A nice point, but isn't this post a bit hollow? After all, you'd expect someone like Seth Godin to put forward a well-supported argument about a radically new approach (new hammer) and its benefits?

>> A nice point, but isn't this post a bit hollow?

It is, but I find all of Seth's posts are this way. He is good at formulating ideas which seems obvious after you read them. ;-) But I don't consider him being some deep thinker who could put forward some "radically new approach".

It is astrology for intellectuals.

Academia (mostly) is astrology for intellectuals; management is astrology for not-quite-intellectuals.

I wish this could come out better than it sounds. I like Seth Godin, but you are expecting too much.

All his posts are "a bit hollow".

He tries to provoke thought, not offer solutions.

There is nothing wrong with that; just a new age philosopher?

OFF Topic: I wish he would have offered a link to the study he mentioned. That would be like someone blogging about him and not offering a link.

Agree 100%. He has some good things to say, but its more anecdotes and bits of motivation than specific, actionable advice. Still valuable in its own right though.

I personally get a lot out of Seth's perspective, but I can certainly understand that his posts are not what most HN readers are looking for.

He said himself a while back that he makes his blog posts short on purpose so that his point doesn't get dilluted in a sea of text.

FWIW, I think the point wasn't to suggest that there is some new hammer; just that you should be aware that there's a very high chance you're not seeing a bigger picture due to confirmation bias or whatever.

There's a long tail for hammers.

The massive burst in innovation that we've seen in the past several decades is caused by a bunch of people making a bunch of new hammers for a bunch of different problem types. In addition, there are certain hammers -- like statistical methods or X-rays or computer networking -- that can be applied to a ranging scope of problems that no one ever predicted before.

Seth is right, you have to find the right tool for the job. But your job is also to imagine and construct a new hammer.

Not a bad point. People tend to solve problems in the way that they tend to build problems (tautologically.)

At least in my own experience, engineers tend to solve problems by building things to solve the problems. Sometimes the answer is to remove parts until those problems don't exist.

"Metaprogramming" in its various forms is often about switching tools to the most appropriate one. Instead of opening that can with only a hammer, you first fabricate a screwdriver.

(Disclaimer: I advocate metaprogramming. Also humor.)

You shouldn't fabricate a screwdriver! You should fabricate a screwdriver building factory

http://discuss.joelonsoftware.com/default.asp?joel.3.219431....

You shouldn't fabricate a screwdriver building factory! you should fabricate a tool fabrication factory factory!

Ah, just have a go at the whole late 19th century equivalent industrial infrastructure. It'll be fun!

Neat base idea, but the blog post is just business porn. He's just restating the old adage about getting stuck in ruts.

The key skills is being able to tell when you're stuck using hammer because it's what you're familiar with, and he doesn't discuss that at all.

"One study found "... citation needed.