Hi,
“Companies, like civilisations, advance by leaps and bounds when genius is let loose, not when it is locked away as too out of the mainstream data-driven knowledge.”
–I read it “… when genius is let loose, not when it [rather ‘ he/she/they’ = genius] is [are] locked away [, =it should be set off too] as “out of … knowledge as well.”
In another words, you need to differentiate companies from genius in order to understand which is advancing ‘by leaps and bounds‘, and ‘out of the mainstream data-driven knowledge’ and which is being locked away.
Or I’ve read it wrongly?
Thank you.
“genius” in this case is an abstract quality, not a person. There is no concept of differentiating companies from genius. “genius” is viewed as something that exists within companies and civilisations. When genius is let loose, companies and civilisations advance by leaps and bounds. This does not happen if genius is locked away and dismissed as data-driven knowledge that is too out-of-the-mainstream.
There is no concept here of differentiating companies from genius. “genius” is viewed as something that exists within companies and civilisations. When genius is let loose, companies and civilisations advance by leaps and bounds. This does not happen if genius is locked away and dismissed as data-driven knowledge that is too out-of-the-mainstream.
Thank you, Dozy.
May I rephrase it like, "Companies, like civilisations, advance by leaps and bounds when genius is let loose, not when it is locked away as opposing to mainstream data-driven knowledge.” (= it’s locked away being too odd)?
Sorry, I don’t properly understand what you mean by “as opposing to” there. “locked away as too out of the mainstream data-driven knowledge” means that genius is locked away because it (genius) is considered too esoteric (“out of the mainstream”) and data-driven (I’m not exactly sure what the author is referring to by this; to me, genius seems the antithesis of “data-driven” knowledge).
The “opposing to” (should’ve I said ‘opposing… knowledge’?) I inserted was implied to mean “competing against, fighting, or arguing with someone else” that is, yes, “considered too esoteric” by those relying on “data-driven knowledge” (=knowledge on the basis of facts occuring by thousands), rather than on scientific intuition of a person years ahead of his time.
It may not have been the easiest or the most familiar subject, but I hope I’ll manage it…
Eugene, I have found the original source of this, and you left out a critical word. It should read:
“Companies, like civilisations, advance by leaps and bounds when genius is let loose, not when genius is locked away and deemed too out of the mainstream of data-driven knowledge.”
I thought something was odd … that makes a lot more sense now.
Eugene, I have found the original source of this, and you left out a critical word. It should read:
“Companies, like civilisations, advance by leaps and bounds when genius is let loose, not when genius is locked away and deemed too out of the mainstream of data-driven knowledge.”
I thought something was odd … that makes a lot more sense now.
Hi Dozy,
Your words about genious being the antithesis of data-driven knowledge got me thinking:
Isn’t genius (by definition) always out of the mainstream of data-driven knowledge?
In other words, why does the sentence say “when genius is deemed out of the mainstream of data-driven knowledge.”
“Companies, like civilisations, advance by leaps and bounds when genius is let loose, not when genius is locked away and deemed too out of the mainstream of data-driven knowledge.” --that makes the reading much easier compared to “Companies, like civilisations, advance by leaps and bounds when genius is let loose, not when it is locked away as too out of the mainstream data-driven knowledge.” which were in the original article before it had been edited. (I Googled this edition and the sentence revealed. Strange?)
On the positive side, you can’t keep a good company down. 
I think the stress is on ‘too out’: you could be ahead by say, ten years /Picasso/, then you are an innovator; you could be ahead by 100 years /Gauguin, Van Gogh/, then you are simply loony.