Society pushes us towards us a consensus. Managing masses of independent thinkers is not convenient or efficient for government operations and processes. So we are herded towards a select few ideologies (and stories) that all of us believe in.
Depending on where you are from/who you are/how you were raised - dictates which stories you believe in.
Here in school, lots of people seem to believe that Investment Banking is the career path of choice. It is the best for x and x reason.
I do not particularly agree, but of course everyone is subject to their own opinion.
Not agreeing with the norm (aka not building a consensus opinion with everyone else) causes friction.
Internally, it is challenging to go agains the current. There is often not a huge payoff in fighting the waters. And socially, it is really hard as a student to "fight" the battle (a career) alone.
But, I've found, that thinking a bit "differently" about things has helped me build a stronger foundation for a set of mental models that help me make decisions.
It has forced me to come up with personal conviction over why I do what I do.
Is my conviction "correct?" I do not know. Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe it will look completely different in 6 months. (I bet it will).
But nonetheless I have a foundation to stand on.
Is it better to have conviction and be "wrong" or have no conviction at all?
This is a hard question, of which there is likely no right answer.
I'd say it is better to have conviction but be open to change. The problem comes when people are stubborn/biased/stuck in their ways. They refuse to change at any cost.
This is dangerous.
And when people affirm/give validation (form consensus) to ideas, bubbles form.
And when bubbles form...