Doing Time

The template of medicine is to See one, Do one, Teach one. (This was before "Do One" became a standard modern insult).

That this concept left us with a lot of people who thought they were teachers, and weren't, is regrettable.
That's recruitment for you. Get the wrong people in the first place and you're screwed. (If only we had not left this most important of jobs to recruiters).

For the rest of us who got through this process okay, and even recommended it for a time, it plays into advancing life.
The trouble is you See less and Do more.
You become pure doers. The balance is wrong but it's better than the alternative.

You can withdraw to some administrative level, but largely, personally, I have preferred the frontline.
I am sure that the only people who genuinely "de-skill", never really had the skills in the first place. And ironically most of the ones that de-skill (and bleat about its dangers), generally decide to find a little niche for themselves training the skills to others.
I don't really care whether you refer to this loop as a paradox or irony. But if you're going to call it something you might as well call it what it is. It's bullshit. Pure and simple.
The doers are relegated to worker-bee level, and managed/looked down upon by the de-skilled.
Where you are on this spectrum, is where your conscience lies. It's what sort of a human you are.

I may on a spring February day argue that the doers are the men in the white hats. And the managers, should be the men in the short cream jackets with a very long arms that can be tied behind their backs by a third-party. (Remember to check their oral cavity for hair grips).

But when, then, do the doers do their thinking? They're busy doing the doing. (Wasn't that a hit for Sonia in the 80s? No? Gina G then).
I think I think I need more thinking time. I need to timetable it. The entertainers have it right. One 90 minute show twice a week, and the rest of the time to think. I could go for a bit of that.

Our current skills took time to learn. It's hard to ever sideline them. They control our spending power, and hugely influence our identity. But without ongoing seeing and learning, it's not that they decay, or that you de-skill. They just date a little. You date. In your heart of hearts, you know it. And it's not comfy.

Growing up isn't about hitting 18. And anything worth learning can take 5 years to learn - a language, a skill, an apprenticeship, a degree with a bit of practical know-how. Whichever way you spin it, you're looking at 5 years. And that's 5 pretty intensive years.
If you want to learn a language and are only going to put in an hour a week, instead of 35 hours a week, you can multiply that 5 years by 35.
Good luck with that by the way.
Or you can lower your expectations of your eventual skill level. That's a pity. And if you begin with low expectations of yourself, you're bound to underachieve.
It's one of life's cruellest negative loops.

Many of us traditionalists are used to the concept of trying to work out at the age of 18 what we want to be at the age of 21 (slacker degrees) or 23 (medical degrees). Frankly, in the rest of life it is not usually possible to think even this far ahead, but we all forget that this process never ends.
Get married and have kids and the process is massively derailed. But this is a mercy, as the burden of so many possibilities is narrowed down for you. You can focus instead on what a young seed of yours may achieve when they are 18, and allow the cycle to loop.

But the gritty reality is this.

At 30 (remember it takes 5 years to learn stuff), you need to make a decision about what sort of 35-year-old you want to be.
At 45, you need to decide what sort of a 50-year-old you want to be.
At 55, you need to make a decision about what you'd like to be when you're 60.

It never ends.

I suggest you start now.