3 Answers

  1. After reading your question, I remembered the famous phrase of Bruce Lee “I'm not afraid of someone who studies ten thousand different strokes. I'm afraid of someone who learns one strike ten thousand times.” It's not about weaknesses or strengths, it's about the ability to develop what you want, find what you do best and develop (speaking of strengths). If you prefer something that is not very good for you, then again, develop it. The main thing is to decide not on the basis of weaknesses or strengths, but on the basis of whether you are ready to say so “ten thousand times”.

  2. It is worth developing useful ones for the chosen goal, and the division into strengths and weaknesses is secondary here.

    Let's say you want to be a mathematician, and your strengths are counting fast in your head and running fast, and your weakness is not being able to concentrate for a long time. In this case, you need to develop the strong side “ability to count” and the weak side “inability to concentrate”, but do not spend time developing the strong side “fast running”.

  3. As for me, it is worth developing your strengths as best as possible so that they eventually begin to compensate for the weak ones, rather than being with average skills in all areas. It is also worth considering, for example, that an artist will never master mathematics, and a physicist will not sit down at the piano after playing a sonata.
    Any new undertaking requires hard work and patience, which, by the way, a person can develop already mastered skills[for example, an artist trained in patience can spend hours understanding the structure of a musical instrument and, perhaps, eventually even perform something]. Therefore, of course, it is worth developing comprehensively, but you always need to sensibly assess your strengths and weaknesses and draw conclusions from this.

    Well, or something like that.

Leave a Reply