Reminds me of Asimov's short story "Profession".
I really don't like how it portrays humanity as a race where only a tiny percentage have the ability to innovate. All humans have this ability! Not all may use it, but we all have it.
Yes.. I know I'm pointing out factual inaccuracies from a science fiction story written 55 years ago, but because he used the term "human" explicitly I feel the need to do so.
It's impossible for us to KNOW whether a given person has the ability to innovate, or the potential to be brilliant. That's absolutely true. However, we have no concrete evidence to support the idea that any given individual CAN innovate, or has the potential for brilliance.
Quite the opposite: We already know of many heritable traits that impair an individual's ability to compete in the workplace, or perform effectively in difficult fields. Most of these are classified as diseases or mental disorders, but regardless...
Acknowledging that not every person is necessarily born with identical talents and capabilities is important if we want to empower these people to do good things and achieve what the rest of us can achieve. Claiming that everyone has equal potential implies that those who don't overachieve are simply not trying hard enough.
(I say this as a person who, due to environment or biology, ended up with an unpleasant assortment of conditions that impair my ability to compete in the workplace.)
If people can't compete in the workplace, maybe we need a better workplace.
Anyway, to name a few that afflict people I know (or me, for that matter) and all have devastating impact on productivity (often in different ways)
Chronic fatigue, ADHD/ADD (yes, it exists in adults; sometimes it's adult-onset), clinical depression, bipolar disorder, dyslexia, dyscalculia, etc.
It's true that workplace improvements can help people with disadvantages be able to participate and achieve good things, but this is exactly what I mean when I say that people do not have equal potential and capability. To assume otherwise, or blame these disadvantages solely on schooling or some other controllable factor is hopelessly naive. We have to accept that we can't apply our own experiences universally to everyone, and that we have to understand them and recognize their challenges so we can help overcome them.
Sure it's possible to guess, people will innovate depending on their creativity coefficient. That coefficient goes down drastically once kids finish education. If you want more creativity, then you need to address that major hurdle first.
I think a large number of those listed aren't real illnesses (dyslexia, dyscalculia) or are often misdiagnosed (ADHD/ADD). I think there might be a way to actually get those people using some means to be useful to society at large.
And I think it's pretty clear that saying all humans have this ability is wrong.
Firstly, there are numerous edge cases, e.g. people who are mentally handicapped in ways that preclude this.
Secondly, there is a broad range of intelligence levels in humans. Clearly, the innovation capabilities of people at the low end of the intelligence scale is either absent, or very very limited. Not to mention that, just as clearly, most of us aren't Einstein and aren't going around making giant contributions to science.
Ignoring the fact that there are inherent differences between humans, some of them large and unfortunate, is just a way of closing our eyes and burying our heads in the sand to how the world actually works.
Innovation is not the important part it's recognizing improvements and utilizing them.
[0] http://www.themathlab.com/writings/short%20stories/feeling.h...