Stephen Downes

I'm not sure exactly how I want to respond to this - and after several minutes thinkibg about it decised that this fact makes it work passing along. Here's the author's main point: "Maybe failure is really interesting to explore only after success has been achieved." Before success, people haven't found out what they're good at - and this is what they should focus on. But after success, they've found their niche, and the types of failures they experience are more about process rather than direction. I asked myself, first, have I have some kind of 'success' that I could pin down and identify, and second, is there some 'thing' that I'm good at? Because I do believe I learn from my mistakes, which would mean these two conditions must have been satisfied. But I think that identifying 'success' and the 'thing' we're good at isn't so straightforward - and therefore, neither is this argument.