Why can't hard-working people become experts?

The so-called Practice makes perfect, but there is a huge gap between experts. How can't farmers who work in farmland become rice experts, who are diligent in their jobs, there is always a bottleneck that cannot be broken through in the business.

This is a very common phenomenon. This is why many people are diligent but stupid. Why is it stupid?

I think the main reason why programmers cannot become experts is that they do not have an expert vision.

The so-called expert's vision is to examine the problem from a high-level perspective, which is much higher than that of the workers. The workers are often just an empirical and habitual work, experts are engaged in high-level thinking.

For example:

Workers: 1 + 1 = 2, 2 + 2 = 4 ......

Expert Level: a + B = c

In simple terms, workers can master the tools and have fast and efficient solutions to specific problems, and their learning is based on "cases. For example, 1 + 1 is a case, and 2 + 2 is also a case. Skilled practitioners are characterized by a large number of cases. Experts have a higher theoretical point of view, although the speed of solving specific problems is insufficient, but it can be promoted to the most general situation.

To become an expert, not just an ordinary worker, you must have the thinking habits of experts. I recently searched for books on the Internet and found that many books are an example of how "steel" is ps, "Rainbow" is ps, and "message book. This kind of books is understandable, but these are just the books of the worker who specifically train low-level talents.

For example, ps. This is just how to use photoshop software tools, or even the skill of one of its works. You think about how many ps works are there, and there are 7 or 8 ps software versions. In this way, learning efficiency can be imagined. Even if you are really diligent, what should you do? In the case of Hon Hai, people are very small. In fact, a good person with ps is not because he makes good use of ps, but because he first has the knowledge of design. Design is an idea, while ps is a tool. If you have this idea and no ps, you can work with only a pencil, but you want to get the design idea through a simple painting, you are re-Understanding design and challenging human history. The difficulty levels of these two methods are different.

Some people have a high degree of abstraction. They can use the simple example of a teacher to get the "idea", but most people can only restore this example. It is wise to get ideas through examples. However, if there is an "idea" in front of you, you are willing to restore the example, rather than learning at a higher level, this is not even Xiao Cong Ming.

When we select teaching materials and learn things, we should learn to start with a higher level of knowledge and apply the ideas of our predecessors to our work, instead of repeating the case at a low level, the learning effect is equivalent to loading the rocket. Of course, we still need to identify the unreliable so-called "thoughts.