(~6:07) Koe argues that specializing, or focusing on one aspect only, limits your potential in every conceivable way.

I think I agree, yet I do also think there is a place for that... It depends on the person and what they enjoy. However, I might still be mistaken.

Dan Koe seems to argue against a specialistic education based on the argument that it is nigh-impossible for a teenager to decide what they want (to be) for the rest of their lives. He also gives the argument that it results in a lack of creativity and underlying knowledge (that which connects the dots, instead of compartmentalization) which would result in abnormal performance.

I can bypass the limitation of the first point by giving the counter-point that when one has an insane amount of metacognition, which can be trained, it does not matter if one changes path later; why? Because one can easily learn the new subject matter and skills.

However, the second point is interesting and I think I agree with it. That said, I think there is a continuum, instead of only two points, between super-specialists and super-generalists. I myself enjoy specializing. And I believe a team of specialists (that can also work together) can accomplish much more than one (or even multiple) generalist.