But grad school? Our education system is built on learning to think like someone else. It is the Twitter of Education where you can follow and repeat back what you hear. But for Original Thinkers and Collaborative Intelligence it is a mistake I believe.
Our instincts force us to seek validation and approval from others as individuals. I wonder if the success of blogs, Twitter, and academic research stems from incentivizing people to maximize that self-centered sense of ownership. For example, being first author on a well-cited paper is a powerful motivation to produce better research, which in-turn benefits the community and strengthens the institution.
The question of being the first author is interesting. Here is a question, or a poll: would you rather be the first author of a well-cited paper, or would you rather be a member of a group that created powerful new concepts and ideas?
And yes, I do think it is a binary choice. My own recent experience is that the ideas produced are better when "my" thinking is done in a group of thoughtful original thinkers rather than on my own.
Discussion enriched (imho).
I think the main value I see in grad school is the community of learners rather than the actual knowledge imparted itself.
===
[1] https://www.amazon.de/-/en/Robert-David-Steele/dp/1583944435
Can't we just study because we enjoy studying? It's good to acknowledge that learning with others is often more rewarding then learning on your own, but even more important it so recognize that learning is not a means to an end but an end in itself. And as such, speaking of "specialised" or "foundational" knowledge, or putting quantities on knowledge really doesn't do it justice.
