, does the general thrust of this fit with my philosophy, is this something I could fix if I
Context —
break it, is this something that would cause maybe a predictable problem if I go this way versus that. It's a risk management situation. A lot of it is guessing. A lot of it's intuition. So anybody who is operating at the child level that says that a candidate is bringing chaos when in fact chaos is the canvas, they're not really a good observer. I've noticed this correlation anecdotally and I w…
Next segment → →